The Principle of Charity

Charity is an attempt to reach out in respect

In rhetoric and philosophy, the Principle of Charity holds that one should be charitable when interpreting the statements and arguments of another person. One should try to see the most rational and strongest way reasonably to interpret what is said by another person. Thus, for an argument one disagrees with, one should try to interpret it in the strongest or most logical way they can.

This make a lot of sense on several levels. First, it tends to reduce or eliminate petty bickering based on unreasonable interpretations of what another person is trying to say. In my experience with online politics, that happens quite a lot. Second, being charitable reduces the time wasted, and diversion of discussions away from what is most important. Third, and most importantly, it shows respect for what the other person is trying to say. That reduces frustration and anger that can attach when someone in disagreement interprets what is said to them in a way that doesn't really address the main issue. Finally, when one applies the Principle of Charity, it will reduce logical fallacies or non-sequiturs such as straw man fallacies, whataboutism (the tu quoque fallacy) and appeals to ignorance (the ad ignorantiam fallacy).

One observer commented on the practical effects of the Principle of Charity like this: “it constrains the interpreter to maximize the truth or rationality in the subject's sayings.”

Thus, the Principle of Charity is important to at least try to apply because it shows respect and tends to nudge arguments away from muddled irrationality in favor of somewhat clearer rationality.

One way to bring this concern to people's attention is to say that you are trying to interpret the statements and arguments of another in the best light, or something like that. This makes it explicit that you are respecting what the other person is trying to say. That ought to cut down on reason-dampening emotion, thereby allowing conscious reason to play a bigger role in the discussion.