3 ms·
The low quality of Reddit-think slips into the workplace all the time. If it isn't a debate about semantics (the lowest form of argument, "well this word also m
by cjslep 7y ago
The low quality of Reddit-think slips into the workplace all the time. If it isn't a debate about semantics (the lowest form of argument, "well this word also means..." Etc) it's a debate about the second lowest form (the form/framing of an argument, "that's a reductionist argument..." Etc), and when I challenge said co-workers on this ("what kind of reductionism? So what if it's reductionist? Don't assume I believe in Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative which you use" etc) I get silence as a response because this kind of archetype persona also cannot admit when they are wrong, or want to keep using these techniques as a self-defense mechanism and substitute for their own thought. And they'd rather not continue to have a good faith argument with me at a higher level, because I can get rough around the edges when people pull this nonsense on me.
I find it incredibly frustrating. It's a lot of energy spent on my part and I get no actual debate. No matter how civil I try to be about the whole thing.
- Veen 7y ago> Don't assume I believe in Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative which you use Your co-workers must be very different to the people I come across in my work.
- cjslep 7y agoIt's actually quite simple: do you take something I said and try to extend it to an absurd use case, to show how such a viewpoint cannot be true? This is that universality formulation in action. Quick example: I said not vaccinating is risking death, and someone else said I shouldn't drive because that risk of death is higher. That's all it takes!