09-22-2020, 10:01 AM
(09-22-2020, 02:30 AM)Dill Wrote: You didn't trouble yourself to demonstrate you even understood my "position" and then explain what was hypocritical about it.
You mean I didn't type an unnecessarily long two page paper about how your position is hypocritical on its face? I leave that type of meandering, overly verbose, response to others.
Quote:Just name-calling isn't "pointing out" anything. It is just name-calling.
Authoritarian pronouncements about what is or is not "up for debate" don't "point out" anything either. Especially from the guy who alternates between moral absolutism and "nuance" when it suits him.
This time it is moral absolutism--If wrong then, then wrong now!
But two wrongs wouldn't automatically make one hypocritical, just wrong twice.
Wrong then and right now is only wrong once, and not necessarily hypocritical.
Same for right then and wrong now. And one could be hypocritically right in both cases.
That's because hypocrisy generally isn't assessed separately from intentions and claimed ethical standards from which those intentions determinably diverge. You can't get anything like that from my post.
A very long winded way of saying "it's ok when I do it". You've been doing this a lot of late. Like I said, having integrity is difficult. If it was easy everyone would do it.
