Empathy and Morality

@fmf said
What utter nonsense!

Sounds to me like you are fabricating and projecting something awful and hyperbolic on to people you disagree with [and perhaps don't like being criticized by] and then condemning it as awful and hyperbolic.

Oh, no, sorry, you are mistaken.

I was thinking about Carl Schmitt and thought his take on this is unique and interesting, and also very topical.

I did not mention that I was inspired by Schmitt because that usually prompts vitriol from another user about why you talk about what you reading?!

@philokalia said
This is actually wrong -- I did not say humanitarianism.

But you did. You did say humanitarianism.

@philokalia said
Oh, no, sorry, you are mistaken.

You claimed that these people with an orientation towards humanitarianism are claiming to have the monopoly on representing humanity itself, thus implying that the other person is outside of it. Where "it" means "humanity". This is pure poison-the-well propaganda. No wonder you are refusing to give any examples.

@philokalia said
I was thinking about Carl Schmitt and thought his take on this is unique and interesting, and also very topical.

I did not mention that I was inspired by Schmitt because that usually prompts vitriol from another user about why you talk about what you reading?!

Well, whatever you may think reading whatever it is you have read by whoever the writer is, whatever ideas you may think this has equipped you with, it doesn't seem to have enabled you to rise much above vague fist-waving and sneering at people you disagree with.

@fmf said
But you did. You did say humanitarianism.

I said humanity & humanitarianism, two different concepts, and usually was only saying humanity, the primary concept.

@fmf said
Well, whatever you may think reading whatever it is you have read by whoever the writer is, whatever ideas you may think this has equipped you with, it doesn't seem to have enabled you to rise much above vague fist-waving and sneering at people you disagree with.

I was unaware I was waving fists and sneering!

I'm sorry if you felt that way.

I don't mean to sound aggressive.

You can relax. I promise... No ill will from me!

@philokalia said
I said humanity & humanitarianism, two different concepts, and usually was only saying humanity, the primary concept.

So when you claimed that you DIDN'T say humanitarianism, you were not being truthful?

@philokalia said
I was unaware I was waving fists and sneering!

You claimed that people with a humanitarian orientation that you disagree with are prone to dehumanizing people you [presumably] agree with. "Fist waving" is a metaphor, but much of your stuff on page 1 seemed to me to be pompous unsubstantiated sneering.

@fmf said
So when you claimed that you DIDN'T say humanitarianism, you were not being truthful?

Nah man, not at all. As I pointed out earlier, this is the key statement and idea:

People who begin to fight on behalf of "humanity" or any other nebulous value paint their opposition as cruel on a very fundamental level, and therefore worthy of cruelty, as it is actually very rare to meet a true pacifist.

@fmf said
Yes. It might take a bit of courage, though. Your broad-brush misanthropy on the previous page didn't require any. Nor did it seem to have much substance other than a vague haughty posture.

If you have no experience of your own capacity for empathy clashing with someone else's with some sort of moral consequences, and it resulting in "dehumanization", then all you are is a pse ...[text shortened]... oolly, jaundiced talking points and being snide about people whose perspectives you wish to dismiss.

I would say that this was the first "fist waving" and "sneering" on the thread -- from the top of page 2.

Would you like to point out where I was hostile before this?

Or would you agree with my assessment, perhaps ?

@philokalia said
Nah man, not at all.

@fmf said
So when you claimed that you DIDN'T say humanitarianism, you were not being truthful?

@philokalia said
Nah man, not at all.

It's on Page 1.

@philokalia said
Would you like to point out where I was hostile before this?

I think accusations of dehumanization being aimed at people you disagree with or disapprove of is "hostile".

@philokalia said
I would say that this was the first "fist waving" and "sneering" on the thread -- from the top of page 2.

I haven't accused you of "dehumanizing" anyone. I don't think I have waved a "fist" at you either. Perhaps you have a glass chin.

If you feel ~ as you now seem to be saying ~ that I am sneering at you, then that is something for you to reflect upon.

I think your fist-waving and sneering is aimed at the people you mentioned on page 1 when you accuse them of "dehumanizing" others.

@philokalia said
Nah man, not at all. As I pointed out earlier, this is the key statement and idea:

People who begin to fight on behalf of "humanity" or any other nebulous value paint their opposition as cruel on a very fundamental level, and therefore worthy of cruelty, as it is actually very rare to meet a true pacifist.

I was tackling this statement:

The first person who invokes humanity & humanitarianism is often the first person to dehumanize someone else.

@philokalia said
Great post.

It is completely true that misguided empathy can result in all sorts of injusitces.

People who begin to fight on behalf of "humanity" or any other nebulous value paint their opposition as cruel on a very fundamental level, and therefore worthy of cruelty, as it is actually very rare to meet a true pacifist.

The first person who invokes humanity & humanitarianism is often the first person to dehumanize someone else.

It is...on Page 1

Both terms were used.

I suppose that covers all bases, right?