> Even if the researchers agreed, would they want to have this judgmental, attacking person around?

1. You calling the person above judgmental and attacking is not as tolerant either.

2. What about things that are morally wrong? Slave owners wouldn’t want to have a judgmental attacking person around either. Does that mean we have to have curious-discussions about slavery?

▲

mmooss a day ago | parent [-]

Your comment finds ways to make it adversarial. What are you trying to build?

> What about things that are morally wrong?

That takes possibly the most certain path toward evil: I think what they do is morally wrong so I can act without morality toward them. It's the rationalization of many awful acts and people and ideologies. Just look at the worst of what religions do.

We should not think we are somehow above or exempt from that error, or so above sin generally that we can preach.

	▲	hashstring a day ago \| parent [-]
		> I think what they do is morally wrong so I can act without morality toward them. I never said that this is how we should treat immorality. That’s somehow your interpretation of what I wrote. > We should not think we are somehow above or exempt from that error, or so above sin generally that we can preach. Preach.