GYre0ePJhZ Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 Googled it, but was not satisfied. What is it? Thoughts and suggestions: Reveal hidden contents I primarily think of it in the context of two people talking to each other face to face. Is it a state of mind or an act? I think it is more useful to define it in terms of actions since actions can be observed while state of mind can't. I don't think it is useful to speculate on whether one hurt the other person with intent or not for the same reason, either. Maybe what knowledge you have of human psychology or the other person is a clue? Suggestions: "To act in a way that hurts another person without being sensitive to how the other person will feel about it." or "To act in a way that hurts another person without being sensitive to how the other person will feel about it when you know it will hurt out of knowledge of human psychology or the other person." I am not satisfied but what are your thoughts?
cynicist Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 The main problem with your definitions is that people who are mean are sensitive to how other people will feel about it, that's why they are doing it in the first place. I would define being mean as 'acting out of spite' (a malicious desire, as in to hurt/humiliate/annoy/frustrate/etc).
GYre0ePJhZ Posted July 12, 2014 Author Posted July 12, 2014 Would you argue that it requires a conscious intent to hurt and humiliate for an action to be classified as mean? Would, for example, Stef be classified as a mean person when he put forth arguments which hurt and humiliate bad guys. Is he or is the meanness justified because it is directed towards evil? Also, your definition makes the adjective hard to apply to anyone as it speculates in the state of mind of the acting person. Most claim doing things out of a desire for good. Add to that the question of whether the person does it consciously or unconsciously. Most claim doing something unconsciously if revealed.
cynicist Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 On 7/12/2014 at 11:38 AM, Avalanche said: Would you argue that it requires a conscious intent to hurt and humiliate for an action to be classified as mean? Yes, at a minimum. If you didn't have the intent to do it then the hurt would be accidental. On 7/12/2014 at 11:38 AM, Avalanche said: Would, for example, Stef be classified as a mean person when he put forth arguments which hurt and humiliate bad guys. Is he or is the meanness justified because it is directed towards evil? The reason he makes those arguments is to help people learn the truth and be more rational, he's not trying to hurt people. The fact that it hurts the interests of bad people is just a side benefit. On 7/12/2014 at 11:38 AM, Avalanche said: Also, your definition makes the adjective hard to apply to anyone as it speculates in the state of mind of the acting person. Most claim doing things out of a desire for good. Add to that the question of whether the person does it consciously or unconsciously. Most claim doing something unconsciously if revealed. If I trip someone, is it hard to tell my intent? If I punch someone in the gut? If I yell at someone for making a mistake? If I use my key to scratch up their car? I don't think it's hard at all. And you can't be unconsciously mean since it's deliberate.
GYre0ePJhZ Posted July 12, 2014 Author Posted July 12, 2014 Alright, you have convinced me. Thanks for your input!
cynicist Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 You know, I just realized how rare your response is on these forums. It's pretty hilarious actually.
GYre0ePJhZ Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 I'm thinking accepting valid counter-arguments is kind of the deal at a philosophy-forum and a sign of philosophical maturity. Writing a statement of that acceptance to the person who helped you think more rationally when debates have been civilized has something to do with reciprocity I think.What do you find hilarious about it?
cynicist Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Exactly what you said above. It's what you would expect on a philosophy forum and yet it's so rare.
Recommended Posts