I recall a recent discussion on DSL where someone claimed that people in the media who everyone complains about are “humans just like you”.
To which my response amounted to “Cade Metz deliberately posted lies to ruin the reputation of someone who has done nothing to him. I’ve never done this. No, he is not just like me.”
And if I can say that I’m not just like Cade Metz, I think I can also say that I’m not just like Hitler.
(The trick in the Hitler comparison is that nobody here has been in a position to commit mass murder. So if you say “sure you would have committed mass murder in Hitler’s position” and you place the burden of proof on the person you’re accusing, they can’t possibly disprove you. That’s why the intermediate step of Metz is useful. We all have been in a position where we could post lies meant to hurt someone like Metz, so “sure you would have done it in his position” is provably false.)
Thanks for the feedback! I agree, you and I are not “just like Hitler”. Rather, we are human beings, just like he was. The human condition is what contains the full scope of good and evil, on which most of us like to think we lean towards the former.
It sounds like you may have read something from the post which I did not intend (and if so, that’s my fault). Does it read as a condemnation of humanity, or (worse) a vindication or justification of Hitler?
Thanks again for replying—this is my first post here, and I’ll appreciate any tips on making my points more clear (or shown how they’re wrong).
I agree, you and I are not “just like Hitler”. Rather, we are human beings, just like he was.
Notice that the Metz comparison was about humans too.
This is a deepity. It is trivially true that anything that I can do and anything Hitler could do are things done by humans. It’s impossible for a human to do a thing that can’t be done by a human.
But if you want this comparison to be meaningful, it isn’t. If Hitler is a monster, that just means that some human beings are monsters and others aren’t—it doesn’t disprove that Hitler is a monster.
The human condition is what contains the full scope of good and evil, on which most of us like to think we lean towards the former.
It is literally true that zero murders can be put in the same scope as lots of murders. But that’s a misleading framing.
I recall a recent discussion on DSL where someone claimed that people in the media who everyone complains about are “humans just like you”.
To which my response amounted to “Cade Metz deliberately posted lies to ruin the reputation of someone who has done nothing to him. I’ve never done this. No, he is not just like me.”
And if I can say that I’m not just like Cade Metz, I think I can also say that I’m not just like Hitler.
(The trick in the Hitler comparison is that nobody here has been in a position to commit mass murder. So if you say “sure you would have committed mass murder in Hitler’s position” and you place the burden of proof on the person you’re accusing, they can’t possibly disprove you. That’s why the intermediate step of Metz is useful. We all have been in a position where we could post lies meant to hurt someone like Metz, so “sure you would have done it in his position” is provably false.)
Thanks for the feedback! I agree, you and I are not “just like Hitler”. Rather, we are human beings, just like he was. The human condition is what contains the full scope of good and evil, on which most of us like to think we lean towards the former.
It sounds like you may have read something from the post which I did not intend (and if so, that’s my fault). Does it read as a condemnation of humanity, or (worse) a vindication or justification of Hitler?
Thanks again for replying—this is my first post here, and I’ll appreciate any tips on making my points more clear (or shown how they’re wrong).
Notice that the Metz comparison was about humans too.
This is a deepity. It is trivially true that anything that I can do and anything Hitler could do are things done by humans. It’s impossible for a human to do a thing that can’t be done by a human.
But if you want this comparison to be meaningful, it isn’t. If Hitler is a monster, that just means that some human beings are monsters and others aren’t—it doesn’t disprove that Hitler is a monster.
It is literally true that zero murders can be put in the same scope as lots of murders. But that’s a misleading framing.