It’s false or not-even-wrong (“worthless parody of a human” is not something that I imagine epistemically applies to any human ever.)
It’s mixing epistemics and shoulds—even if you categorized yourself as a misery pit, this does not come close to meaning you should throw yourself under a bus.
Misery pits are a false framework, that may be useful for modeling phenomena, but may not be a useful model for people who would tend to identity themselves a misery pits. For instance, if they were likely to think the quoted thought, they’d be committing a lot of bucket errors.
I also dislike this comment because I think it’s too glib.
Some reasons this is bad:
It’s false or not-even-wrong (“worthless parody of a human” is not something that I imagine epistemically applies to any human ever.)
It’s mixing epistemics and shoulds—even if you categorized yourself as a misery pit, this does not come close to meaning you should throw yourself under a bus.
Misery pits are a false framework, that may be useful for modeling phenomena, but may not be a useful model for people who would tend to identity themselves a misery pits. For instance, if they were likely to think the quoted thought, they’d be committing a lot of bucket errors.
I also dislike this comment because I think it’s too glib.