No, absolutely not. You're making an induction yourself. You THINK you know what was going through my head when I wrote this.
First, as for "name calling", it was never intended as diminutive. Fine, I'll call you Penguin. I'm really not sure why you care. People refer to me as 'zilla frequently. I don't take it as diminutive - even though it's a modification.
Let me explain wh yI see no self-contradiction and why I think you're making an induction yourself:
1. My evaluation of a person's past behavior, as manifested outwardly, is for the purpose of deciding whether they are a desirable associate. I'd draw sharp distinction between this and "judging the person as good/bad". After all, have you never deemed someone an undesireable associate yet also an entirely good and worthy person?
2. Even a judgment of bad behavior need not imply bad person. You seem to be making that equation. I am not interested in the extrapolation, just choosing associates.
The way it might work in practice is that you look at someone and get an intuitive read based on cues. Honestly, in most cases, my intuitive read is pretty neutral. the vast majority of people neither interest nor repel me. However, let's say I see a woman smoking, then hear her speak in a gravelly voice. I might say, that's kind of gross - and it is. Yet I recognize that doesn't means he's a bad person or even that I think she is. However, it might mean that I choose not to associate -and that was the nature of my guidance - choosing an assoicate. It had NOTHING t odo with evaluating the person as good/bad. That was the direction you took us. I had nothing to say on that matter until you attemped to put words in my mouth.
Now, I'll admit, in the case of a parolee, I might also be included to dismiss the person as a miscreant. Admittedly, that's a fundamental judgment. However, it's also exceptional.
So, you see, my "switch" was not one at all. I discussed guidance for choosing your company. you changed it to "rules of judgment". I told you my own.
