3 ms·
The problem is that people writing in support of the positions that they believe often unintentionally elide things that they consider obvious, which, from the
by supriyo-biswas 3y ago
The problem is that people writing in support of the positions that they believe often unintentionally elide things that they consider obvious, which, from the perspective of the other group, sounds like nonsensical mumbo-jumbo, resulting in derisive assessments of the first group as “idiots”, “lunatics” and so on.
Further, people also like staying in their ingroup, so while a flat-earther can already look up evidence and statements supporting a spherical Earth, they often choose to remain in their ingroup to avoid the cognitive dissonance from contradictory information.
- ronsor 3y agoSee also: the anti-AI debate, where most discussion has devolved into either how "AI bros" are evil or artists are all "dumb luddites." Both sides believe all their points to be so obvious that the only explanation for why someone could disagree is that they're either stupid or malicious.
- passion__desire 3y agoPeople don't even have the same facts to base distinct opinions from. If one side's collection of facts differ from another, there is no hope to reach any sort of agreement. The whole propaganda thing is orchestrated to convince bystanders, a large silent majority, so having them all the facts is what this process about. The influencers might not change their position but the bystanders will not be enthusiastic to the same degree especially when they have both sides's facts. If this happens consistently, the debate would have advanced to a more nuanced take. It is hard to be violent and morally upright about it when you also know about your own shortcomings.
- demondemidi 3y agoYou’ve exactly described why internet public forums are dead for at least the next half century.