misdreavus79

misdreavus79 t1_j8y0xhc wrote

Not as much as you might think. If someone punches you in the nose, you're going to bleed regardless of whether it was an accident or not.

We can't read people's minds, but we can evaluate actions on their own merit. Not only that, but a lot of people hide behind intent in order to not change their behavior. If it's continually an accident, you can continually keep doing the thing over and over again!

But, again, the important part here: the intent of an action doesn't negate the action. And, in this particular case, whether they intended to have an inaccessible stage or not doesn't change the fact that the stage was inaccessible.

1

misdreavus79 t1_j14bcsy wrote

Reply to comment by LaurelRaven in [image] Be kind by _Cautious_Memory

As to not get too split-hairy here, I just want to focus on the definition of a symptom vs the phenomenon of masking.

You (and presumably the other commenter) are talking about masking. Were happiness to be a symptom of depression, like, say, a fever is a symptom of the flu, you'd have to evaluate every person who displays happiness to test for depression. We know that's not remotely true.

That is because, as a symptom, people would put on a happy face because they're depressed, and not to hide their depression. That's the difference.

2