[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The classical liberal naivety will always suggest that anyone, regardless of their position, should be reasoned with.

Never said this.

Fact of the matter is, not everyone can be reasoned with, nor does everyone deserve to be reasoned with.

Never said otherwise.

It's also not everyone's job to reason with every bad actor around.

Never said it was.

Yes, it's a blissful thought that every bad idea in the world can be reasoned out by someone with a philosophy, history, or political science degree.

Never said this either.

I sometimes wonder what it must be like to be so far removed from the human experience or understanding regular human emotions and reactions that all you can do is come up with some philosophical theory or book you read once or some lazy resort to argumentative logic.

First time I've ever heard logical reasoning or reference to philosophical traditions called "lazy". I would argue the opposite - that knee-jerk reactions and unexamined assumptions are lazy.

How little must you understand other human beings that you always have to argue that their reactions, even to people wearing a swastika, aren't fair or logical or reasonable or whatever. Of course they aren't, always. Why would they be? It's called being a human being. Most human beings understand what that's like.

I would also suggest that constantly examining human behavioural tendencies rather than just taking them for granted would lead to a better understanding of human nature, not a worse one, but what do I know.

Do people just forget what it's like to be a human being sometimes?

I think the problem is that a lot of people just assume that what it's like for them is what it's like for everyone, and to the extent it's not, that difference demonstrates that there's something inherently flawed or wrong with the person who's wired differently from them. I guess in this case I can thank you for saving me the trouble of supplying a real world example of that.