The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien ( talk · contribs) 21:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Broad, abstract articles like this are my favorite. I'll work on this over the next few days. I know that a few other longish articles you wrote are currently being reviewed right now, so I'm assuming there's no rush to get into this.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk) 21:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
like masskillings ordered by dictators– mass killings is two words.
But others also emphasize that the problem– "but" and "also" can be removed without changing the meaning. This sentence also runs on and might be better as two sentences.
capitalism, fascism, religious fundamentalism, or imperialism– who blames these forces?
may result in a lot of harm– "a lot of" does not change the meaning.
General:
i.e.might be unnecessary, though this is more of a style choice.
on the other hand, which is an idiom.
, for example,– This shows up a lot, and it gets distracting.
very, all of which can be removed without changing any meanings.
however. They vary in usefulness, and a few might be removable.
Lead:
the general hatred, dislike, distrust, or contempt of the human species– It would be "of" for hatred and dislike, but "for" is a better fit for contempt.
becoming disillusioned with someone that was adored before– Awkward wording.
It has been discussed and exemplified by philosophers throughout history.– This sentence can be combined with the next one.
Definition:
This distinguishes misanthropes from racists, misogynists, and misandrists, which hold a negative attitude toward certain races or genders.– There are other ways to discriminate between people besides race and gender. Perhaps it should clarify that misanthropy is distinct from all forms of negative discriminatory attitude, and then provide these as examples.
It has been argued that misanthropy– If this is a controversial claim, then who is arguing it? If not, then "it has been argued that" can be dropped altogether.
that a person literally dislikes every human being– "Literally" is redundant.
Instead, it depends on the person's horizon.– The two uses of "horizon" in this paragraph feel slightly idiomatic.
including the more ordinary cases– Maybe this can be reworded to clarify what "ordinary cases" look like.
Types:
whether the misanthrope includes themselves– Since this sentence is written plural to be gender neutral, you might as well make "misanthropes include" plural as well.
is due to Immanuel Kant&
due to Irving Babbitt– Maybe "created by" or "attributed to".
contrasts it with Swift's thorough dismissal of all of humanity– This is the first mention of Swift in the body, so it should be wikilinked and should probably use his full name for clarity.
hatred involves an intensive form of dislike– Intense might be preferred to intensive.
It includes the additional component of wishing ill upon others and, at times, of trying to realize this wish.– Technically nothing here is wrong, but it could be reworded. The comma is after the conjunction, which is distracting, and the second "of" could be lost without changing the meaning.
Misanthropic forms of life:
Forms of human flaws:
Moral flaws are often identified with tendencies to promote what is bad or with inappropriate attitudes toward values.– This sentence is a little clunky.
(1) (2) (3)– These can be removed without changing the meaning.
This prevents the affected person from addressing it and improving themself– "Themself" is non-standard in formal writing. It might be better to make this whole sentence plural and use "themselves".
Psychological and social causes:
For example, it is often argued that undergoing disappointments and disillusionments in life– Is this a widely accepted position, or does it need to be attributed?
This type of psychological explanation is already found in Plato's Phaedo.– "Already" can probably be dropped. Otherwise, I'd replace it with "is found as early as" or something like that to make it clear what's being said.
Socrates explains that misanthropy arises when a person trusts and admires someone without knowing them sufficiently well.– Read out of context, this makes it sound like trust is synonymous with misanthropy. Maybe rewrite this sentence and the next two.
it has been argued that socio-economic inequality in the form of unfair distribution of wealth– Widely accepted or needs attribution?
Arguments for and against:
great deal of suffering and destruction but are also morally responsible for them– "great deal" is singular.
the scales are tipped against man– Idiom
Philosophy:
a loner who had little patience for human society– This feels informal.
Various strands of misanthropy are also found– Is "strands" the best word here? Maybe it is, but it doesn't seem right.
For example, in a famous statement– "in a famous statement" doesn't add anything to the sentence.
that constitutes no progress– "Constitutes" might not be the right word here.
