Anyway, the reason I noticed this article is that I posit that the steely harm 
reduction approach that was discussed recently is in my mind a form of 
stoicism.   Can one put away their emotional responses and make hard choices 
based on the greater global good?   If one engages in large intimate social 
networks, I would say two things are likely to happen:  1) executive decisions 
become harder because there is diffusion of sensitive information, and thus 
political complications in making them.  Members in the network may not be 
sharing the whole factual context (preferring the emotionally laden parts) 2) 
there are still dominance relations (her language), but they are just manifest 
in different ways.  Namely by being in the center of a social network and 
slightly censoring the information that gets passed along.

As it relates to the subject line, there may be some weak tendency one has to 
share or not share by default depending on hormones/genetics.
________________________________
From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Marcus Daniels 
<mar...@snoutfarm.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 5:12 PM
To: friam@redfish.com <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality

< So, I'd argue against you completely. This essay is talking about how to 
detect and operate in the presence of bad faith. And, to be clear, the bad 
faith actor doesn't necessarily *know* that they're acting in bad faith. In 
fact, it's a more canonical case of bad faith if the actor has simply 
habituated to it. >

A contrast she draws is between petulant vulnerability and "real" 
vulnerability.   That it is "scary" and "any less necessary, for men".
There's another option which is not to use "the language of vulnerability as a 
cudgel", but also not engage "the human condition of reliance on others."  She 
is expressing an expectation for high intimacy, and it is implicit that there 
is something wrong with keeping your distance.   I've seen this false choice 
portrayed by other so-called feminists.  I don't buy it.

Marcus
________________________________
From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of glen <geprope...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 4:55 PM
To: friam@redfish.com <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality

What's interesting about that essay is its appeal to character or "virtue 
ethics", I think. I've tried to address this a few times in past threads, 
especially when concepts like "bad faith" arise. Rittenhouse' crying looked 
precisely like bad faith to me. I get accused of it a lot because I enjoy 
playing roles and believe playing roles (like Devil's Advocate) facilitates 
healthy reasoning. (E.g. EricC's accusation of illiberalism on my part when 
condemning the anti-masker's punching of the doctor.)

So, I'd argue against you completely. This essay is talking about how to detect 
and operate in the presence of bad faith. And, to be clear, the bad faith actor 
doesn't necessarily *know* that they're acting in bad faith. In fact, it's a 
more canonical case of bad faith if the actor has simply habituated to it. 
Rittenhouse's crying on the stand and Kavanaugh's crying in his confirmation 
hearings both seem to me to be statements about their *character*. That means 
whatever ways we have/develop to detect bad faith can be made reflective ... 
kinda like the Reddit forum "Am I the Asshole?" 8^D

I doubt one's oxytocin-laced skepticism over such acting is completely 
arbitrary ... or even a preference at all.

On 1/13/22 14:33, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Well, now that I've taken one extreme position, let me take the other extreme 
> position!   This essay reflects, IMO, an arbitrary preference for social 
> affinities of a certain sort, and it is only one sort of valid class of 
> relationships.  Relationships that have benefits, but also costs.   It's not 
> just overbearing on how men should be, but also on how women should be.
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/opinion/toxic-masculinity.html

--
glen
Theorem 3. There exists a double master function.


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to