Comment on People who reject challenging ideas as stupid without engagement are like intellectual nepobabies
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoHow do you determine what’s not in good faith?
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 3 weeks ago
Even with MAGAts and the wave of red that’s ever-present online?
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 3 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.
Yliaster@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I think it’s fair to assume those when people openly support a movement that visibly takes away the rights of marginalized groups and kills innocent people.
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
In some discussions, faith, good or bad, doesn’t matter. If a politician says that ducks have three feet, whether they say that in good faith or not, it’s wrong. So it’s still best to assume good faith and logically explain how it is incorrect. To respond to such a statement with an accusation is a fallacy.