You said he's not wrong, and you're just arguing over semantics. Why argue? Why?
Sorry for not keeping my post cold and logical and HNish, but that's the problem: you're being robotic here and arguing just to argue.
Off topic but WRT your response - "people see the world differently" but apparently my fixation on truth isn't allowed?
On topic, why argue? He says that he's not discriminating but he describes discrimination. I simply wanted to point out that apparent contradiction.
Discrimination is some sort of bete noire of corporate society but I find it quite silly to suggest that we should not discriminate for people because of the peculiarities of their personal situations. If you find that robotic I find your response curious but I suspect you won't meet an enquiry about it well so feel free to move on to one of the other 10 million or so comment threads of the day.
>of course they'll apply different meanings to the same words, and even to the same concepts
If you use the same words to mean something else then we need to converse more to establish that which you are trying to communicate.
And now for the record to just rehash what I am doing:
1. The person is obviously being treated differently from others (he is being given a chance),
2. I will not treat his work differently due to his condition. I want him to get up to speed and I'm helping along,
3. He doesn't need blanket pats on the back. He needs them when they're due and he also needs a proverbial kick in the arse when due.
Also, discrimination is a term used when we act negatively towards someone. I'd be discriminating against my mentee if I were telling him that he's no good dimwit. Or are you suggesting that I'm discriminating towards others?