= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
taryneast comments on The peril of ignoring emotions - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (101)
Agreed. Except that I don't think everyone uses it as a counter-judgement. There are a significant number of people who take it literally and assume that we really should be tolerant of everyone and not judge people for their lifestyle choices.
Oh yes, absolutely. In fact most people I've met use it "correctly" at some times and as a counter argument at others...
I totally agree with the actual phrase, as stated. It's a useful social heuristic for getting along with others - especially where people are disagreeing over a point of personal taste. (No matter how much I argue that Vegemite is "just better" - the Marmite-lovers won't agree... so we should indeed learn to just be tolerant of one another ):)
However I can get quite upset if somebody uses this heuristic as a means to shout-down an argument about verifiable fact - or even just force people not to have a discussion about whether or not something is a verifiable fact (which is where I most often see this mis-used).
I've never seen it used this way, probably because the friends I spend the most time with love discussing anything and the last thing they would want to do would be to shut down a conversation. Agreed that people who don't like discussing the issues closest to their heart would probably use it for this.