🧵 View Thread
🧵 Thread (15 tweets)
whenever we have a disagreement, the first thing I want to understand is: how have your experiences have been different from mine? https://t.co/gNCFnhzCZB
I have had extremely heated disagreements lead into nourishing friendships once we get around to appreciating each other's backstories and contexts and I have had relatively mild-seeming disagreements ruin relationships because someone simply refused to discuss their experiences
Disagreements can be good https://t.co/svyh1FWVQv
IMO often what makes a disagreement interesting is whether or not the other person has a sense of vision a lot of twitter idiots (from every subculture, tribe, ingroup) have no vision, which makes the disagreements hideously boring unless you're choosing to entertain yourself
@ilex_ulmus @Malcolm_Ocean @visakanv I think so, yes. Do we disagree? NO YES If YES, is that a problem? NO YES If YES, can we solve it together? NO YES [loop] Can we solve it? LoRC says YES, &here's how/why Should we? Ethics says YES Must we? exponential tech says YES pic from: https://t.co/9tMifJShH0 https://t.co/13CafGWoR4
(h/t @vidhster) https://t.co/pRKzTg7E3M https://t.co/gWzgNWGk7g
@visakanv This reminds me of evaporating cloud diagrams. Have you ever played with them? https://t.co/phpFW5AatS
@HiredThought @visakanv came here to say this. wrote about them recently for Praxis: https://t.co/e5yKbwtTXW
@visakanv I name definitions and how you get those definitions an important part in argument games. https://t.co/7gdO6a21Hd
@visakanv Read this sometime when you're bored! https://t.co/laPwJAnuCl
@visakanv Philosophers would benefit from better understanding of how tacit linked premises often have emotional contents. Therapists would benefit from better understanding how tacit linked premises often have philosophical content.