4 ms·

I'm not sure why you care so much? It doesn't cost anything to assume good faith, its just a win win situation. As we see here you still waste time arguing with

I'm not sure why you care so much? It doesn't cost anything to assume good faith, its just a win win situation. As we see here you still waste time arguing with people even when you assume bad faith, so it doesn't even save you time, its just your loss. Anyway, very few people really argue in bad faith, I almost always can make people listen if I just get to talk to them long enough. Assume good faith long enough and you will find it in almost anyone. But conversely assume bad faith and you will find that in almost anyone as well. Edit: > All this passive aggression is making me reach for the pepto, I will say that! There is nothing passive about my aggressiveness here, I am very loudly and clearly stating that I think your approach leads to worse outcomes. There is nothing wrong about clearly stating when you think others are wrong about things.

rnd0 4y ago
I care because I feel that the attitude is destructive and that there are better approaches that can be taken. I've outlined them other places ITT already. >As we see here you still waste time arguing with people even when you assume bad faith >arguing If there's another way to get my point of view read, I'd love to hear it! >when you assume bad faith Logical fallacy. I do not necessarily assume bad faith ...I simply do not assume good faith. >Anyway, very few people really argue in bad faith, I would encourage you to try to have some sustained long-term on youtube comments or facebook if you haven't already. I'm being completely serious here -that will present you with numerous examples of people arguing in bad faith. I have the impression when you say "arguing" you could actually be meaning "discussing"; the difference being one aims to convince another person -the other simply seeks to share veiwpoints. One's adverserial, the other isn't. Am I reading you correctly?

rnd0 4y ago

I care because I feel that the attitude is destructive and that there are better approaches that can be taken. I've outlined them other places ITT already. >As we see here you still waste time arguing with people even when you assume bad faith >arguing If there's another way to get my point of view read, I'd love to hear it! >when you assume bad faith Logical fallacy. I do not necessarily assume bad faith ...I simply do not assume good faith. >Anyway, very few people really argue in bad faith, I would encourage you to try to have some sustained long-term on youtube comments or facebook if you haven't already. I'm being completely serious here -that will present you with numerous examples of people arguing in bad faith. I have the impression when you say "arguing" you could actually be meaning "discussing"; the difference being one aims to convince another person -the other simply seeks to share veiwpoints. One's adverserial, the other isn't. Am I reading you correctly?