[ SECRET POST #6133 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6133 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Void Stranger]



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.


























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #877.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Asking for a friend

[(Anonymous)]

The point I'm making is that training yourself to think of counterfactuals, even for weird stuff, trains your brain to make it less likely that you will miss things that can cause horrific real world consequences. It also trains your brain to recognize that you must consult with experts in whatever field you're looking at. As well, it makes you comfortable with the idea that nothing is guaranteed and nothing is set in stone. As circumstances in the real world change, the counterfactuals will change as well. Basically, it boils down to training people to have a flexible mindset with regards to stated goals.

A counterfactual exercise is exceedingly useful because that's how a lot of these discussions go:

Assertion: "We've added a ramp for wheelchair users! It's accessible to ALL disabled users."

Counterfactual: "There are no rails, what about people who need rails to go up a ramp?"

Re: Asking for a friend

[(Anonymous)]

Right but the distinction I'm drawing here is that, while thinking in counterfactuals can be useful, thinking in terms of *wildly implausible* counterfactuals is not. Asking questions of the form "can you imagine a situation in which immoral act A is justified" is not useful.

Re: Asking for a friend

[(Anonymous)]

The "wildly implausible counterfactual" was a throw away line that had nothing to do with the actual discussion. I was TRYING to start a discussion of the metaphysics of Loki when liar!anon accused me of lying about having a degree in philosophy to try and make myself seem important (?) and then accused me of using my degree in philosophy (that I don't have, apparently??) to justify rape, which had nothing to do with anything I was trying to discuss. Now they have come down here to try it again.

So. In the interest of an actual philosophical discussion, since apparently I'm not allowed to talk about the metaphysics of Loki, counterfactual discussions, regardless of plausibility, have the aforementioned usefulness for mental flexibility training.

It actually IS useful to ask questions in the form of "can you imagine a situation in which immoral act A is justified." I had many an assignment in philosophy class which is basically just that. Most memorably, when we were asked to write essays on when/if murder is ever justifiable. So, yeah, this is a very common training tool in philosophy and has many uses, even when wildly implausible.

It's especially fun in fandom circles because you can use the most wildly implausible circumstances in the arguments and have actual canon backing you up.

Re: Asking for a friend

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah OK I have absolutely no idea about all of this drama and no particular feelings on it

I just think that the value of asking those kinds of questions is incredibly limited and it should become clear real quick that you can come up with these kinds of narratives but that they don't have much significance. But people, especially in fandom, get really worked up about them and there is a lot of discourse and discussion that is colossally stupid.