2 ms·

Nothing about the GP’s description sounds like ‘Sea-Lioning’ to me. ‘Disagreement’ was the word the GP used to describe how it seemed the professor was interpr

by zepto 6y ago

Nothing about the GP’s description sounds like ‘Sea-Lioning’ to me. ‘Disagreement’ was the word the GP used to describe how it seemed the professor was interpreting the question. Your explanation that the professor had experienced a bunch of sea-lioning before is likely correct. But it seems likely that it was the professor who was wrong and behaved inappropriately, because their past bad experiences have led them to be distrustful and categorize some honest people as dishonest. All the professor had to say was this: > There are no natural phenomena that coincide precisely with the industrial revolution. Which is a concise encapsulation of what an honest interlocutor would need to hear to answer the question. Sea-lioning is a real phenomenon, and so is misuse of authority.

jfengel 6y ago
The GP said "questions that even remotely disagree with the popular Science opinion". Sincere questions don't agree or disagree; they request information. Phrased that way it sounds very much like they were pre-supposing an answer. So does their use of "popular" (as if this is merely people agreeing with each other for fun, rather than their best judgment based on expertise) and "opinion" (as if this were merely a guess or an aesthetic preference". Even the capitalization of "Science" seems strange in this context. Plus, there's the way they went from "this professor acted inappropriately" to "any politically motivated topic you can't ask questions that even remotely disagree" [emphasis mine]. It was intended as an example, but it's a big jump to make, and it just happened to be on a topic where people consistently engage in sea-lioning behavior. That's why I suggested that it sounded like sea-lioning to me. I may be wrong: as I said, I'm basing that judgment solely on what I read in that very short description. But there were a lot of red flags in that short description.
- zepto 6y ago
  > "questions that even remotely disagree with the popular Science opinion" Yes, but we don’t know when they formed that view. Did they hold it before or after the professor scolded them? We accept that the professor scolded them, and that now they hold the view they are asserting. I think it’s just as likely that the professor caused their current view as the other way around. It’s very easy to go from being unfairly scolded by a professor who wrongly views you as dishonest, to then being influenced by the popular idea that "any politically motivated topic you can't ask questions that even remotely disagree". If they didn’t think that before, the professor’s behavior would be a great way to make them think it now, and we simply don’t know how they thought about it before the professor’s action. Even if the poster was sea-lioning, which frankly you cannot know, the professor definitely acted inappropriately in such a way as to engender further distrust, thus failing in their role as a science educator and betraying the authority of their position. Even if the poster worded the question the way it seems - “with red flags”, it is a bad faith act to assume they have ill intent. It’s perfectly possible for someone to be using language they have picked up from popular culture that they haven’t refined, without themselves having bad faith. Plus I don’t accept your position “questions that disagree”, are always bad faith. It’s possible to ask a question that is based on a premise that differs from the assumptions of the person you are questioning. This would imply disagreement in view, but it doesn’t imply bad faith. E.g. “Are there any other sources of carbon emissions other than human industry?” Is there disagreement here? From your view, the answer would be ‘yes’, because the implication is that this is relevant to climate change, which you think it is not. The professor could have simply used the question as an opportunity to teach about scientific thinking. E.g. “It’s a valid question from a geological point of view, but it isn’t relevant to the issue of climate change because there are no natural phenomena that coincide precisely with the industrial revolution.”
- specialist 6y ago
  Of course it was sea-lioning. Don't apologize. University isn't day care. Even if the prof was in the wrong, learning to handle asshole professors is part of growing up.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Even if the prof was in the wrong, learning to handle asshole professors is part of growing up. It seems like you are willing to accept that the professor may have been an asshole. I don’t see anything to suggest that the poster doesn’t know how to handle asshole professors. What would make you think that?

by zepto 6y ago

jfengel 6y ago

The GP said "questions that even remotely disagree with the popular Science opinion". Sincere questions don't agree or disagree; they request information. Phrased that way it sounds very much like they were pre-supposing an answer. So does their use of "popular" (as if this is merely people agreeing with each other for fun, rather than their best judgment based on expertise) and "opinion" (as if this were merely a guess or an aesthetic preference". Even the capitalization of "Science" seems strange in this context. Plus, there's the way they went from "this professor acted inappropriately" to "any politically motivated topic you can't ask questions that even remotely disagree" [emphasis mine]. It was intended as an example, but it's a big jump to make, and it just happened to be on a topic where people consistently engage in sea-lioning behavior. That's why I suggested that it sounded like sea-lioning to me. I may be wrong: as I said, I'm basing that judgment solely on what I read in that very short description. But there were a lot of red flags in that short description.

zepto 6y ago
> "questions that even remotely disagree with the popular Science opinion" Yes, but we don’t know when they formed that view. Did they hold it before or after the professor scolded them? We accept that the professor scolded them, and that now they hold the view they are asserting. I think it’s just as likely that the professor caused their current view as the other way around. It’s very easy to go from being unfairly scolded by a professor who wrongly views you as dishonest, to then being influenced by the popular idea that "any politically motivated topic you can't ask questions that even remotely disagree". If they didn’t think that before, the professor’s behavior would be a great way to make them think it now, and we simply don’t know how they thought about it before the professor’s action. Even if the poster was sea-lioning, which frankly you cannot know, the professor definitely acted inappropriately in such a way as to engender further distrust, thus failing in their role as a science educator and betraying the authority of their position. Even if the poster worded the question the way it seems - “with red flags”, it is a bad faith act to assume they have ill intent. It’s perfectly possible for someone to be using language they have picked up from popular culture that they haven’t refined, without themselves having bad faith. Plus I don’t accept your position “questions that disagree”, are always bad faith. It’s possible to ask a question that is based on a premise that differs from the assumptions of the person you are questioning. This would imply disagreement in view, but it doesn’t imply bad faith. E.g. “Are there any other sources of carbon emissions other than human industry?” Is there disagreement here? From your view, the answer would be ‘yes’, because the implication is that this is relevant to climate change, which you think it is not. The professor could have simply used the question as an opportunity to teach about scientific thinking. E.g. “It’s a valid question from a geological point of view, but it isn’t relevant to the issue of climate change because there are no natural phenomena that coincide precisely with the industrial revolution.”
specialist 6y ago
Of course it was sea-lioning. Don't apologize. University isn't day care. Even if the prof was in the wrong, learning to handle asshole professors is part of growing up.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Even if the prof was in the wrong, learning to handle asshole professors is part of growing up. It seems like you are willing to accept that the professor may have been an asshole. I don’t see anything to suggest that the poster doesn’t know how to handle asshole professors. What would make you think that?