4 ms·

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled.

by bendoernberg 13y ago

IanDrake 13y ago
I'm pretty sure "inconsistently principled" == "consistently unprincipled".
- dllthomas 13y ago
  I think that depends on the reading of "inconsistently principled". If the principles are inconsistent, then I tentatively think your equality holds. If the principles are consistent, and the stridency in application is inconsistent, then I don't think they are equal. With the second reading, a tangential concern is what drives the inconsistency. If it is purely stochastic, then I think the above saying holds ("better to be..."). If it is manipulated by unprincipled agents, then it's much more questionable.
  - 001sky 13y ago
    Keeping it intellectual, these arguments get put in front of the US supreme court all the time. Under "uses and abuses" of power, type cases. Disregarding their fundamental import has important consequences (at least if you believe wikipedia). See, eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause There's also a long history in cognitive science on social trust and perceived consistency (anti-hypocrisy). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance So that is why people normally vet these issues outsied of the context of SCOTUS, even on social issues. These are valid ideas irespective of people's views on any subject, IMHO.
- mindrag 13y ago
  Nahh
vinhboy 13y ago
I like your quote. It reminds me of a buddy of mine who says I am a hypocrite for buying local fruits and vegetable, because I buy toilet paper made by a Koch-owned company. For some people, unless you live in a cave and refuse all modern technology, you are not allowed to have any moral authority.
- bduerst 13y ago
  I think it's more of an appeal for validation for your [more] consistently unprincipled friend's part. They've decided that the effort is futile, so why can't you?
001sky 13y ago
Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled. That's some Jim Crow logic right there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws Or perhaps its just psychopathy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopaths-how-can-you-spot-one.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopath...
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- 001sky 13y ago
  Or, maybe you just got your quote wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled.

IanDrake 13y ago

I'm pretty sure "inconsistently principled" == "consistently unprincipled".

dllthomas 13y ago
I think that depends on the reading of "inconsistently principled". If the principles are inconsistent, then I tentatively think your equality holds. If the principles are consistent, and the stridency in application is inconsistent, then I don't think they are equal. With the second reading, a tangential concern is what drives the inconsistency. If it is purely stochastic, then I think the above saying holds ("better to be..."). If it is manipulated by unprincipled agents, then it's much more questionable.
- 001sky 13y ago
  Keeping it intellectual, these arguments get put in front of the US supreme court all the time. Under "uses and abuses" of power, type cases. Disregarding their fundamental import has important consequences (at least if you believe wikipedia). See, eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause There's also a long history in cognitive science on social trust and perceived consistency (anti-hypocrisy). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance So that is why people normally vet these issues outsied of the context of SCOTUS, even on social issues. These are valid ideas irespective of people's views on any subject, IMHO.
mindrag 13y ago
Nahh

vinhboy 13y ago

I like your quote. It reminds me of a buddy of mine who says I am a hypocrite for buying local fruits and vegetable, because I buy toilet paper made by a Koch-owned company. For some people, unless you live in a cave and refuse all modern technology, you are not allowed to have any moral authority.

bduerst 13y ago
I think it's more of an appeal for validation for your [more] consistently unprincipled friend's part. They've decided that the effort is futile, so why can't you?

001sky 13y ago

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled. That's some Jim Crow logic right there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws Or perhaps its just psychopathy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopaths-how-can-you-spot-one.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopath...

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
001sky 13y ago
Or, maybe you just got your quote wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good