Of the two options I’d be tempted to say it’s more of a priority to spread the underlying arguments, but actually I think something more nuanced: it’s a priority to keep engaging with people about the underlying arguments, finding where there seems to be the greatest discomfort and turning a critical eye on the arguments there, looking to see if we can develop stronger versions of them.
I think that talking about the tentative conclusions along with this is important both for growing the network of people sympathetic to those, and for providing concrete instantiation of what is meant by the underlying philosophy (too much risk of talking past each other or getting lost in abstraction-land without this)
Good question.
Of the two options I’d be tempted to say it’s more of a priority to spread the underlying arguments, but actually I think something more nuanced: it’s a priority to keep engaging with people about the underlying arguments, finding where there seems to be the greatest discomfort and turning a critical eye on the arguments there, looking to see if we can develop stronger versions of them.
I think that talking about the tentative conclusions along with this is important both for growing the network of people sympathetic to those, and for providing concrete instantiation of what is meant by the underlying philosophy (too much risk of talking past each other or getting lost in abstraction-land without this)