Mr. Girl interviews russian philosopher

[Danioover9000]

A good video on the POV of a russian philosopher from the older generation:

https://youtu.be/-LRNckuFYMU

[PurpleTree]

should we care about everybody's pov?

or shouldn't we?

once someone is the attacker should we care about their pov?

should we care about the pov of white lynchers, of nazis, of people who rape and kill women etc.?

not saying we shouldn't 

[Danioover9000]

@PurpleTree

8 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

should we care about everybody's pov?

or shouldn't we?

once someone is the attacker should we care about their pov?

should we care about the pov of white lynchers, of nazis, of people who rape and kill women etc.?

not saying we shouldn't 

   Contrast that video with the video below, from Destiny:

   Which one is more open minded and considerate about POV? I feel that Destiny is too sunk cost to be non partisan in this issue, despite his rhetoric and rationale being sound, he benefits too much from western culture, as most of his audience is western, while Mr. Girl is able to host and question this Russian philosopher's POV from Russia's side.

[zurew]

2 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

should we care about everybody's pov?

If you want to get as objective image as possible, then you should. So it depends on your goal.

The reason why, is because everyone has their own biases and incentives. The more different kind of sources you use, the better ability you can have to shed light on the biases.

 

5 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

once someone is the attacker should we care about their pov?

If you want to understand ,why the attacker attacked, then the answer is yes. You could argue, that i am assuming rationality, and reasonability here.

I think its a good practice to assume rational reasons why things happened, or why someone did what they did. Once you contemplated that, and you spent a good amount time with that, if you didn't find any rational argument why they did what they did, then you can start to assume that there is no rational reason, but you can still be wrong there.

Also you can deliberately search for good earnest people and sources, that can represent and defend the side, that you want to analyze.

[Scholar]

8 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@PurpleTree

   Contrast that video with the video below, from Destiny:

   Which one is more open minded and considerate about POV? I feel that Destiny is too sunk cost to be non partisan in this issue, despite his rhetoric and rationale being sound, he benefits too much from western culture, as most of his audience is western, while Mr. Girl is able to host and question this Russian philosopher's POV from Russia's side.

He shits on western culture all the time and actually had held the anit-nato position before he did his research.

[PurpleTree]

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

If you want to get as objective image as possible, then you should. So it depends on your goal.

well you say that but do you really actively seek out to listen to for example white lynchers pov who thought it was the best idea ever to lynch black people etc.? and stay open minded while listening to them. (this is just an example out of many)

just saying we should listen to all pov's without actually doing it is just kind of virtue signalling imo

[zurew]

6 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

well you say that but do you really actively seek out to listen to for example white lynchers pov who thought it was the best idea ever to lynch black people etc.? and stay open minded while listening to them. (this is just an example out of many)

just saying we should listen to all pov's without actually doing it is just kind of virtue signalling imo

Well, you don't know if i actually do it or not, or how much i do it on a scale(assuming it was targeted at me). You asked the question i answered it directly. Virtue signalling is only true, if you can provide evidence, that a particular person is not doing what he preaches.

But i think your take is fair. But the answer is still the same. You can try your best, to understand various positions and then you can get closer to an objective image. Basically thats all you can do. Just because a lot of people do some virtue signaling on a particular level, that doesn't mean, that you shouldn't try to understand better.

If your goal is to understand, you shouldn't be focusing on or bothered by people who don't do it. You do you.

And to not dodge your question the answer is yes, most of the time the issues i care about i actively seek every side of the spectrum to understand better. Of course becuase i have an ego, i will still have some biases and holes in my knowledge, and i have to say this, i don't do this with every single issue, because i either don't have time to search for it, or i don't find that particular issue serious enough to get a more objective image about it.

Edited March 12, 2022 by zurew

[Yarco]

22 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

should we care about everybody's pov?

or shouldn't we?

once someone is the attacker should we care about their pov?

should we care about the pov of white lynchers, of nazis, of people who rape and kill women etc.?

not saying we shouldn't 

How do you know you're correct that Russia is the true aggressor in this situation? Because that's what Western governments tell you?

Very few people are total psychos that will just attack without some rationalization in their mind for why they're in the right. You especially can't get away with that on a national level when you have constituents to report to.

Everyone on every side of every war in history has thought they were on the right. Otherwise they would've stopped fighting. Keep in mind that all of history has only been written from the winner's point of view.

1 minute ago, PurpleTree said:

well you say that but do you really actively seek out to listen to for example white lynchers pov who thought it was the best idea ever to lynch black people etc.? and stay open minded while listening to them. (this is just an example out of many)

just saying we should listen to all pov's without actually doing it is just kind of virtue signalling imo

Yes, I listen to podcasts and videos put out by groups that the ADL and other organizations label as hate groups. On both the extreme right and left end of the spectrum. It's not just virtue signaling for me. I think freedom of speech should be nearly absolute.

