Then why did you use the word “discriminate” when you meant “hate”?
Because I thought if that excerpt of mines were to be taken literally it would be understood as my simply not treating a retard, a black human, or a gay any differently from any other human were I to approach them for instance, or were I even to just consider them. I don’t ascribe negative emotion to my understanding of them so I don’t scowl when I think of them, for instance. I’ve also seen “discrimination” as a word used as I used it, and assumed my thought would be understood. A lot of what I say is to be taken something less than literally, such as the fact that I even use the word “retard” as an insult when I haven’t anything against literal retards, but my expression makes sense to me.
Because I thought if that excerpt of mines were to be taken literally it would be understood as my simply not treating a retard, a black human, or a gay any differently from any other human were I to approach them for instance, or were I even to just consider them.
Except as we’ve just established you would (and should treat them differently).
I’ve also seen “discrimination” as a word used as I used it, and assumed my thought would be understood.
“Discriminate” is another word that’s sometimes used in a confused manner. Although, here it’s less about confusing two meanings and more about ritually saying statements perceived as socially desirable even if it would be insane to actually act on the literal advice. This by the way is not just a harmless word game, it means that anybody could be accused of hypocrisy (or usually worse) by noting a specific instance where they do in fact discriminate.
Except as we’ve just established you would (and should treat them differently).
Excuse me? Did you miss the part of the excerpt of mines you quoted in this post where I said “were I to approach them for instance, or were I even to just consider them”? I said I would not discriminate against those subset of human were I to approach them, or consider them, and that is what I expected my original remark to be understand as. Without adding variables you have no reason to consider from the excerpt itself, when simply considering me and a retard, a black human, or a gay, I would not treat them any differently than I would any other human.
Although, here it’s less about confusing two meanings and more about ritually saying statements perceived as socially desirable even if it would be insane to actually act on the literal advice.
I don’t really understand this but I would like to affirm that I do not very much care for social constructs. I care for argument, and I care for reason. As I am probably autistic, I cannot understand many social constructs and have yet to be given rational reason to even consider them, so I don’t. If you wish you convince me to heed social constructs in any way please provide an argument defending your notion.
As I am probably autistic, I cannot understand many social constructs and have yet to be given rational reason to even consider them, so I don’t
I don’t know if you’re still reading this, but the answer is “the rational reason to consider them is that if you don’t, you will get very hurt, and you don’t want to get very hurt”.
Because I thought if that excerpt of mines were to be taken literally it would be understood as my simply not treating a retard, a black human, or a gay any differently from any other human were I to approach them for instance, or were I even to just consider them. I don’t ascribe negative emotion to my understanding of them so I don’t scowl when I think of them, for instance. I’ve also seen “discrimination” as a word used as I used it, and assumed my thought would be understood. A lot of what I say is to be taken something less than literally, such as the fact that I even use the word “retard” as an insult when I haven’t anything against literal retards, but my expression makes sense to me.
Except as we’ve just established you would (and should treat them differently).
“Discriminate” is another word that’s sometimes used in a confused manner. Although, here it’s less about confusing two meanings and more about ritually saying statements perceived as socially desirable even if it would be insane to actually act on the literal advice. This by the way is not just a harmless word game, it means that anybody could be accused of hypocrisy (or usually worse) by noting a specific instance where they do in fact discriminate.
Excuse me? Did you miss the part of the excerpt of mines you quoted in this post where I said “were I to approach them for instance, or were I even to just consider them”? I said I would not discriminate against those subset of human were I to approach them, or consider them, and that is what I expected my original remark to be understand as. Without adding variables you have no reason to consider from the excerpt itself, when simply considering me and a retard, a black human, or a gay, I would not treat them any differently than I would any other human.
I don’t really understand this but I would like to affirm that I do not very much care for social constructs. I care for argument, and I care for reason. As I am probably autistic, I cannot understand many social constructs and have yet to be given rational reason to even consider them, so I don’t. If you wish you convince me to heed social constructs in any way please provide an argument defending your notion.
I don’t know if you’re still reading this, but the answer is “the rational reason to consider them is that if you don’t, you will get very hurt, and you don’t want to get very hurt”.