Replying to Avatar mike

Currently having a discussion here about the right to die.

In this and almost all other discussions I see, others frame your answers in ways unintended and proceed to explain that you are wrong about a point you are not making.

I think a good practise is to really try to understand what the other side is AND is not saying.

It is fine to extend the argument to other points that you find relevant, but don't expect the other person to join you on that journey.

MSM often takes an extreme possible outcome from a proposition and tries to use that as a reason why the original argument is wrong.

I hope we on NOSTR don't end up being like MSM using that technique when we cannot win an argument on merit alone.
Avatar
Sleventy3 6mo ago

Gatekeepers are 99.99% wrong. If we could let people do what they want it would eliminate mostly all arbitrary conflict.

Unless your decisions cause harm or takes away another's agency, do you bro.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
mike 6mo ago

This should be the primary concept of "laws" and edge cases should never be allowed to abuse that prime directive.

Avatar
Sleventy3 6mo ago

Our government is to big not to quibble about minor details. We've created a 'dystopian' environment where every moron has a right to be coddled. So we end up massaging idiotic idealisms.