Vigorous, open-ended epistemic and moral competition is hard. Neutrality and collaboration can be useful, but are always context-sensitive and provisional. They are ongoing negotiations, weighing all the different consequences and strategies. A fighting couple can’t skip past all the messy heated asymmetric conflicts with some rigid absolutes about civil discourse.
I agree with this. The intended message is not that cooperation is always the right choice, but that monstrous morals alone should not be enough to rule out cooperation. Fighting is still sometimes the best choice.
I agree with this. The intended message is not that cooperation is always the right choice, but that monstrous morals alone should not be enough to rule out cooperation. Fighting is still sometimes the best choice.
What are your thoughts on Three Worlds Collide?