• JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    7 days ago

    It’s so weird to me that people will respond to something and then get angry that I don’t engage them in debate. People don’t owe you anything.

    I fell super hard into this in 2020. I would try so hard to gently explain to people that, yes, COVID is real and that, yes, Donald Trump lied about election interference. There was some post about more people in some county voting than were registered. I literally found the county’s records and showed them that no, there were more people registered than voted and that the post was a lie. You know what they said? “You found that with Google, which is a liberal source.”

    It’s not worth it. I don’t engage. I’m a much more stable and happy person because of it.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        I think it was because I told them something like “you can just Google the county’s election information” and gave them the official link with the information.

    • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      The best? They proceed to call you a troll and then block you before you’re able to tell them to get off from your back and fuck off

  • josefo@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Also, the debate crowd doesn’t actually want to hear you to change their minds if new information is presented, they just want a platform to parrot their bullshit in a way they look legit and smart, and they can’t do that without the debate. So, as usual, don’t feed the troll.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      They’re absolutely being disingenuous, but I think it’s important to keep in mind that the purpose of debate is not generally to change the mind of the person you’re debating with. It’s intended to be done with an audience (or judges in a formal competitive debate), and it’s the audience that you’re trying to sway to your side.

    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The only reason to engage is for lurkers who might not know better and need to see a way out of the pipeline before they go in too deep.

  • prime_number_314159@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 days ago

    Actually, debate between hostile strangers online serves an important role in churning up internet drama. This is vital to the continued survival of the popcorn industry.

  • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Wow thank you for this meme. The comments in the post above this one were absolute dog shit, and I seriously was on the verge of engaging with them. I didn’t engage. Yayyyy

  • A7thStone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 days ago

    If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. It is not that they are afraid of being convinced. They fear only to appear ridiculous or to prejudice by their embarrassment their hope of winning over some third person to their side.

    -Sartre

    Two additional sentences at the end of the often posted quote from “Anti-Semite and Jew”. Those two sentences were always included in the quote when I first saw it making it’s round years ago. Now it takes hunting to find the complete quote. Most sites cut it off after “the time for argument is past”. I wonder who would benefit from us forgetting those last two sentences.

  • neanderthal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    Unfortunately, social media is highly influencial of public opinion, so it is a civic responsibility that those with life experience and expertise with things need to engage in. Failure to do so effectively is rolling over for MAGA Nazis 2.0.

    We need to be better at rhetoric and debate. Cicero wrote over 2 millenia ago about the power of eloquence.

    "Wisdom without eloquence does too little for the good of communities, but eloquence without wisdom is, in most instances, extremely harmful and never beneficial. If, then, anyone exerts all of his energies in the practice of oratory to the neglect of the highest and most honorable pursuits of reason and moral conduct, he is reared as a citizen useless to himself and harmful to his country; but the person who arms himself with eloquence in such a way that enables him not to assault the interest of his country, but rather assist them, this man, in my opinion, will be a citizen most helpful and most devoted both to his own interests and those of the public.”

    In recent years, the unwise have weaponized eloquence. The wise among us have failed spectacularly at understanding the importance and power of persuasion.

  • HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    I argue to check if my opinions are popular in the community I’m in. If I get more positive engagement then I know I’m probably in the right place.

    • Soleos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      I find it’s helpful to practice parsing political arguments and recognizing underlying worldviews as well as understanding and applying my own. With the right attitude it can be a compassionate and worthwhile way to put good out into the world. But still, have to be measured with how invested you get and know when to walk away.

    • prime_number_314159@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Face to face, this is definitely possible. I’ve convinced more than a dozen people that climate change is real, and humans are the primary cause of it in face to face conversation. Online, where tone is easily misinterpreted, everyone is a stranger, and people are more able to rapidly retreat into a bubble of others that agree with them, I think it does a lot less good - but every once in a while, something works a little bit for someone.

      More importantly, if we decide that we should all exist in our isolated bubbles of (non)social acceptance, it leads to the rise of extremism in some of those groups, and even the most terrible ideas can be allowed to fester and grow. Pretty much regardless of who you are, or what you believe, you probably have an example or two of such beliefs.