4 ms·
You didn't acknowledge my claim that your view of the tech industry is rose-colored and inaccurate.
by michaelochurch 11y ago
You didn't acknowledge my claim that your view of the tech industry is rose-colored and inaccurate.
- nostrademons 11y agoI'm risking feeding the trolls here, which dang has scolded me for in another thread, but... Everybody views the world through tinted, inaccurate lenses. Including you, michaelochurch - perhaps especially you, since your view is pretty far off the mainstream. Personally, I'm glad that you share your perspective, even though I disagree with much of it, because it's only through having a dissonance of voices that we can get to some approximation of the truth. But what you're asking for in this thread, with the accusations about Dick Costolo and Evan Spiegel and then the claim that a moderator of the site holds a biased, rose-tinted view, is for readers to consider your view of reality as reality itself. It is not. It's a perspective on reality, an interpretation, just like everyone else's post is. It's fine to leave out the qualifiers and just assert a view as fact as a rhetorical device - I've certainly been guilty of this a lot, and PG does it all the time. But most people, when an alternate viewpoint or interpretation is presented, will at least listen, consider their points, and possibly adapt their worldview. It doesn't advance the discourse or our understanding of the truth to say "You're just biased", because all it invites are posts that say "No, you're biased." Duh. Everybody is biased. The point of critical thinking is to take in a bunch of different viewpoints, understand everyone's biases (including our own), and then work out what's actually going on.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]