4 ms·
Cynicism is not a substitute for wisdom.
by tomohawk 4y ago
Cynicism is not a substitute for wisdom.
- noduerme 4y ago
- mattsahr 4y agoWhat? Wisdom is expensive! If you're fresh out of wisdom, or just low on cash, you can TOTALLY use cynicism 1:1 in most recipes.
- smilespray 4y agoOr Worcestershire sauce. Everything tastes better with Worcestershire sauce.
- tomohawk 4y agoHow cynical!
- gnfargbl 4y agoA healthy skepticism can be a useful way to avoid vacuous thinking.
- krapp 4y agoSkepticism requires critical thinking and engagement. You can't be a proper skeptic about something without taking the time to understand the domain you're being skeptical of, approach it in good faith from first principles as much as possible, and accept criticism in kind. Most people just won't bother, because cynicism and snark provide a better endorphin hit, and the internet has trained people to associate that feeling with likelihood of correctness (what Stephen Colbert called "truthiness" back in the day.)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- wawjgreen 4y agothe first things skeptics should be skeptical about is skepticism itself: are they right in being skeptical about what they are skeptical about?
- noduerme 4y agoThe first thing skeptics question are sentences which begin with >> the first things skeptics should be skeptical about from there I guess we just migrate up to talking shit about bloated blog posts where one dude mumbles his observations about deep thoughts.
- ehnto 4y agoIf in their analysis, they come to the conclusion that they shouldn't be skeptical, does that make them the best skeptic or the worst?
- wawjgreen 4y agothe best if their skepticism is carefully done.
- TremendousJudge 4y agoYes, I completely agree. The author should have applied it to his "odds of success vs extent to which you consider second order and subsequent consecuences" graph and saved everybody the time.