And “lesswrong.com″ just went from my bookmarks to my speed dial. Anyway, I would like to say that rather than your hypothetical and “ideal” retort of “MLK was the good kind of criminal,” I would prefer the more sophisticated response you put forth for other situations, but more generalized: “I fail to see how that is relevant.”
“But… but… abortion is MURDER!” (Please note that I am against abortion for reasons I categorically refuse to discuss due to several harrowing experiences on spacebattles.com forums, although this site seems much more civil)
“I fail to see how that is relevant.”
That response may be technically true (you don’t acknowledge the relevance of the argument,) but I don’t think it’s usually appropriate, since the idea that something falling into a negative category could be irrelevant probably falls across a gap of inferential distance for your interlocutor. If they already got it, they probably wouldn’t have made the argument in the first place.
That’s fair, but I’d certainly still prefer it to “x is the GOOD kind of y,” which I feel has an infantile feel to it. Not that I think Yvain was actually saying he would use that construction.
And “lesswrong.com″ just went from my bookmarks to my speed dial. Anyway, I would like to say that rather than your hypothetical and “ideal” retort of “MLK was the good kind of criminal,” I would prefer the more sophisticated response you put forth for other situations, but more generalized: “I fail to see how that is relevant.”
“But… but… abortion is MURDER!” (Please note that I am against abortion for reasons I categorically refuse to discuss due to several harrowing experiences on spacebattles.com forums, although this site seems much more civil) “I fail to see how that is relevant.”
That response may be technically true (you don’t acknowledge the relevance of the argument,) but I don’t think it’s usually appropriate, since the idea that something falling into a negative category could be irrelevant probably falls across a gap of inferential distance for your interlocutor. If they already got it, they probably wouldn’t have made the argument in the first place.
That’s fair, but I’d certainly still prefer it to “x is the GOOD kind of y,” which I feel has an infantile feel to it. Not that I think Yvain was actually saying he would use that construction.