I'm just front-paging something I wrote in "The Green Rat Café."
This made me want to read "The Principle of Charity" (Wikipedia):
In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker's statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation....I'm making a tag "the principle of charity/humanity," because I think it might help me (and you!) remember to do something I very much believe in doing. You might say it's too similar to calling for civility (which I'm known for calling "civility bullshit"), but it's not the same thing. It's not about tone. It's about interpretation and understanding.
[Donald] Davidson sometimes referred to it as the principle of rational accommodation. He summarized it: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimises agreement. The principle may be invoked to make sense of a speaker's utterances when one is unsure of their meaning...
[There are] at least four versions of the principle of charity...
A related principle is the principle of humanity, which states that we must assume that another speaker's beliefs and desires are connected to each other and to reality in some way, and attribute to him or her "the propositional attitudes one supposes one would have oneself in those circumstances"...
- The other uses words in the ordinary way;
- The other makes true statements;
- The other makes valid arguments;
- The other says something interesting.
Posts
230 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 230 of 230gadfly said...
And I wonder what is so terrible about Nathan's service in the Marines - whether in or out of a war zone and what an AWOL incident means since he returned to duty - but dirt is important for placing blame. Thank you for your service Nathan Phillips.
Obviously no service time for you. AWOL 3 times in one enlistment? He was a burden and a drag on his unit, worthless and unreliable.
Did he return to duty? Or was he returned? In my time I saw both (more than once). One who returned to duty received 30 days restriction as we got underway for 30 days. At that time restriction could be served underway. So, for the 30 days we were underwater, he couldn't leave the sub. Another returned to duty in handcuffs after he ran off the highway in front of a Nevada State Trooper. He had only been gone 5 days vs. the 18 days of the other. 3 days bread and water and solitary confinement, reduction in rank from E2 to E1 (months earlier he had been an E5), restriction and extra duty, and loss of 1/2 pay for 2 months. Of course there's more to each story, but leaving service as an E1 says a lot, and nothing good. We don't have record of the fake Vietnam vet's punishments. Did he receive non-judicial punishment or special court martial? That's something an inquisitive press doing it's job would have told us by now. The media seems strangely uninterested in informing news consumers about the fake Vietnam vet's history.
I would never wear a MAGA hat. It's not worth the hassle. I go to the dentist regularly. It's worth the hassle.......Prior to my current gig working as Jennifer Lawrence's personal shopper, I had the unappealing job of security guard at a methadone clinic. Many of the clientele had bad teeth. I attributed this to the fact that after receiving methadone, their next stop was invariably the vending machine to buy candy. Addicts have bad teeth......Many of them were struggling with problems not completely of their own making and deserved sympathy. Others had rolled their lives into one huge, massive ball of shit and attempted to roll that huge massive ball of shit all over you and crush you......I once got attacked by a methadone addict because his dosage had been changed, and he didn't like it. He was sufficiently shrewd to attack me and not the nurse. When the cops arrived, he filed a cross complaint saying hat I had attacked him. The cops took us both to the precinct house and gave us DAT's. He got out of the station house first because he was getting antsy and the cops wanted to be rid of him. I never followed up on the DAT. It wasn't worth the hassle......A security guard at a methadone clinic is far more marginal than the addicts.....He didn't get dropped from the program. Upon reflection, I decided that there were easier ways to make a living and got a job elsewhere. It wasn't worth the hassle.
This wasn't an accident and it wasn't happenstance. Phillips and his crew are professionals and they made this happen.
Check out this Twitter thread explaining the composition and actions of the group:
Twitter Thread - Phillips Crew
“Both Phillips and Sandmann were ordinary people living private lives in obscurity.”
Holy shit.
Nothing says "I'm just a random, ordinary guy living in obscurity" like a one man protest in front of cameras in NYC in front of Trump Tower in 2017.
And I wonder what is so terrible about Nathan's service in the Marines - whether in or out of a war zone and what an AWOL incident means since he returned to duty - but dirt is important for placing blame.
This is dishonest. If the left-media wasn't citing it implying it should increase his credibility people wouldn't be noting the media representation is false.
