Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kelleris" data-source="post: 2488402" data-attributes="member: 19130">Yes, but you have to remember something here that makes the situation different: ignorance is not the same as moral failure.  If someone doesn't know something, I'm pretty justified in thinking that, well, they don't know it.  If they have a moral lapse in a trivial matter, I'm not justified in thinking that they're morally suspect in a general sense.  Also, I think I'm justified in making a judgment based on the evidence.  I don't have more evidence (wish that I did), so I made the most generous judgment I could, that he honestly doesn't know what he's talking about.  Others have been less generous, imputting outright maliciousness or simple cynicism to Dr. Bombay.  Both of these options are supported to some degree by the evidence, and I picked the most generous since I was effectively called upon to make a judgment.I'm asking you to extend me the same courtesy and make the most generous judgment supported by the evidence.  In this case, it's that I'm suffering a moral lapse relating to a trivial matter but am probably quite a nice, empathic guy most of the time, and in particular in relation to less trivial occassions.  Though, given all these posts, I'll be okay with it if you decide that I can be pig-headed stubborn sometimes, because that's sure a heck true.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Heh.  If you knew me, you wouldn't doubt that I'm able to laugh at myself on occassion.  My Wisdom, as it were, is much too low to do otherwise.See, this is another one of those times when you should be practicing some epistemic generosity.  I've never said that I laughed at the abuse of the EQ guy (and in fact I didn't), just that I found his column to be funny on other occassions.In fact, if you were a little less personally affected by this subject (it obviously affects you deeply, or you have a lot of free time, or you're mad at me now) you might've taken the following to mean that I was mildly upset at the EQ stuff as well (which I was), just not angry yet: It's ambiguous, I admit, but you're reading something a little extra into what I said if you take that to mean that I was laughing hysterically at the EQ guy.  In fact, I wasn't "cheesed off" or much of anything else because I didn't have an emotional reaction to that part.  I thought it was wrong, and more than usually distasteful, but it hadn't gotten to me emotionally.  The D&D stuff did, so I got upset and decided to post this thread to vent a little.Were I an EQ (but not a D&D) player, I would probably have roughly the opposite reaction, because my sphere of knowledge and personal interests would be different.  In either case, I still wouldn't expect people who weren't D&D players to get upset at the D&D stuff.  I would be upset if they missed the (really obvious) cues that they shouldn't take this guy all that seriously, and upset at the stereotype itself as I would any other that impacted me, but I don't get upset over things I have no desire to seek change in.  It's a waste of energy to send letters that will be ignored on behalf of people who will never see it, and that's how I see the situation.  Likewise, it's a waste of energy to get distraught over something I might otherwise find funny unless doing so prevents some moral or substantive harm to myself (by lowering my standards or something) or another person (by adding to their pain).Now, I am willing to admit that getting angry was the wrong reaction, for these very reason, but I don't think it was a hypocritical action.  I should have shrugged it off and thought a little more before posting anything.  I did "betray my own principles" in a sense, but it was because I got annoyed at something I knew shouldn't bother me, not because (as you seem to think) I think it's okay to ridicule people as long as they aren't myself.Hmm, so yes, I agree I was being a hypocrite.  But I wasn't violating the principle you take me to be violating, and it was an intellectual lapse (my emotions got the better of me) and not a moral one.</blockquote>

Verification