3 ms·
There’s a tendency for this to result in more work for the people in a conversation, so I think it’s also important to lower the stakes: * Nobody in a casual c
by skybrian 3y ago
There’s a tendency for this to result in more work for the people in a conversation, so I think it’s also important to lower the stakes:
* Nobody in a casual conversation is required to do homework. It’s great if you do, but you don’t have to.
* Discussing something very serious happening in the news doesn’t make an Internet conversation important. Terrible things are always happening and we can talk about them, but that doesn’t make a casual chat between two strangers on the Internet high-stakes.
* Ignorance is the default. We start out not understanding what’s going on, and sometimes that’s where we end up.
* A casual conversation is worthwhile when the people in it are learning things and/or enjoying themselves. If nobody’s having a good time, it’s not working.
- macintux 3y ago> Nobody in a casual conversation is required to do homework. It’s great if you do, but you don’t have to. There was a heated discussion here a week or two ago: someone made an analogy, and someone else challenged them to show their work proving that the analogy was relevant. No matter how many people pointed out that this wasn’t a scientific paper or a deep technical discussion, they wouldn’t back down in their insistence that the original comment required scientific evidence.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- skybrian 3y agoThere’s one more point I forgot to add, though: * When you’re a stranger, nobody has to take your word for anything. So I think it’s okay to say you’re skeptical and would need more evidence, but in a way that doesn’t turn it into homework for someone else.
- evulhotdog 3y agoRight. If it’s something that you, yourself are interested in investigating further then you take it upon yourself to do so, but the burden of proof can’t be placed upon you by someone else.