Religion:
an extremely difficult and rare achievement– Slightly redundant
most human beings carry these deep flaws with them throughout their life– "Human beings" is plural but "life" is singular.
Philosophical pessimism:
Misanthropy is closely related to but not identical with– Maybe "closely related but not identical to" or "closely related to but distinct from".
life as a whole is not worth living or that the world in general is a bad place– "as a whole" and "in general" can probably be dropped.
by misanthropy by– Strange wording
and maybe partially responsible for the badness of the world– "maybe partially" and "badness" seem informal.
the two views do not entail each other– Even if "entail" is correct, it reads strangely here.
Antinatalism and human extinction:
and that humans, therefore, have a duty– "therefore" can be dropped.
is the so-called misanthropic argument– "is called the misanthropic argument" avoids "so-called", which can be read to express skepticism.
for avoiding to create more humans– This reads awkwardly. Maybe "for avoiding the creation of more humans".
Human exceptionalism and deep ecology:
turn human exceptionalism on its head– Idiom
All sources appear to be reliable. Dictionaries as sources aren't ideal, but it's good enough for GA. There are some primary sources where it would be preferable to have sources that talk about them rather than citing the work directly, but that's also beyond the scope of GA. The spot checks are all good, with just a few minor notes.
The word originates from the Greek words μῖσος mīsos 'hatred' and ἄνθρωπος ānthropos 'man, human'.– This sentence in the lead is unsourced and does not correspond to any sourced statement in the body. I suggest moving it out of the lead down to the "definition" section.
Spot checks:
Boorishness, vulgarity, rudeness, yobbishness, loutishness.
All of the basic aspects seem to be covered. Going into an article like this, I expect to see coverage of the different definitions/usages, the philosophical history of the concept, and the core ideas that adherents to this concept believe.
There are a few areas that seem to go off topic:
For posterity, a few suggestions for future expansion if the sources allow them. None of these need to be worried about right now, and they're not necessary to meet the GA criteria:
General:
claim, which can be read to express doubt.
Lead:
Types:
a faulty and self-contradictory outlook or a respectable philosophical position– This can just say that it's for evaluating the arguments or something like that. Better to avoid suggesting that there are any approaches that are "faulty" or "respectable".
even though this outlook seems to undermine its own position by constituting a form of hypocrisy– It should be made clear that this is also attributed to Harris. Currently it could be read as being either Harris or wikivoice.
According to Svoboda, only misanthropy based on judgment constitutes a serious philosophical position.– This sentence and the one after it warrant a closer look. Even though it's attributed, this is a strong claim, and it might be undue. The next sentence even more so, as it seems to accept Svoboda's position as correct. Is Svoboda's position that valid misanthropy requires a judgemental attitude widely accepted in philosophy, or even a major school of thought?
Psychological and social causes:
It may be possible to overcome or reduce this source of misanthropy by implementing policies that build trust and promote a more equal distribution of wealth.– This is a prescriptive policy suggestion and should be attributed, if included at all.
Arguments for and against:
And the focus on negative exemplars, like Stalin or Hitler, should be contrasted with positive exemplars, like Mother Teresa or Gandhi.– Avoid describing people as negative or positive. Specific examples might be better replaced with general ones here.
Philosophy:
Religion:
since human nature is already tainted by sin from birth– This could be read as a statement of fact from which original sin is interpreted, rather than being part of the original sin claim.
Literature and popular culture:
Philosophical pessimism:
This view is perhaps best exemplified– Not for us to say.
but for the negative, destructive influence of humanity– This wording implies that "negative, destructive influence" is a fact rather than the opinion of eco-misanthropists.
Antinatalism and human extinction:
These harms include wars, genocides, factory farming, and damages done to the environment.– This list seems to be the opinion of one misanthrope. It would be better if they were verified as widely cited and accepted examples.
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement and the Church of Euthanasia– Are these groups relevant enough for inclusion in a general article about misanthropy? I suspect they're being given a boost from recency.
Human exceptionalism and deep ecology:
A recent unexplained removal that was reverted, but there's no indication that it was justified or will garner enough support to bring about a debate.
