But I will never know what it is that I am missing if no one ever tells me. (And to be honest, if people refuse to tell me even when they could, I start to wonder how important my blunders could really be. If they were really important, wouldn’t the people who are harmed by them want to correct them, if given the chance?)
Be careful; this is very close to the oft-quoted error of saying “If this is so important to you, why won’t you teach me?” You’re right that someone on the other side of a conflict can teach you, and also that it is in their best interest to do so; it does not logically follow that if they do not, it must not be important. It just means that teaching you about e.g. accomodating women is not their present top priority. Even the people who feel passionately about the debate get to have lives outside of it.
I’m sure you don’t actually believe or intend to suggest that it’s Angel’s duty to stay and educate people. I just wanted to point out that hole in the road before somebody else fell in it.
Be careful; this is very close to the oft-quoted error of saying “If this is so important to you, why won’t you teach me?” You’re right that someone on the other side of a conflict can teach you, and also that it is in their best interest to do so; it does not logically follow that if they do not, it must not be important.
To reject another oft quoted saying, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. If people consistently don’t rfriel something when it is in their best interest to give it to him then it is correct for him to consider that evidence that said thing does not exist.
If people consistently don’t [give] rfriel something when it is in their best interest to give it to him then it is correct for him to consider that evidence that said thing does not exist.
It is indeed correct for him to consider it. A good next step in evaluating that consideration might be to seek out other sources for that evidence than individuals currently engaged in a realtime debate—for example, published resources on the topic. That way, he can distinguish between a real lack of evidence, and the presence of some incentive for any given individual not to focus their energy on teaching it to him.
Be careful; this is very close to the oft-quoted error of saying “If this is so important to you, why won’t you teach me?” You’re right that someone on the other side of a conflict can teach you, and also that it is in their best interest to do so; it does not logically follow that if they do not, it must not be important. It just means that teaching you about e.g. accomodating women is not their present top priority. Even the people who feel passionately about the debate get to have lives outside of it.
I’m sure you don’t actually believe or intend to suggest that it’s Angel’s duty to stay and educate people. I just wanted to point out that hole in the road before somebody else fell in it.
To reject another oft quoted saying, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. If people consistently don’t rfriel something when it is in their best interest to give it to him then it is correct for him to consider that evidence that said thing does not exist.
The problem is that people can give up on trying to explain something if they don’t feel as though they’re being heard.
I suggest that “complicated mess” is at least as good a hypothesis as “nothing there”.
It is indeed correct for him to consider it. A good next step in evaluating that consideration might be to seek out other sources for that evidence than individuals currently engaged in a realtime debate—for example, published resources on the topic. That way, he can distinguish between a real lack of evidence, and the presence of some incentive for any given individual not to focus their energy on teaching it to him.