Pros: it will be exciting and engaging to see someone with a federated name and the notice their opinion being dogshit
Cons: mathematically proven to not have cons
Pros: it will be exciting and engaging to see someone with a federated name and the notice their opinion being dogshit
Cons: mathematically proven to not have cons
Getting my ass dunked on actually helped me grow politically. Everyone repeats that whole line about how civility and kindness are the best way to convince people, but I'm skeptical, seems like one of those things everyone says cuz everyone says it. It works in certain circumstances, but a lot of ignorant or arrogant people will just abuse your kindness and use it to validate themselves. Jerking them off just makes it worse. Embarrassing them and making them feel humbled is often much more effective.
It depends on context, but I'm not saying you should jerk them off. I'm saying insulting generally (and this is a well studied well understood thing) causes people to shut down. They won't read beyond the first sentence if they're being insulted. I'm not saying you have to give their opinion any weight, because it likely doesn't deserve any. I'm saying, if you're spending the time to engage, you should do so in a way to ensure (particularly for other readers) you're making allies and not enemies. Point out how stupid and/or ignorant their argument is. Don't just insult the person, which doesn't make anyone think you know what you're talking about any more than the other person does.
Like you said, humble them. Don't insult them.
Proving someone wrong feels like an insult no matter how politely you do it. If anything all this just further proves the general futility of debate, people just get more entrenched in their positions.
Such as?
Sure, people can feel harmed when their closely held beliefs are questioned. However, insulting the person only makes it so they don't need to consider if their beliefs were attacked because they'll dismiss it outright.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03634523.2018.1465192
Do I really need to prove every single statement? It's not like I'm making bold claims. You can figure some basic things out for yourself I believe.
Weren't you just talking about not insulting people?
Sorry, I thought it was in this chain of comments where I was asked to prove something else, but people asking to prove very basic things is rediculous. It's either sea-lioning or lazy, and it's impossible to tell the difference. I don't know if its also this chain, but identifying bad faith arguing is hard or impossible. I'm not going to spend all day proving basic things.
And do you not think it's this same experience that leads users on here to insult others?
There's a difference between pointing out that not every claim needs to be pointlessly supported by evidence and posting an image of a pig shitting on its balls. You might think it insulting for me to say I don't need to back every single small thing up and that you can find it yourself, but it isn't an insult. I'm not calling you names or anything.
Sure, getting annoyed is expected. I don't expect anyone to be on perfect behavior all the time. I do think it's good to not engage if you're only adding an insult rather than a contribution.
One, now you know how it feels to be a socialist on the internet.
Two, I'll have to do a deeper dive later, but taking a cursory look I don't think your source really backs up you point as much as you think it does. Also you act like this is a "basic thing" but I earlier rejected that framing, I think everyone acts like it's a basic thing cuz everyone just assumes it's true but I have my skepticisms based on my own experiences.
Three, if you're unable to remain civil in the face of minor jeer and sassiness, isn't it a bit hypocritical for you to tell us to remain civil in the face of people who are out right hostile and willfully ignorant?