|
Top-level
@jpaskaruk On the point of the assumption, I personally didn't assume your l were making a moral judgement, but rather using a term that had meaning for you. However it was received in a different context overloaded with other meanings, and so sparked ire. The use of the term is, I think what was initially objected to. Given that it might have implications to others beyond your intent, it might be worth reconsidering choice of term for more effective communication in a crucial conversation. 3 comments
 I have also lived in a bubble of unreality because the people around me either could not or would not force me to see certain things in more than abstract terms. There was family affluence involved, but not just that, and more importantly, reality did finally assert itself to me in various ways I could not discount. Someone who was born into more privilege, and never faced the mildly-difficult choices that made me see, has a disease, but it's not necessarily evil. My original comment was essentially, "they know not what they do," and that is what I think is at play here. It is very easy to create paper bogeymen and say things are easy; I decline to do so, even if it is very clear that those holding power right now have no connection to reality. |
Gregory's Server
@davidcampey
I don't think empathy is what they lack, though - I think they are living in a bubble of unreality and surrounded by yes people who do not make them listen to, for instance, the actually-knowledgeable scientists and tech workers who understand the world that they have the option to not need to live in.
A sociopath lacks empathy - if I have to armchair diagnose, I prefer to diagnose them with having distorted vision, rather than being fundamentally evil.