You can never trust the people who have the power to silence others, they always have an agenda. Even if in their own mind it's a noble and virtuous agenda that will make the world a better place. Like I said above, no one thinks they're evil. Especially the people who currently think they're on the right side of history.

[PurpleTree]

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

Well, you don't know if i actually do it or not, or how much i do it on a scale(assuming it was targeted at me). You asked the question i answered it directly. Virtue signalling is only true, if you can provide evidence, that a particular person is not doing what he preaches.

But i think your take is fair. But the answer is still the same. You can try your best, to understand various positions and then you can get closer to an objective image. Basically thats all you can do. Just because a lot of people do some virtue signaling on a particular level, that doesn't mean, that you shouldn't try to understand better.

i didn't say that's what you did, i just asked if you do that because i don't know you obviously

8 minutes ago, Yarco said:

How do you know you're correct that Russia is the true aggressor in this situation? Because that's what Western governments tell you?

Very few people are total psychos that will just attack without some rationalization in their mind for why they're in the right. You especially can't get away with that on a national level when you have constituents to report to.

Everyone on every side of every war in history has thought they were on the right. Otherwise they would've stopped fighting. Keep in mind that all of history has only been written from the winner's point of view.

Yes, I listen to podcasts and videos put out by groups that the ADL and other organizations label as hate groups. On both the extreme right and left end of the spectrum. It's not just virtue signaling for me. I think freedom of speech should be nearly absolute.

You can never trust the people who have the power to silence others, they always have an agenda. Even if in their own mind it's a noble and virtuous agenda that will make the world a better place. Like I said above, no one thinks they're evil. Especially the people who currently think they're on the right side of history.

obviously there are many rationalisations, everybody has rationalisations for what they do most people don't think they're evil

people who kill lgbt have their rationalisations, people who rape someone etc.

hitler and the nazis had many rationalisations, many (conspiracy theorists?) believe hitler and the germans were baited into ww2 for example and that jews were destroying germany and europe or whatever.

 

Edited March 12, 2022 by PurpleTree

[zurew]

1 minute ago, PurpleTree said:

i didn't say that's what you did, i just asked if you do that because i don't know you obviously

Fair enough. Thats why i put 'assuming it was targeted at me' in parentheses. And i understand your position and frustration about virtue signalling, because it really is an issue.(it could be said here, that i am doing a meta virtue signalling here lmao) 

[DocWatts]

49 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

should we care about everybody's pov?

or shouldn't we?

once someone is the attacker should we care about their pov?

should we care about the pov of white lynchers, of nazis, of people who rape and kill women etc.?

not saying we shouldn't 

Insofar as as those pov's are having a societal impact, I would say we should seek to understand those perspectives.

Note that this doesn't necessarily mean empathizing with them, as the vast majority of human beings who aren't white supremacists won't to be able to empathize with a neo-Nazi.

If societies are creating large numbers of hateful and alienated people, it behooves to understand why that's happening. 

I'll likely never be able to empathize with someone who lynches another human being, but I also understand that had I been born in to a very different context with different social conditioning, that could have been me.

As far as caring about these perspectives, while most of the time care has a positive connotation, caring also can mean taking something seriously while disapproving of it.

Edited March 12, 2022 by DocWatts

[Scholar]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

A good video on the POV of a russian philosopher from the older generation:

https://youtu.be/-LRNckuFYMU

Yes it's actually a good video to showcase the bias of some people, Mr Girl did a good job revealing that.

[PurpleTree]

2 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Yes it's actually a good video to showcase the bias of some people, Mr Girl did a good job revealing that.

mr girl also has some russian heritage i think i've heard him say that

not saying it makes him more open for russian reasoning or propaganda but who knows

[Danioover9000]

   I think this is part of Destiny's first take before his second take:

 

[PurpleTree]

Listening to it but i think he should also have an Ukrainian philosopher on to even things out.

This Russian philosopher isn't even allowed to use words like invasion, war, annexed (because of putin)

[PurpleTree]

4 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

Listening to it but i think he should also have an Ukrainian philosopher on to even things out.

This Russian philosopher isn't even allowed to use words like invasion, war, annexed (because of putin)

Listened to it and it was fine really didn't learn anything new though, i do understand that Russian perspective, until they attacked the Ukraine

But the philosopher said stuff like Russia doesn't want to be pushed around, Russia has a great history ok fine. But Ukraine has history too and doesn't want to be pushed around or attacked either.

[Leo Gura]

That was a good interview.

[Carl-Richard]

17 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

russian philosopher

He is a professor in political science.

[Hsinav]

Could be really good with a real interviewer. This guy sucks.

 

[Danioover9000]

@Hsinav

4 hours ago, Hsinav said:

Could be really good with a real interviewer. This guy sucks.

 

   The interviewer or the interviewee?