El C wrote:
We agree its good to keep the moral highground, but my moral
highground *isn't situational --call it "abstract ideals" if you like.
Everyone has ideals, only the most narrow-minded, agenda-driven of minds consider the basis for these to be limited to... shal we say, situational isolationism.
The issue isn't with the ideals (abstract or otherwise), but rather, to whenever there is a risk for these to serve merely as a pretext for a highly a *selective* approach, one wherein these ideals are juxtaposed, transposed, and superimposed to any concrete case in an un-balanced, inaccurate, and un-objective way.
Rationality goes hand in hand with relationality. Unfortunately, empathy often isn't enough to bring a sympathy which is balanced, be it for those absorbed in abstract ideals, petty proceduralism, or both. The forest *and* the tress, in other words. Either one, in itself, is obviously insufficient and self-defeating.
Having frequently engaged in such pedantic drivel myself, I can perfectly understand what you say.
Unfortunately, sometimes "a cigar is only a cigar".
Ec