That's an interesting question. I will open a Jira ticket to schedule a meeting with the Product Team, and they will assign you several stories with acceptance criteria written by AI.
I think if you empathized more with the scolder, you would see that they DID empathize with the shovel-eating-class-hater, and realized, via empathy-bond, that person was not empathizing downstream enough.
I'm pretty sure you meant "obligatory" word count. But "obituary" is an awesome accident. Like Copilot is waiting, happy to sum up your life in a tidy paragraph, when the time comes.
You're right, it's about ideas, but the original article handles the interesting case where we fail to form or handle our ideas using "reason."
> The power of reasons is an illusion. The belief will not change when the reasons are defeated.
So privilege plays an interesting role. Unaware privilege - failing to see ones own circumstances, failing to assess how we fit in the world - is almost the same thing as non-reason. I suppose there could be a class of people who are like, "I am totally privileged, and somehow I delude myself and don't notice, but in every OTHER way I am totally reasonable." That could be a subgroup. But probably not a big one?
Mimesis is one side of a coin, it seems like contrarian tendency is the other. They both involve you making a little theory-of-mind for each of your friends/enemies/associates. To the point, it disturbs you that people are malleable and/or unreasonable, but why do you care at all?
I just wondered. Because you are a rando on the internet, and I constructed a model of your mind, and I don't quite understand it.