[82 Card]

As a general point, though, if you label policy positions with which you disagree as being "insane" how can you possibly engage with them?  How can you think about the relative merits and drawbacks?

Totally agree, and I believe that this drives many of the deep divisions that appear to exist in our country. Why would one attempt to reason with a person that you have already decided is insane?

How do you even examine your own positions?


BC

Especially this. If you don't examine your own assumptions and understand what must be true for your position to have merit you will not be in a position to rationally defend it. Sometimes it turns out you can't defend all your assumptions or prove the all truths you need to be correct.

The ultimate disconnect is seen in this thread alone.  If you don't strenuously object to (let alone agree with) the position that you should not let Covid "dominate your life" then people label you a defender of "a creep" and a cultist.  It is a remarkable phenomenon that goes back to Trump fixation/obsession and the inability to engage rationally (for many . . . obviously not all).

P.S.  Had to look up TDS (and down a bit on Google hit).  Still, I don't think OF has used the term correctly.

It is not possible to engage rationally with Trump. After enough attempts fail, it is rational to write him off. Continuing to try to find rationality in an insane person is not rational.

[82 Card]

As a general point, though, if you label policy positions with which you disagree as being "insane" how can you possibly engage with them?  How can you think about the relative merits and drawbacks?

Totally agree, and I believe that this drives many of the deep divisions that appear to exist in our country. Why would one attempt to reason with a person that you have already decided is insane?

How do you even examine your own positions?


BC

Especially this. If you don't examine your own assumptions and understand what must be true for your position to have merit you will not be in a position to rationally defend it. Sometimes it turns out you can't defend all your assumptions or prove the all truths you need to be correct.

The ultimate disconnect is seen in this thread alone.  If you don't strenuously object to (let alone agree with) the position that you should not let Covid "dominate your life" then people label you a defender of "a creep" and a cultist.  It is a remarkable phenomenon that goes back to Trump fixation/obsession and the inability to engage rationally (for many . . . obviously not all).

P.S.  Had to look up TDS (and down a bit on Google hit).  Still, I don't think OF has used the term correctly.

It is not possible to engage rationally with Trump. After enough attempts fail, it is rational to write him off. Continuing to try to find rationality in an insane person is not rational.