The point here is that within Maple’s frame their behavior is largely a reasonable response to intense constraints to a society which faces acute existential risk of its own making, etc etc.
Doesn’t this apply to pretty much any group? Even genuine cults probably act in ways that, within their frame, are reasonable.
One common feature of critiques of Maple which is especially frustrating to me, especially from ex Maplers, is that they can only be made by recourse to some secular liberal scientism, and refuse to meet Maple and Soryu, as they say, “where they’re at.”
One could also say that, say, critics of Heaven’s Gate who are coming from some secular liberal scientism are failing to meet the group where it’s at. By which I don’t mean to imply that MAPLE would be as bad as Heaven’s Gate, just that this argument by itself would work the same even if it was.
Doesn’t this apply to pretty much any group? Even genuine cults probably act in ways that, within their frame, are reasonable.
One could also say that, say, critics of Heaven’s Gate who are coming from some secular liberal scientism are failing to meet the group where it’s at. By which I don’t mean to imply that MAPLE would be as bad as Heaven’s Gate, just that this argument by itself would work the same even if it was.