taro: "what i meant to be saying was that in the case of an emotional cause of a position, you're not going to get anywhere closer to understanding what's going on by investigating the position itself, and in that way if you begin at the right location it is easier to come to appropriate knowledge"

Alt Text

Show parent replies

taroJan 10, 2026

you should talk more about your feelings and less about your ideas

taroJan 10, 2026

not because feelings have metaphysically primacy over ideas, just from the practical matter that you are more likely to be misinformed about your ideas (that is, there is falsity in the ideas themselves and your understanding of the nature of what those ideas truly are)

2 replies

taroJan 10, 2026

hm i dislike how i made this an issue of epistemology. in some ways its a statement of contextual emotivism (sometimes your ideas are actually feelings) and an instruction to pay attention to those emotions and take them seriously on their own terms rather than bringing your own arbitrary material

taroJan 10, 2026

i don't think its easier to know or to articulate emotions

taro @taro.somber.me

what i meant to be saying was that in the case of an emotional cause of a position, you're not going to get anywhere closer to understanding what's going on by investigating the position itself, and in that way if you begin at the right location it is easier to come to appropriate knowledge

January 10, 2026 at 3:02 PM

taroJan 10, 2026

again thats simplistic because it could be seen as treating the emotions with a certain level of unmediated givenness and yes, primacy, that i don't intend. the emotivism was a poor metaphor. the mistake is beginning to look at the causal chain for origins,

taroJan 10, 2026

which is already disrespecting the inner objectivity of both the ideas and the emotions