if you say that X is true for people everywhere, you better show me you did real experiments in different cultures. Also, if you tell me that X is different.
That’s very reasonable standard, but I don’t think people apply it consistently in this part of concept-space. I agree that people go funny in the head when dealing with personal identity, so one should be more critical of assertions about the universality (or distinctiveness) of a particular identity.
For example, this comment makes an assertion that certain types of effective self-improvement universally have particular properties that some people find undesirable. The universality of that property can (and is) challenged on an empirical basis, but such a possible change was not addressed—or even acknowledged as possible.
Further, sometimes people use your personal-identity-is-the-mindkiller point as a fully general counter-argument to policy positions they don’t like.
That’s very reasonable standard, but I don’t think people apply it consistently in this part of concept-space. I agree that people go funny in the head when dealing with personal identity, so one should be more critical of assertions about the universality (or distinctiveness) of a particular identity.
For example, this comment makes an assertion that certain types of effective self-improvement universally have particular properties that some people find undesirable. The universality of that property can (and is) challenged on an empirical basis, but such a possible change was not addressed—or even acknowledged as possible.
Further, sometimes people use your personal-identity-is-the-mindkiller point as a fully general counter-argument to policy positions they don’t like.