@ben_r_hoffman, @jessi_cata, I took some time / emotional space to reflect on if I was doing something in this and related tweets that I would or should consider objectionable.
https://twitter.com/EpistemicHope/status/1362420736791437312?s=20
Having done so, I currently think
1) I did not do anything objectionable according to my ethics and discourse norms,
2) that there were better and more skillful things that I could have done instead, but
3) I endorse not having spent more time finding those better things.
1) I did not do anything objectionable according to my ethics and discourse norms,
2) that there were better and more skillful things that I could have done instead, but
3) I endorse not having spent more time finding those better things.
My understanding of your critique is something like
"You, Eli, were optimizing for social harmony, and so were willing to paper over places where you disagree with Glen, and were therefore misinforming him and others."
"You, Eli, were optimizing for social harmony, and so were willing to paper over places where you disagree with Glen, and were therefore misinforming him and others."
I agree that I was doing something that was aiming to harmonize, though for the long-term goal of better understanding on my part, and (ideally) Glen's part.
I think that I was NOT papering over disagreements.
I think that I was NOT papering over disagreements.
Rereading the conversation, my best guess is that Glen and I _were_ actually thinking about the same cluster of discourse norms, though I would guess that the versions that his familiar with differ somewhat from the one's I'm familiar with.
If I found out that I was wrong about that, it would be a crux for me in the sense that I would be more careful about delineating which norms, exactly, people are thinking of, in the future.
For instance, if Glen told me that he was opposed to people criticizing ideas, and I could engage with him enough to confirm that what he meant by "criticizing ideas" was the same as what I mean, I would be shocked, and would be much...
https://twitter.com/jessi_cata/status/1362432315813752835?s=20
...more careful expressing agreement with "that sort of thing."
However, I do guess that there are places where I think it is appropriate to do something that you might tag as "papering over disagreements."
ie, there are many places where I will ignore disagreements that don't seem central to me, so that I can prioritize getting clarity about the core perspective of the person I'm talking with.
If it's a big thing, I will flag my disagreement as a bookmark, but I will also sometimes let small-by-my-lights things pass without a flag.
I think that you might also be making a broader critique that I don't understand as well.
https://twitter.com/ben_r_hoffman/status/1362447576910471168?s=20
If you think that the above paraphrase is not a good characterization of what you think is less-than-good about my statement, obviously please correct me.
@threadreaderapp unroll
@diviacaroline @AnnaWSalamon
You guys seem like you might be interested in following this small saga.
You guys seem like you might be interested in following this small saga.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
