explain to me why I should care about anyone's feelings and esteem
Because doing so aligns with a principle of avoiding unnecessary harm, for a start. Also because it facilitates better communication when you are making an effort to avoid creating more animosity.
This is a public forum, but it is also threaded
You're right; I hit reply from the notification without checking. My bad.
Thanks, Pattern!
Yeah, that sentence came out a bit poetic. I feel like it would have broken the tone to say something like, "In neurotypical situations, fear comes from clinging to an object that someone holds dear, and anticipating that object's loss", though. Maybe there's a middle-ground way to express it?
I've been making bets with my just-turned-5yo for about a year now to put a stop to arguments. I wholeheartedly endorse using bonds as well, and I intend to do so, though I wouldn't have thought of it on my own (having never really been exposed to the concept before). Thanks for that!
What other financial tools can we adapt in this way?
Firstly, I'm replying to a comment by Impassionata...
I could make a similar claim, but this is a public forum last I checked.
... who I consider antisocial at best.
I'll thank you to keep your opinions to yourself regarding my other interlocutors.
The Cave explains that there is only one reality, but that your perception is limited. I actually think that is an extremely apt parable.
I don't have to worry about bias here when it comes to my own ideological framework.
That's an extremely worrying statement. I strongly suggest you examine it closely.
Most people "have to" brush their teeth before going to bed, "have to" eat at a set time (or when they get hungry), and "have to" grab for the seatbelt as soon as they sit down in the car. Many "have to" make their bed in the morning, or write in their journal, etc.
This is something I've never experienced, nor has it ever occurred to me that it might be the case. To use the tooth brushing example: for me, that happens every night only because it's part of the "Getting ready for bed" mental checklist. I'd like to share that checklist along with some annotations. It takes between 30 and 45 minutes from start to finish. This checklist began life some 20 years ago and has been carefully sculpted over that time to accommodate my own changing needs, as well as those of my partner and our relationship.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting you need to adopt this checklist or anything like it; rather I want to share a very mature and complex habit of mine that accomplishes many varied goals, and the performance of which now feels very continuous and normal to me. After this long, each item has been coordinated to flow neatly into the next, and each moves me closer to the goal of being asleep in bed by a certain time. Of course, I can't always control that time, but I try to keep it within an hour of standard for health reasons. This checklist is one part of a larger but somewhat looser script that actually starts at dinner time and ends when my alarm goes off in the morning.
On occasion, I have skipped this entire process, falling asleep in whatever situation the evening leaves me in. I don't recall ever being disturbed by this happening, but I do notice that I tend to feel a bit gross and groggy the next morning. Specifically, I deliberately notice that so that I remember that feeling if I ever get the idea that "I can skip it, just this once". That way I have something to hold against the urge to make what I already know are poor choices for me.
This list begins as soon as I notice it is after 20:30, and ends when I am in bed with the lights out.
The people who supported Trump did so because they're not driven by care based morality, but by justice based morality. This is a typical left/right split. This is the difference between the swaddling mother and the protection of the patriarch.
the worldviews are irreconcilable at this point
Remember how I said there is more than one reality?
"Correspondence bias (also known as the fundamental attribution error) is the tendency to overestimate the the contribution of lasting traits and dispositions in determining people's behavior, as compared to situational effects. We might see someone kicking a vending machine, and conclude they're an inherently angry person. But maybe they just failed a test, had their driving license revoked, and had the machine eat their money for the third time this week. We think of the other person as an evil mutant and ourselves as righteous actors."
They're still people, Stuart. They still deserve as much dignity and respect as you and I. These happen to be scared people. There are ways to handle scared. If we don't even try to de-escalate, then we've already failed.
You, who have read so much history, believe that words cannot cause harm? That's an interesting conclusion.
I don't think existing animosity should be ignored. It's very important to acknowledge all the conditions when participating in any conversation, if at all possible. Rather, we should work to avoid creating new animosity, partly for the sake of communication and partly to avoid being even partly responsible for the harms that come to others as a result of our words. We likely won't be successful all the time, because wise speech is hard to do. But, like with everything else, the surest way to fail is to not try at all.
Moreover, I find that the exchange of ideas meets less friction when I try to not antagonize others. That's the goal of conversation, is it not?