But if a thin skinned person takes offense when a thick skinned person intends none, then isn’t it fair to say that the thin-skinned person isn’t modeling the other very well either?
Only if you understand my taking offense to mean that I’m inferring that you meant to offend me. If I understand perfectly well that you meant no offense and I’m offended anyway, it’s possible I’m modeling you very well.
the possibility that the offended could grow thicker skin [..] would be the most efficient protection of the offended from such offense
Efficiency in this context has to do with the ratio of costs to benefits, so how efficient that is presumably depends on the costs of growing that skin, which I expect varies among people and subjects.
That said, the cost to me of other people doing the work of not being offended by my actions is of course extremely low, which makes that strategy maximally efficient for me.
“That said, the cost to me of other people doing the work of not being offended by my actions is of course extremely low, which makes that strategy maximally efficient for me.”
Sure, but as someone whose skin has become a lot thicker over time I see the primary benefit of that change is to me. I didn’t require the cooperation of offenders to experience less pain.
With little further ongoing effort I’m now largely immune to what many experience as a world of hurt. For the rest of my life. Seems efficient to me. I think it was a lot easier than retraining the world to be less offensive to me.
Yes, growing a thicker skin might be very difficult for some, but most people can make very productive headway. This appears to have been overlooked by Yvain.
I certainly agree that in cases where “growing a thicker skin” (which I understand to mean self-modifying to be less offended by a given act) is relatively cheap, it’s worth considering.
Yes, that’s what I mean. And “relatively cheap” has to factor in the benefit of all of the pain you avoid for the rest of your life by thickening your skin, not just the cost of modification of the “offender”.
Only if you understand my taking offense to mean that I’m inferring that you meant to offend me. If I understand perfectly well that you meant no offense and I’m offended anyway, it’s possible I’m modeling you very well.
Efficiency in this context has to do with the ratio of costs to benefits, so how efficient that is presumably depends on the costs of growing that skin, which I expect varies among people and subjects.
That said, the cost to me of other people doing the work of not being offended by my actions is of course extremely low, which makes that strategy maximally efficient for me.
Sure, but as someone whose skin has become a lot thicker over time I see the primary benefit of that change is to me. I didn’t require the cooperation of offenders to experience less pain.
With little further ongoing effort I’m now largely immune to what many experience as a world of hurt. For the rest of my life. Seems efficient to me. I think it was a lot easier than retraining the world to be less offensive to me.
Yes, growing a thicker skin might be very difficult for some, but most people can make very productive headway. This appears to have been overlooked by Yvain.
Fair enough.
I certainly agree that in cases where “growing a thicker skin” (which I understand to mean self-modifying to be less offended by a given act) is relatively cheap, it’s worth considering.
Yes, that’s what I mean. And “relatively cheap” has to factor in the benefit of all of the pain you avoid for the rest of your life by thickening your skin, not just the cost of modification of the “offender”.
There’s a lot of win on that table.