Politics

10176 readers

28 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Pathos v Logos (self.politics)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ConsciousCode to c/politics

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

How do you argue with someone who's confused a lack of emotional connection to a topic with objectivity and rationality? Say a topic profoundly affects you and those you care about, but not the other person, so you get angry and flustered and they seem to think this means you're less objective as a result and it's an easy win.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Kajo 8 points 1 year ago

One solution is to question their competence to speak on this subject, and assert the superiority of lived experience over purely theoretical knowledge.

Another solution is to weigh (their) rationality against ethics. Many purely rational policies have led to disasters and horrors. Eugenics, for example, is perfectly rational.