Glen writes: < By asking for more examples, it seems the original one (Ellison's Trump support) isn't meaningful for you? Another example might be learning that your organization accepted money from a convicted sex offender like Epstein. These are triggers for some people. They'd trigger me, too. >
A reason I can see for avoiding a term like EI is because others might not have a binding for it, or there are too many different bindings observed for it. And, specifically, that it is "pompous" to use the term if it is expected there is no binding -- a way to bully the conversation in some direction putting the other party at a disadvantage. But it is hypocritical if one turns around and assumes there are shared values and that we should or do all have them. This is arguing in bad faith because some values are assumed to be mandatory and other optional, rather than all things being optional. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
