Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Can someone give me a steelman of the popular pro-Lindsay Clancey argument? I’m not really talking about the defense, whose argument is a complex justification for why she medically and legally qualifies for the insanity defense. I’m more asking about the people online arguing that she is a victim and her being prosecuted/this situation is an example of sexism. My wife told me about the case and is very anti Clancey. ChatGPT also gave what I felt is an unsatisfactory steelman. I don’t have a theory of mind for her supporters, and wish to rectify that.
I can think of some arguments like:
"It's emotional reasoning..."
"Feminism and its consequences..."
"Different moral standards..."
But when someone does something completely against your morals, should a steelman really be made?
"Therapy culture has destroyed..."
These women are openly proclaiming on social media that they also want to kill their kids.
"In the times before abortion, many women would..."
At some point you are just gaslighting yourself.
"The stress of having kids can cause parents to..."
Like, are we really doing this? Take a step back. Apologies to the mods if this comes off as consensus building, but this is so far beyond reasonable that I have to wonder if trying to build a mental model of the kind of person who would do this is actually eroding my own personal integrity. The rational response here might actually be:
"This is fucking evil"
As saying anything else opens your mind to ideas which can only ever be bad for you and those you love.
Oh, this is tempting to agree to. I have already upvoted it by reflex. I for one have already expressed my view on this - outside of the libertarian utopia in which parents literally own their children and society has no claim on them, parents having provably killed their children is such an unmitigable breach of all natural law, social contract, basic trust and any ethics whatsoever that the only reasonable consequence is society killing the parent, as quickly as possible, for keeping its own order, for giving justice to the children, and for preventing the impossible farce of the parent living on in any way.
But is this suitable material for the Motte?
Is there a point at which trying to understand others is actually harmful to yourself?
That is really the thing I am trying to get at.
In a forum where Nazi sympathizers are allowed to argue their points, I guess it would not be out of the question for sympathizers of postpartum abortions to be allowed the same grace. If the way I framed my point is too opinionated for this site, then that's fair. I will submit to the authority of the mods.
But I do think the question itself has merits. For people who like the intellectual exercise of building a steelman, I think it is valid to consider that doing so may have unintended consequences.
To your point I think actively giving understanding others a shot is critical, and trying once, twice, or even a couple dozen times won't kill you.
It does make me much more confident about coming to the "Well it's just evil" conclusion. There are certain (very few!) beliefs and behaviors which are great signal shortcuts to knowing a person is worthless.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link