All images are public domain.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien ( talk · contribs) 21:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Broad, abstract articles like this are my favorite. I'll work on this over the next few days. I know that a few other longish articles you wrote are currently being reviewed right now, so I'm assuming there's no rush to get into this.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk) 21:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
like masskillings ordered by dictators– mass killings is two words.
But others also emphasize that the problem– "but" and "also" can be removed without changing the meaning. This sentence also runs on and might be better as two sentences.
capitalism, fascism, religious fundamentalism, or imperialism– who blames these forces?
may result in a lot of harm– "a lot of" does not change the meaning.
General:
i.e.might be unnecessary, though this is more of a style choice.
on the other hand, which is an idiom.
, for example,– This shows up a lot, and it gets distracting.
very, all of which can be removed without changing any meanings.
however. They vary in usefulness, and a few might be removable.
Lead:
the general hatred, dislike, distrust, or contempt of the human species– It would be "of" for hatred and dislike, but "for" is a better fit for contempt.
becoming disillusioned with someone that was adored before– Awkward wording.
It has been discussed and exemplified by philosophers throughout history.– This sentence can be combined with the next one.
Definition:
This distinguishes misanthropes from racists, misogynists, and misandrists, which hold a negative attitude toward certain races or genders.– There are other ways to discriminate between people besides race and gender. Perhaps it should clarify that misanthropy is distinct from all forms of negative discriminatory attitude, and then provide these as examples.
It has been argued that misanthropy– If this is a controversial claim, then who is arguing it? If not, then "it has been argued that" can be dropped altogether.
that a person literally dislikes every human being– "Literally" is redundant.
Instead, it depends on the person's horizon.– The two uses of "horizon" in this paragraph feel slightly idiomatic.
including the more ordinary cases– Maybe this can be reworded to clarify what "ordinary cases" look like.
Types:
whether the misanthrope includes themselves– Since this sentence is written plural to be gender neutral, you might as well make "misanthropes include" plural as well.
is due to Immanuel Kant&
due to Irving Babbitt– Maybe "created by" or "attributed to".
contrasts it with Swift's thorough dismissal of all of humanity– This is the first mention of Swift in the body, so it should be wikilinked and should probably use his full name for clarity.
hatred involves an intensive form of dislike– Intense might be preferred to intensive.
It includes the additional component of wishing ill upon others and, at times, of trying to realize this wish.– Technically nothing here is wrong, but it could be reworded. The comma is after the conjunction, which is distracting, and the second "of" could be lost without changing the meaning.
Misanthropic forms of life:
Forms of human flaws:
Moral flaws are often identified with tendencies to promote what is bad or with inappropriate attitudes toward values.– This sentence is a little clunky.
(1) (2) (3)– These can be removed without changing the meaning.
This prevents the affected person from addressing it and improving themself– "Themself" is non-standard in formal writing. It might be better to make this whole sentence plural and use "themselves".
Psychological and social causes:
For example, it is often argued that undergoing disappointments and disillusionments in life– Is this a widely accepted position, or does it need to be attributed?
This type of psychological explanation is already found in Plato's Phaedo.– "Already" can probably be dropped. Otherwise, I'd replace it with "is found as early as" or something like that to make it clear what's being said.
Socrates explains that misanthropy arises when a person trusts and admires someone without knowing them sufficiently well.– Read out of context, this makes it sound like trust is synonymous with misanthropy. Maybe rewrite this sentence and the next two.
it has been argued that socio-economic inequality in the form of unfair distribution of wealth– Widely accepted or needs attribution?
Arguments for and against:
great deal of suffering and destruction but are also morally responsible for them– "great deal" is singular.
the scales are tipped against man– Idiom
Philosophy:
a loner who had little patience for human society– This feels informal.
Various strands of misanthropy are also found– Is "strands" the best word here? Maybe it is, but it doesn't seem right.
For example, in a famous statement– "in a famous statement" doesn't add anything to the sentence.
that constitutes no progress– "Constitutes" might not be the right word here.
