Feb 24, 2020, 9:14 PM
I don’t’ think you understand what I mean by that statement.
I mean that if I write a constructivist proof that I don’t err.
The reason is that it’s so fking difficult to err if you write one.
The phrasing is to bait the other party into making an argument, thereby minimizing the frame, rather than forcing me to explain with a wall of text.
All of this explanation written down on the “Criticisms” page links on the site.
These statements offend you on a regular basis, for emotional reasons – probably because you can’t empathize with my methods. It’s because you attribute to my words the emotional intuition that you put into yours.
It’s possible you haven’t run a large organization, participated in politics, or competed in the courts against people who are dishonest. I have.
I don’t presume the other party has a moral character, has good intentions, is intellectually honest, or even has any more degree of agency than a puppy. I assume everyone is a gene machine and that agency and self awareness are rare occurrences.
And I assume I am a gene machine too – it’s just that my gene machine brought me here, to this function, at this point in time. And the court-jester that is my internal personality is just along for the ride.