"David Hogg...has officially come out and..."
Get with the modern parlance, Bimbo. "Come out" means out of the closet.
Initially, we should give everyone the benefit of the doubt, up to the point where it is clear that they deserve no such benefit by their behavior. When people have made clear through their behavior that they are not honest or interested in being honest, then they deserve to be treated as such.
I think that perhaps rather than charity, Althouse might be looking more for the concept of mercy. Lots of people who claim to want justice would be much better seeking mercy.
Living private lives in obscurity vanishes when a high school junior's signature is placed on a letter written by a PR firm to sway public opinion...
Pssst. His private life vanished long before that evil PR firm stepped up to correct your lies.
gadfly said...
“And I wonder what is so terrible about Nathan's service in the Marines - whether in or out of a war zone and what an AWOL incident means since he returned to duty - but dirt is important for placing blame. Thank you for your service Nathan Phillips.“
Because he lied about being in Vietnam and was a multiple AWOL POTG shitbird.
He is one of the few veterans that supports Democrats.
I am willing to bet the rate of other than honorable discharge veterans that vote Democrat is high.
When banging a drum in someone's face is perversely considered less aggressive than a "smirk"...
Oh right..Phillips was deep in prayer.
That's it...
Dunno..isn't the case that the only "theater" he was in showed films that he smuggled booze into after fighting the good fight of refrigeration?
I read this to my indoor plants. They really perked up. Must be the nitrogen.
Regarding this whole episode, the axiom that is most fitting to the upside-down view by many, including some very privileged and powerful people is also applicable to this post.
"Those who are kind to the cruel, in the end will be cruel to the kind."
It's a surprisingly reliable prediction.
After scrolling thru this thread I find Althouse has not deigned to try to defend her maliciously false equivocation. Maybe her next post
"“And I wonder what is so terrible about Nathan's service in the Marines - whether in or out of a war zone and what an AWOL incident means since he returned to duty - but dirt is important for placing blame. Thank you for your service Nathan Phillips.“
Maybe you don't see what's wrong with that, but the military found it bad enough to incarcerate him multiple times for it and to refuse to discharge him honorably.
Stolen valor: Falsely claiming credit for risking your life as other people actually did, with 10,000 of them dying for it, and pretending to be as brave and sacrificing as they were seems pretty dispicable to most people. What is surprising is that anyone would not see it as despicable, but what some people justify lately is amazing.
Maybe this analogy will bring it home: Let's say Sandman wore blackface and claimed to be a black man victimized by white supremacists, and he went around openly claiming it for years. How would you feel about him? How would you feel about those who defended him, or didn't see anything wrong with that?
LOL@ Gadfly@12:41PM thanking this piece of shit for his service! Yup, this is the kind of military man that Democrat party members support, a worthless tramp who went AWOL multiple times and mustered out after 4 years the same rank he went in. At least he didn't murder any troops like the democrat party other favorites sergeant Akbar and major Nidal, and he wasn't an active traitor like Democrat party honored veterans Bowe Bergdahl and Bradley Manning, but still this warrior is a true Democrat party hero. Thank you for your service to the democrat party! Thank you for your Anti-American service!
Big Mike:
re: @Cassandra, it is true that Phillips “was cynically used to support a larger agenda,” but I note that he has eagerly embraced that role.
I agree that he has, and I see a huge difference between statements made to the media to attack others and statements made to the media to defend yourself. Someone earlier on this thread said there was no video of Phillips claiming to be a Vietnam vet. That's not true:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/stolen-valor-native-american-activist-nathan-phillips-lied-that-he-was-a-vietnam-vet-in-facebook-video
2 excerpts from the video:
I'm a Vietnam vet, you know...one of the boxes (referring to his DD214) in there shows if you were peacetime or... what my box says that I was in theater. (note: the Marine Corps says he didn't deploy anywhere (to any theater)
"I got a Section 8 home because I'm a veteran, wartime veteran like that. Honorable, in theater, so I have Section 8 home."
