Hofmaimaier@feddit.org to memes@lemmy.world · 14 days agoUh, yeah. That rings a bell.feddit.orgimagemessage-square124fedilinkarrow-up11.39Karrow-down18
arrow-up11.38Karrow-down1imageUh, yeah. That rings a bell.feddit.orgHofmaimaier@feddit.org to memes@lemmy.world · 14 days agomessage-square124fedilink
minus-squareaidan@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 days agoI argue with people for a lot of reasons. I an saying no one has an inherent obligation to argue with anyone.
minus-squareirmoz@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-28 days agoIt’s not an inherent obligation, but if you genuinely oppose those ideas, you’d feel compelled to argue against them if someone expressed them, or else remove yourself from the situation ASAP
minus-squareaidan@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 days agoYou’re saying you would, I explained why others might not feel the same way, and still genuinely oppose them
minus-squareirmoz@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 days agoYou can’t genuinely oppose something and tolerate it at the same time, that’s a contradiction
minus-squareirmoz@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·6 days agoThen I suppose we disagree on what “oppose” or “tolerate” mean
I argue with people for a lot of reasons. I an saying no one has an inherent obligation to argue with anyone.
It’s not an inherent obligation, but if you genuinely oppose those ideas, you’d feel compelled to argue against them if someone expressed them, or else remove yourself from the situation ASAP
You’re saying you would, I explained why others might not feel the same way, and still genuinely oppose them
You can’t genuinely oppose something and tolerate it at the same time, that’s a contradiction
I don’t agree with that
Then I suppose we disagree on what “oppose” or “tolerate” mean