4 ms·
Because... you're defending the right to be dishonest, manipulative, belittling or egocentric? That's an unusual point of view.
by antimagic 12y ago
Because... you're defending the right to be dishonest, manipulative, belittling or egocentric? That's an unusual point of view.
- pc86 12y agoTruthfully I was on the fence about "manipulative" (not the other three, though). I get that it has a negative association, but at the end of the day aren't you just trying to show someone why doing _______ is in their best interest? Understanding that the connotation of "manipulative" is that it's not actually in their best interest.
- kybernetikos 12y agoFrom my point of view manipulative doesn't speak to whose interest the manipulation is in, but rather to the fact that the manipulator is trying to bypass the autonomy of the target - getting them to do what the manipulator wants without consciously being brought to assent to the reasons behind it. It can therefore be used with good intentions, and may often result in good outcomes if done by an effective manipulator for those good reasons but according to my moral system it is never an ethical way to act, and is likely to ultimately corrode relationships.
- philh 12y agoI feel like there's a pattern of people who say "I have no tolerance for <bad group, vaguely defined>", and use that as an excuse to be as mean as they like to whomever they like. I don't get that impression from this post. But plausibly, uniformlyrandom isn't defending the right to be an asshole; but merely mistrusts that someone who claims not to tolerate assholes, is in fact a good judge of that.