By “nice” do you mean something like “polite” or “courteous”? If so, then I do agree that it’s a basic principle of rationalist discourse to be “nice”; but on the other hand, in that case I do not agree that it is necessary to care about someone in order to be “nice” to them in this sense.
On the other hand, if by “be nice” you mean something that does require caring about someone, then I do not agree that it’s a basic principle of rationalist discourse. (Indeed it may be actively detrimental, in some cases; and certainly any attempt to mandate such a thing, or even to raise it to the level of an expectation, ought to be strongly quashed.)
So, could you clarify which sort of thing you have in mind here?
By nice I do mean actually caring about someone a little bit. That’s needed to make sure we’re cooperative vs. combative in discussion. I think this is a lower bar than you are thinking. I care enough about everyone I pass on the street enough to save them a minute if it takes me a couple of seconds to do it.
If you’ve ever noticed how two people that clearly don’t care even that much have a discussion, I think you’ll agree that they aren’t as productive as when people are in disagreement but cooperatively inclined.
By nice I do mean actually caring about someone a little bit. That’s needed to make sure we’re cooperative vs. combative in discussion. I think this is a lower bar than you are thinking. I care enough about everyone I pass on the street enough to save them a minute if it takes me a couple of seconds to do it.
Alright, but if what you mean by “caring about” someone is only this very low bar, then where, in rationalist spaces, are you meeting people who don’t “care about” you…?
In fact, this seems to me to be such a low bar that determining whether someone meets it is going to be overwhelmed by noise in your judgment. For almost any plausible behavior on a discussion forum like this, how sure are you whether it’s motivated by such minimal “caring” or not?
In short, I would like to see what it means, in your view, to not “care about” someone, in this sense, before I can make any sense of the claim that “be nice” is a basic principle of rationalist discourse, that there are improvements to discussion from doing this sort of “caring” over not doing it, etc. Right now, I struggle to imagine it!
By “nice” do you mean something like “polite” or “courteous”? If so, then I do agree that it’s a basic principle of rationalist discourse to be “nice”; but on the other hand, in that case I do not agree that it is necessary to care about someone in order to be “nice” to them in this sense.
On the other hand, if by “be nice” you mean something that does require caring about someone, then I do not agree that it’s a basic principle of rationalist discourse. (Indeed it may be actively detrimental, in some cases; and certainly any attempt to mandate such a thing, or even to raise it to the level of an expectation, ought to be strongly quashed.)
So, could you clarify which sort of thing you have in mind here?
By nice I do mean actually caring about someone a little bit. That’s needed to make sure we’re cooperative vs. combative in discussion. I think this is a lower bar than you are thinking. I care enough about everyone I pass on the street enough to save them a minute if it takes me a couple of seconds to do it.
If you’ve ever noticed how two people that clearly don’t care even that much have a discussion, I think you’ll agree that they aren’t as productive as when people are in disagreement but cooperatively inclined.
Alright, but if what you mean by “caring about” someone is only this very low bar, then where, in rationalist spaces, are you meeting people who don’t “care about” you…?
In fact, this seems to me to be such a low bar that determining whether someone meets it is going to be overwhelmed by noise in your judgment. For almost any plausible behavior on a discussion forum like this, how sure are you whether it’s motivated by such minimal “caring” or not?
In short, I would like to see what it means, in your view, to not “care about” someone, in this sense, before I can make any sense of the claim that “be nice” is a basic principle of rationalist discourse, that there are improvements to discussion from doing this sort of “caring” over not doing it, etc. Right now, I struggle to imagine it!