You’re being downvoted for poor critical thinking in this case, which led you to write a comment that doesn’t add to the conversation.
Of course the father is “heavily invested” in his son. That comes from decades of raising him, diapers, dinners, driving and him around, and probably also sharing 50% of his genes.
It's less a lack of critical thinking and more an overabundance of cautious wording to avoid unnecessary offense.
I'm suggesting that this father may have engaged in nepotism once before, which makes me question his integrity. Not every father does that, so it's more relevant than just "of course, it's the dad".
I phrased it cautiously because I don't know the full story, but the pieces are there and I think it's worth pointing them out.
I think people are also reacting to presumption that [hiring ones son[ is a [negative] mark on integrity or honestly. Many (most?) people don't draw that as a logical conclusion.
Thanks, I edited to clear that up. Yes, I meant hiring his son. I think loliander was explicitly claiming that it impacts their honesty and credibility.
>I'm suggesting that this father may have engaged in nepotism once before, which makes me question his integrity.
It's absolutely a mistake and a lack of critical thinking to believe that any given father would go out of his way and put his own reputation at risk for his son. Some would. I don't know if it's even a majority. But plenty of fathers would not, even if they're present in their son's life.
Of course the father is “heavily invested” in his son. That comes from decades of raising him, diapers, dinners, driving and him around, and probably also sharing 50% of his genes.