A section 8 (no longer used) usually meant "mentally unfit to serve". This is a guy who went AWOL several times and had a criminal record and substance abuse issues. Leaving as an E1 after 4 years suggests he had some significant mental or emotional issues, and that makes me judge him less severely than I might judge someone I knew was fully competent.
We're all responsible for our own actions, but there's something about him that seems off. I expect that's at least part of why some people are defending him so passionately (aside from the identity politics thingy).
Unlike the traitor Gen Flynn, Bo Bergdahl, Bradley Manning, and Pvt. Phillips, served their country with distinction and honor!
-Every liberal
FWIW, I find Phillips' behavior infuriating.
*IF* he's got some mental issues, then he's less culpable (and easier to manipulate) than someone who's fully competent. On the otter heiny, if he's got some mental issues, that makes his version of events less than rock-solid evidence -- especially when the available video seems to contradict his story (at worst) or offer no support for his accusations (at best).
There is a well known quote about the danger of being so open minded one's brains fall out. We...should avoid that.
Phillips speaks in such a way as to imply more than he actually directly says. I know a guy like this, and we all just roll our eyes; after all he’s an OK guy otherwise. I think that Phillips is kind of thinking that maybe “theatre” includes everywhere where people involved in the war were stationed. If that definition should just so happen to imply that he was in Viet Nam without him actually having said it, that’s on you! I think an eye roll is a better response than calling him a liar. He’s mistaken in his belief of what theatre means.
Indian Country today also says his “scout recon” remark had to do with some protest somewhere, not Vietnam.
I am not saying that Phillips isn’t a fabulist, BTW.
You are better than this Ann....
No, she's not. Marxist feminist who wants sexual abominations normalized. The Whore of Amazon.
@Cassandra, I am guessing that Phillips was referring to HUD section 8 housing. The following excerpt is from HUD’s “Affordable Housing” web site:
“The most well known form of housing assistance for veterans is the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Voucher program. It operates just like the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program, but is designated only for homeless veterans.”
So it is fair to assume that Phillips is referring to the VASH program, which is like section 8 but exclusively for Vietnam Era Veterans. (Or it could be for all veterans, and not just Vietnam Era vets.)
His referring to himself as a Vietnam Veteran more problematic. Most of us who served in that timeframe are careful to call ourselves “Vietnam Era vets, and “Vietnam Veteran,” without “Era,” is reserved for people who were actually deployed in theater. We know, and even the media have acknowledged, that he was never deployed in theater. Never. Not ever.
But “Vietnam Era Veteran” is a term with a legal definition, which I believe was established in the Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law (P.L.) 104-275, Section 505, enacted October 9, 1996. IIRC it does not require that the recipient of Vietnam Era Veterans’ preferences and special benefits have been honorably discharged.
The only possible explanation for bad teeth is poverty and the failure of America's health care system.
Official Indians - but nobody else - get free health care including dentistry from the federal "Indian Health Service".
Huh...section 8 housing? That didn't occur to me (I interpreted it as being a reference to his discharge since he had been talking about his time in the military). I don't know anything about HUD.
You learn something new every day!
NP fails on all four points. He gets no charity from me.
He chose to make all this happen. Sandmann just stood there as it happened to him.
Phillips went out of his way, bringing his own media along mind you, to create that scene. He then ran to the WaPo and gave a tendentious report of the situation which fell apart hours later.
Sandmann was literally standing there minding his own business.
They are in no way comparable, and Phillips deserves all the opprobrium he's getting.
No. Phillips took his tom-tom and his native dress, went into a tense situation and tried to get HIT. He had a pet cameraman behind him who also spoon fed a specific clip to cause this dishonest narrative in the first place.
He is an 'innocent victim' the same way some black guy who spray paints 'KKK' on his front door is a 'victim'.
This was also a man who went on television and offered lies and incredibly misleading testimony. That the credulous media refused to do their job and fact check anything is its own problem, but he promulgated his lies and distortions and WORKED to set up this narrative.
I submit to your prodigious vocabulary the terms 'agent provocateur', instigator, and provocation. None of them are synonymous with 'victim'.
And charity is for the oppressed, not some guy trying to goad teenagers into attacking him.
Post a Comment