4 ms·

Don’t “assume” either one. Use the evidence you have and your own intellect to discriminate between the two.

Jensson 4y ago
At least try to assume enough good faith that you would see yourself as arguing in good faith if you argued for the other side. Most people don't even pass that low bar though, they demand that others assume way more good faith than they themselves do, that is the kind of people who need to hear this advice.
DoughnutHole 4y ago
Why would you bother engaging someone in conversation at all if you didn't assume they were engaging in good faith? If I'm going to assume there's a 50% chance the person I'm talking to is engaging in bad faith I'd rather do something more productive like scream my opinions out my window. "Assuming good faith" is potentially a fantasy, but it's a useful fantasy for encouraging quality conversation.
- rnd0 4y ago
  >Why would you bother engaging someone in conversation at all if you didn't assume they were engaging in good faith? Not all interactions are a conversation -at least not necessarily an on-going one. For instance, in a political thread you may choose to reply to a very obvious troll simply for the sake of countering misinformation -not because you want to run off and get married to them. >If I'm going to assume there's a 50% chance the person I'm talking to is engaging in bad faith I'd rather do something more productive like scream my opinions out my window. Fair. "Don't read the comments" has become a proverb for a reason. That said -there are times and places where it's useful (for your own sake) to interact.
naasking 4y ago
Sure, adjust your conclusions as the conversation evolves, but that first interaction requires an assumption of good faith to make conversation possible to begin with. It's like how tit-for-tat has been the most effective long-term strategy in the iterated prisoner's dilemma tournaments. An agent employing this strategy always starts by cooperating as it's first choice, and only switches to defecting after you've defected first.
- ruszki 4y ago
  The possibility of good faith is enough to start a conversation. However, there is an inverse correlation of this probability, and how likely I will start a conversation, at least for me.

At least try to assume enough good faith that you would see yourself as arguing in good faith if you argued for the other side. Most people don't even pass that low bar though, they demand that others assume way more good faith than they themselves do, that is the kind of people who need to hear this advice.

DoughnutHole 4y ago

Why would you bother engaging someone in conversation at all if you didn't assume they were engaging in good faith? If I'm going to assume there's a 50% chance the person I'm talking to is engaging in bad faith I'd rather do something more productive like scream my opinions out my window. "Assuming good faith" is potentially a fantasy, but it's a useful fantasy for encouraging quality conversation.

rnd0 4y ago
>Why would you bother engaging someone in conversation at all if you didn't assume they were engaging in good faith? Not all interactions are a conversation -at least not necessarily an on-going one. For instance, in a political thread you may choose to reply to a very obvious troll simply for the sake of countering misinformation -not because you want to run off and get married to them. >If I'm going to assume there's a 50% chance the person I'm talking to is engaging in bad faith I'd rather do something more productive like scream my opinions out my window. Fair. "Don't read the comments" has become a proverb for a reason. That said -there are times and places where it's useful (for your own sake) to interact.

naasking 4y ago

Sure, adjust your conclusions as the conversation evolves, but that first interaction requires an assumption of good faith to make conversation possible to begin with. It's like how tit-for-tat has been the most effective long-term strategy in the iterated prisoner's dilemma tournaments. An agent employing this strategy always starts by cooperating as it's first choice, and only switches to defecting after you've defected first.

ruszki 4y ago
The possibility of good faith is enough to start a conversation. However, there is an inverse correlation of this probability, and how likely I will start a conversation, at least for me.