The article vacillates between saying sometimes identifying bad faith is good, actually, and trying to move the goal posts so everyone is still acting in good faith. Just about as good self-editing that I’d expect from LW.
Using his own terminology here. He says in the piece that bad faith is often ‘incorrectly’ defined as ill intent, and my argument is that the ill intent is a package deal.
Can I argue that misrepresenting yourself in an argument intentionally is, in fact, done with ill intent an overwhelming majority of the time.
The article vacillates between saying sometimes identifying bad faith is good, actually, and trying to move the goal posts so everyone is still acting in good faith. Just about as good self-editing that I’d expect from LW.
or very poor communication skills
You can, but it’s not really an argument, more of a statement. For example, do you have any anecdotal evidence of this being true?
Maybe I’m just misunderstanding. You use the term “ill intent” which is subtly different from “bad faith”. It’s also a loaded term.
Using his own terminology here. He says in the piece that bad faith is often ‘incorrectly’ defined as ill intent, and my argument is that the ill intent is a package deal.
I still don’t think this happens in an overwhelmingly proportion of arguments.