sorry matt 😢

I owe Michael Dillahunty an apology (not that he gives a shit).

When people call into your show regularly and try to deny reality and reasoning, I could see how one would lose their cool. In a discussion, when one person is correct and the other is wrong, when the correct person is an asshole, it does not negate the legitimacy of their claim.

I’ve often said that proof of unambiguous truth does little to change people’s minds. Probably because, and I could be wrong on this, that most of the decisions we make throughout a day are of the aesthetic preference/value kind (good or bad) and not the true/false kind. Nevertheless, where true/false claims are made…which is usually the source of our arguments…either someone is right or both parties are wrong (or both partially correct, or both WHOLLY correct but are lost in semantics).

Which leads me to this question: is it better to be correct and an asshole? Or better to be wrong but nice?

I think the answer is obvious: the former.

Or, in other words, truth trumps all.

Now obviously, truth is difficult to establish. We’re human. We’re finite. That’s why we have to rely on logic, reasoning, evidence, and experimental science to establish such claims. If you want to deny the validity of those methods, you have to use those methods you’re denying, which means you’d corner yourself. Of course, most arguments and disagreements are of the moral/ethical kind.

Morals and ethics are, in all likelihood, a human invention which are subject to change given the historical paradigm. But so what? I’d say that these ethics and the laws and social engagements they promote are VERY necessary for a society…however big or small…to function. And where these ethics fail the needs of a given paradigm, then it’s our moral obligation to challenge them. That’s my general description of morals/ethics that, I think, many would agree on. (If not, then excuse the hell out of me)

So what methods should we use to establish these ethics and morals?

That’s where Dillahunty is unapologetic: it’s humanism. Does humanism have its flaws? I’m sure. But it’s kinda hard to gain the moral upper hand when you’re arguing AGAINST the best interests of all people….or even against SOME people.

So I’ve changed me mind: Matt Dillahunty has every right to be a jerk while he’s arguing for truth and well-being for all of humankind.


4 thoughts on “sorry matt 😢

    1. I’m beginning to come around to this position, at least in a case by case basis. In Dillahunty’s case, people should at least be aware of what they’re getting into before calling.

      I think I’m trying to overcome my old dirtbag Left position, who argued that the rise of the Donald Trump Right is due to the Left’s tendency to moral posture or “virtue signal”.

      But when you’re correct and and have positions that are morally superior, then…you are correct and morally superior!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sadly, I think you are at least partly correct with your reasoning for the rise of Trump and the far Right being due to the Left’s moral posturing and ‘wokeness’. Hell, some of it even turns me off at times, and I’m a lifelong bleeding-heart liberal. But a lot of people on the far Right have simply lost their fucking minds.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. The causes of the Trump Right are multifaceted and warrants understanding. I initially agreed with the Marxist/anti-capitalist Left that it was mostly due to class issues. But once when I realized that Trumpism was mostly a petite bourgeois movement (as opposed to a working class/populist one) I began questioning the entire Marxist/anti-capitalist movement and their motivations, especially once when they began emulating some of Trumpism’s worst tendencies. At the end of the day, some things are just wrong.

        To me, “wokeness” never rose above being a nuisance rather than “neo-McCarthyism.” It’s purely an internet phenomenon. If I used “woke” in real life conversation, no one would know what I’m talking about. So I felt it was more responsible to ignore it rather than engage with it.

        But that’s a different conversation altogether lol

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s