• swlabr@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Learning diplomacy is like, early adulthood stuff. People lie and shit, you learn that in kid’s shows. This is just another case of a LWer re-litigating something under the guise of inventing new brain jutsu.

    That is, sure, you can assume good faith when talking to someone for the first time. But one shouldn’t hold onto that assumption tightly; I think LWers tend to hold onto their assumptions way too hard. Much harder than people who are supposed to be uPdAtInG tHeIr PrIoRs should. Otherwise, why would anyone spend time writing this article?

  • future_synthetic@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can I argue that misrepresenting yourself in an argument intentionally is, in fact, done with ill intent an overwhelming majority of the time.

    • gerikson@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You can, but it’s not really an argument, more of a statement. For example, do you have any anecdotal evidence of this being true?

      Maybe I’m just misunderstanding. You use the term “ill intent” which is subtly different from “bad faith”. It’s also a loaded term.

      • future_synthetic@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Using his own terminology here. He says in the piece that bad faith is often ‘incorrectly’ defined as ill intent, and my argument is that the ill intent is a package deal.