23 ms·
> It used to just be that "arguing in good faith" was what "steelmanning" is today Isn't steelmanning the practice of actively making your opponent's argument
by gnicholas 4y ago
> It used to just be that "arguing in good faith" was what "steelmanning" is today
Isn't steelmanning the practice of actively making your opponent's argument for them? This exercise goes beyond arguing in good faith, where you are arguing your own side, but in a way that doesn't strawman the other side.
- swatcoder 4y agoI think of “arguing in good faith” as working to clearly communicate a position, as against working to distress, embarrass, confuse, gaslight or otherwise personally undermine your opponent/audience. You can absolutely do it for a position you don’t hold, and it has nothing particular to do with steelmanning/strawmanning (and indeed, you can use both techniques bad faith).
- skykooler 4y agoReminds me of a story about the Wright brothers, who when arguing would agree to switch sides and argue each others point to try and overcome their bias.