7 ms·
I basically do not take issue with your dissection of terms here. However I have seen another bit of your logic elsewhere and strongly disagree with it: the id
by griffinmmahon 9y ago
I basically do not take issue with your dissection of terms here.
However I have seen another bit of your logic elsewhere and strongly disagree with it: the idea that mislabelling (or even correctly labelling) something "does an injustice" or "is a disservice" or "would be offensive to" people who died in the past at the hands of someone/something. We only have an obligation to make the lives of current and future people better: people who have died because of hatred would surely appreciate us doing our best to combat hatred in the modern world.
- tomhoward 9y agoI'm not sure I see where the disagreement is. I agree that making life better for people today and in the future is what matters most. And I think an important step in doing that is to heed the lessons of history, which includes having sympathy for the suffering of those who've gone before.
- griffinmmahon 9y agoSure, we're agreeing. I just take issue with the idea that it is possible to do an injustice against the dead over word choice. I probably jumped too quick, though, and maybe shouldn't have commented. Sorry if any of this came off as combative!
- tomhoward 9y agoFair enough :) I see what you're getting st, thanks for sharing your thoughts.