4 ms·
I think the value sometimes is in having relevant resources to point to when in localized arguments. (If someone is repeating a falsehood, I can direct them to
by interestica 7y ago
I think the value sometimes is in having relevant resources to point to when in localized arguments. (If someone is repeating a falsehood, I can direct them to resources that refute it rather than having to do all the searching repeatedly).
- ativzzz 7y agoSuch arguments are usually emotional and spouting off facts is unlikely to change the other person's stance and instead make them double down harder.
- coffeecat 7y agoI've attempted to engage with people in ideological echo chambers not by citing any specific facts that contradict their beliefs, but by asking them to state their own beliefs using more specific and concrete language. "What exactly is your definition of communism?", "Has Bernie made any specific statements indicating that he supports that policy? If not, what leads you to infer that he does?", etc. The results? No engagement at all.
- ativzzz 7y agoPeople do not want to be challenged in an echo chamber. Either talk to them (without convincing them of anything) outside the chamber, or walk away.
- sebwi 7y agoAgreed, often it's less about the person you are interacting with but about those reading your conversation.