Should we not recognize that, even if you or I now have the 100% perfect view on things, others are at a different place, and kindly conversations are better than attacks?
Should fashion, health, philosophy, financial savvy and everything else in life me on the same level?
Should we not recognize that, even if you or I now have the 100% perfect view on things, others are at a different place, and kindly conversations are better than attacks?
Of course we must be practical, right? Who even claims 100% perfection? As someone deemed unworthy of association due to not passing muster in the past, I very much appreciate the sentiment of tolerance and kindliness being expressed here!
@xochipilli-inlakech But, as an edge case, what if a neighbor has a nasty habit of child molestation. Should I not shun him?
If I am 90% in agreement with Y and 95% in agreement with X, and 5% in agreement with A - how ought I organize my associations?
@shepard I think you misspelled "shoot".
It's a judgment call. Ultimately we must decide where to draw the line, for me, it's somewhere between a child molester and a flag-pole hanger on, and I'm not sure I could nail down a precise criteria to apply in every instance. I haven't shunned my family for being voters, so maybe I err a little on the tolerant side. I like to think someone has to be pretty damn bad for me to shun them entirely.
@shepard People's fashion and health choices don't affect me (nor peaceful people generally). Their immoral actions do. Certainly there is a case to be made for dissociation with immorality, but I would say the case gets stronger the more heinous the specific immorality in question is. Violations range in severity from the most obvious and heinous to the almost insignificant and highly nuanced. In the more insignificant and highly nuanced end of the spectrum I think we can have more tolerance, and less so on the more severe side of the spectrum. Again coming up with a precise criteria by which we can objectively say when you should compromise your associative purity is impossible. The only logical way to view it IMO is as a judgment call.
I don't judge people for just being associated necessarily, there is a difference in being associated and advocating immoral behavior. If the association amounts to approval or advocating immorality then yes, I will judge. On the other hand two individuals may be "associated" (I guess we need to define this relationship more precisely), and one may express very different views and behavior and shouldn't necessarily be colored with the same brush as all of their associates.