3 ms·

Yes, I'd say most people on HN are aware of this stuff. I guess that's why I comment here more than other places. > Agreed, but if no one is even willing to ac

Yes, I'd say most people on HN are aware of this stuff. I guess that's why I comment here more than other places. > Agreed, but if no one is even willing to acknowledge the existence of the phenomenon, what should one do? It's just a slow process of education I guess to take a scientific approach to knowledge seeking. Discussions should be about seeking the truth, agreeing with the other person when you agree, questioning your own assumption etc. I wasn't taught logical fallacies in school for example - I'd be for teaching critical thinking in school at an early age to help with the above. Most people see views opposed to their viewpoint as an attack and cornering someone with logic to show they're wrong does not work because they're not genuinely seeking the truth anyway.

mistermann 6y ago
> Yes, I'd say most people on HN are aware of this stuff. In the abstract (in principle), sure. But how consistently do people exercise this awareness during real-time behavior? > It's just a slow process of education Ideally. But often, but it often seems like many individuals and communities very much prefer taking the shortcut of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil". Or in other words, those other people suffer from that, but not us. No siree Bob, we are fully conscious and logical, at all times. You and I seem largely in agreement, but I wonder if we agree on how well we here at HN, as a community, execute these principles. In my experiences, most people are "not very fond" of even discussing the topic.
- seanwilson 6y ago
  > You and I seem largely in agreement, but I wonder if we agree on how well we here at HN, as a community, execute these principles. In my experiences, most people are "not very fond" of even discussing the topic. My feelings are people here will tolerate a few anecdotes (as long as you're not pushing it as absolute truth) but generally if you post appeals to nature, appeals to popularity etc. it'll be challenged and downvoted pretty quick. Certain topics seem worse than others though e.g. eating meat, x10 programmers, job interview processes and programming language comparison topics are full of anecdotes and fallacies with bold statements.

mistermann 6y ago

> Yes, I'd say most people on HN are aware of this stuff. In the abstract (in principle), sure. But how consistently do people exercise this awareness during real-time behavior? > It's just a slow process of education Ideally. But often, but it often seems like many individuals and communities very much prefer taking the shortcut of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil". Or in other words, those other people suffer from that, but not us. No siree Bob, we are fully conscious and logical, at all times. You and I seem largely in agreement, but I wonder if we agree on how well we here at HN, as a community, execute these principles. In my experiences, most people are "not very fond" of even discussing the topic.

seanwilson 6y ago
> You and I seem largely in agreement, but I wonder if we agree on how well we here at HN, as a community, execute these principles. In my experiences, most people are "not very fond" of even discussing the topic. My feelings are people here will tolerate a few anecdotes (as long as you're not pushing it as absolute truth) but generally if you post appeals to nature, appeals to popularity etc. it'll be challenged and downvoted pretty quick. Certain topics seem worse than others though e.g. eating meat, x10 programmers, job interview processes and programming language comparison topics are full of anecdotes and fallacies with bold statements.