Oh my gosh, thank you for responding this way 😭
I feel like on Lemmy it’s really difficult to ever post anything but total agreement without it immediately becoming an argument. Glad we found common ground!
Comment on People who reject challenging ideas as stupid without engagement are like intellectual nepobabies
SpiffyPotato@feddit.uk 3 weeks agoBut those examples are extreme on purpose
Yes they were! And you’re right, we need to allow ourselves to be challenged, to consider ideas outside of our comfort zone, but we also need to able to reject ideas that are not being posited in good faith.
This is the joy of debate, to question statements and receive nuanced answers in reply.
Oh my gosh, thank you for responding this way 😭
I feel like on Lemmy it’s really difficult to ever post anything but total agreement without it immediately becoming an argument. Glad we found common ground!
Yliaster@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How do you determine what’s not in good faith?
I would imagine this would tie to values, but do those become the unquestionable object, then?
SpiffyPotato@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
That’s a great question and I’m not sure I have a definitive answer. For lack of better description, it would be the vibe I got from them:
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I personally always assume good faith. I can’t read people’s minds. On the Internet, I can’t even see facial expressions or hear how they’re saying it. It’s like that Key and Peele text message sketch.
Yliaster@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Even with MAGAts and the wave of red that’s ever-present online?
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
When one assumes bad faith, one is assuming guilt. That isn’t fair. I have found it better to assume innocence, to adopt Judge Blackstone’s ratio over Judge Dredd’s.
clean_anion@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
I assume good faith unless clear evidence indicates otherwise. I try to adopt a more general version of WP:AGF in life.