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 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

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 1 points 2 years 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.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

see also helpful link to Zack's previous banger, Why Me Being An Asshole Is Virtuous Actually

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

also, the fuck is "full-contact psychoanalysis"

[–] swlabr@awful.systems 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm picturing an MMA match where the fighters ask about each other's mothers.

[–] acb@mastodon.social 1 points 2 years ago

It’s like percussive maintenance, only for the mind