I seem not to have noticed this post at the time, but now the review process has brought it to my attention, I have strong-downvoted it and would disrecommend it for any “Best Of” list.
There is an unpleasant genre of posting in which someone says, “Suppose someone did X, Y, and Z, which are really bad! Don’t you agree that would be really bad?” and it is obvious that this is a thinly disguised self-justifying whine about some real incident. It is also clear that no-one else involved would recognise it as an account of the matter.
This posting fits squarely into that genre.
ialdabaoth is Edgar. Charles and David only exist to interpolate between Edgar and all the (in ialdabaoth’s view) horrid, nasty, happy Adams and Bobs hating on Edgar and unjustly excluding him. This post is of no more epistemic worth than a political cartoon. It is not even an argument, but a picture — literally — constructed in a medium that will put up with whatever you draw on it.
And if Edgar asked me for advice, what I would say, which I never would unless asked, would be “Sucks to be Edgar. Tough shit, Edgar.”
What behavior of Edgar’s is it that draws your ire? You acknowledge that Edgar’s position is poor, he believes he has no good options, yet you feel it necessary to blame him for choosing a bad option.
it is obvious that this is a thinly disguised self-justifying whine about some real incident.
Plenty of rational thought in a social sphere comes from analyzing striking personal events using our repositories of stored information. Plenty of valuable rational thought stems from self-justification. Do you want Edgar to self-reflect on his behaviors and devise a scheme in which he is a bad person? Edgar’s not going to view himself as a moral mutant no matter how evil you think he is.
We rarely get the opportunity to delve into the thought patterns of evil people. We will likely never know what the 9/11 hijackers were thinking because they are all dead. We rarely hear rational justifications from murderers and rapists (we just hear their lawyer’s best arguments) because the large majority of murderers and rapists don’t care to express themselves rationally.
This means that if Edgar is evil (as you seem to believe) then his insights are more valuable than the insights of a non-evil person. Rational, evil people are in short supply and even moreso are rational, evil people willing to expound on their evil nature.
If Edgar provides faulty reasoning, refute it! Or if you want to, disregard it and allow others to do so. The absolute worst thing to do is to blind yourself to rational discussion from evil people and to force others to do the same. That will just make it so that when a potential victim hears faulty, evil reasoning straight from the source it will be their first time and they might be convinced!
Edgar is an imaginary person, for whom you can invent whatever background story you like. Edgar is not making an argument and has nothing to say, because he does not exist. ialdabaoth is making an argument through the picture of Edgar, but I have seen enough of his writings here and elsewhere to stand by my characterisation of his vignette.
This is not about “blaming” Edgar or Edgar being “evil”. If I met an Edgar (I have never met ialdabaoth) I would merely not care to know him. It is up to him to learn, but not up to me to teach. Perhaps he never will. Sucks to be Edgar, tough shit, Edgar.
As you can see, the milk of human kindness flows thinly in my veins, especially towards the Edgars of this world. Let those who think Edgar worth taking on as a project do so, and the best of luck to them.
We will likely never know what the 9/11 hijackers were thinking because they are all dead.
We know what they were thinking well enough from the accounts of similar people who have been taken alive, or announced their intentions before their deeds, and the propaganda of their supporters. Allahu akbar etc. There is no mystery about what they think. They want you to know and will tell you, so clearly and unambiguously that there is no scope for wondering about it.
ETA: Re this other comment of yours, I note that I had formed a negative opinion of ialdabaoth/Brent long before seeing the allegations of sexual harassment.
I seem not to have noticed this post at the time, but now the review process has brought it to my attention, I have strong-downvoted it and would disrecommend it for any “Best Of” list.
There is an unpleasant genre of posting in which someone says, “Suppose someone did X, Y, and Z, which are really bad! Don’t you agree that would be really bad?” and it is obvious that this is a thinly disguised self-justifying whine about some real incident. It is also clear that no-one else involved would recognise it as an account of the matter.
This posting fits squarely into that genre.
ialdabaoth is Edgar. Charles and David only exist to interpolate between Edgar and all the (in ialdabaoth’s view) horrid, nasty, happy Adams and Bobs hating on Edgar and unjustly excluding him. This post is of no more epistemic worth than a political cartoon. It is not even an argument, but a picture — literally — constructed in a medium that will put up with whatever you draw on it.
And if Edgar asked me for advice, what I would say, which I never would unless asked, would be “Sucks to be Edgar. Tough shit, Edgar.”
What behavior of Edgar’s is it that draws your ire? You acknowledge that Edgar’s position is poor, he believes he has no good options, yet you feel it necessary to blame him for choosing a bad option.
Plenty of rational thought in a social sphere comes from analyzing striking personal events using our repositories of stored information. Plenty of valuable rational thought stems from self-justification. Do you want Edgar to self-reflect on his behaviors and devise a scheme in which he is a bad person? Edgar’s not going to view himself as a moral mutant no matter how evil you think he is.
We rarely get the opportunity to delve into the thought patterns of evil people. We will likely never know what the 9/11 hijackers were thinking because they are all dead. We rarely hear rational justifications from murderers and rapists (we just hear their lawyer’s best arguments) because the large majority of murderers and rapists don’t care to express themselves rationally.
This means that if Edgar is evil (as you seem to believe) then his insights are more valuable than the insights of a non-evil person. Rational, evil people are in short supply and even moreso are rational, evil people willing to expound on their evil nature.
If Edgar provides faulty reasoning, refute it! Or if you want to, disregard it and allow others to do so. The absolute worst thing to do is to blind yourself to rational discussion from evil people and to force others to do the same. That will just make it so that when a potential victim hears faulty, evil reasoning straight from the source it will be their first time and they might be convinced!
Edgar is an imaginary person, for whom you can invent whatever background story you like. Edgar is not making an argument and has nothing to say, because he does not exist. ialdabaoth is making an argument through the picture of Edgar, but I have seen enough of his writings here and elsewhere to stand by my characterisation of his vignette.
This is not about “blaming” Edgar or Edgar being “evil”. If I met an Edgar (I have never met ialdabaoth) I would merely not care to know him. It is up to him to learn, but not up to me to teach. Perhaps he never will. Sucks to be Edgar, tough shit, Edgar.
As you can see, the milk of human kindness flows thinly in my veins, especially towards the Edgars of this world. Let those who think Edgar worth taking on as a project do so, and the best of luck to them.
We know what they were thinking well enough from the accounts of similar people who have been taken alive, or announced their intentions before their deeds, and the propaganda of their supporters. Allahu akbar etc. There is no mystery about what they think. They want you to know and will tell you, so clearly and unambiguously that there is no scope for wondering about it.
ETA: Re this other comment of yours, I note that I had formed a negative opinion of ialdabaoth/Brent long before seeing the allegations of sexual harassment.