Religion:
an extremely difficult and rare achievement– Slightly redundant
most human beings carry these deep flaws with them throughout their life– "Human beings" is plural but "life" is singular.
Philosophical pessimism:
Misanthropy is closely related to but not identical with– Maybe "closely related but not identical to" or "closely related to but distinct from".
life as a whole is not worth living or that the world in general is a bad place– "as a whole" and "in general" can probably be dropped.
by misanthropy by– Strange wording
and maybe partially responsible for the badness of the world– "maybe partially" and "badness" seem informal.
the two views do not entail each other– Even if "entail" is correct, it reads strangely here.
Antinatalism and human extinction:
and that humans, therefore, have a duty– "therefore" can be dropped.
is the so-called misanthropic argument– "is called the misanthropic argument" avoids "so-called", which can be read to express skepticism.
for avoiding to create more humans– This reads awkwardly. Maybe "for avoiding the creation of more humans".
Human exceptionalism and deep ecology:
turn human exceptionalism on its head– Idiom
All sources appear to be reliable. Dictionaries as sources aren't ideal, but it's good enough for GA. There are some primary sources where it would be preferable to have sources that talk about them rather than citing the work directly, but that's also beyond the scope of GA. The spot checks are all good, with just a few minor notes.
The word originates from the Greek words μῖσος mīsos 'hatred' and ἄνθρωπος ānthropos 'man, human'.– This sentence in the lead is unsourced and does not correspond to any sourced statement in the body. I suggest moving it out of the lead down to the "definition" section.
Spot checks:
Boorishness, vulgarity, rudeness, yobbishness, loutishness.
All of the basic aspects seem to be covered. Going into an article like this, I expect to see coverage of the different definitions/usages, the philosophical history of the concept, and the core ideas that adherents to this concept believe.
There are a few areas that seem to go off topic:
For posterity, a few suggestions for future expansion if the sources allow them. None of these need to be worried about right now, and they're not necessary to meet the GA criteria:
General:
claim, which can be read to express doubt.
Lead:
Types:
a faulty and self-contradictory outlook or a respectable philosophical position– This can just say that it's for evaluating the arguments or something like that. Better to avoid suggesting that there are any approaches that are "faulty" or "respectable".
even though this outlook seems to undermine its own position by constituting a form of hypocrisy– It should be made clear that this is also attributed to Harris. Currently it could be read as being either Harris or wikivoice.
According to Svoboda, only misanthropy based on judgment constitutes a serious philosophical position.– This sentence and the one after it warrant a closer look. Even though it's attributed, this is a strong claim, and it might be undue. The next sentence even more so, as it seems to accept Svoboda's position as correct. Is Svoboda's position that valid misanthropy requires a judgemental attitude widely accepted in philosophy, or even a major school of thought?
Psychological and social causes:
It may be possible to overcome or reduce this source of misanthropy by implementing policies that build trust and promote a more equal distribution of wealth.– This is a prescriptive policy suggestion and should be attributed, if included at all.
Arguments for and against:
And the focus on negative exemplars, like Stalin or Hitler, should be contrasted with positive exemplars, like Mother Teresa or Gandhi.– Avoid describing people as negative or positive. Specific examples might be better replaced with general ones here.
Philosophy:
Religion:
since human nature is already tainted by sin from birth– This could be read as a statement of fact from which original sin is interpreted, rather than being part of the original sin claim.
Literature and popular culture:
Philosophical pessimism:
This view is perhaps best exemplified– Not for us to say.
but for the negative, destructive influence of humanity– This wording implies that "negative, destructive influence" is a fact rather than the opinion of eco-misanthropists.
Antinatalism and human extinction:
These harms include wars, genocides, factory farming, and damages done to the environment.– This list seems to be the opinion of one misanthrope. It would be better if they were verified as widely cited and accepted examples.
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement and the Church of Euthanasia– Are these groups relevant enough for inclusion in a general article about misanthropy? I suspect they're being given a boost from recency.
Human exceptionalism and deep ecology:
A recent unexplained removal that was reverted, but there's no indication that it was justified or will garner enough support to bring about a debate.
All images are public domain.