On these types of forums it’s easy to jump into an argument about the technicalities or a post or comment.

You should know, though, that there is a theory called Ways of Knowing which defines Separate Knowing and Connected Knowing. It’s been a part of my masters program I’m taking.

Separate knowing disconnects the humanity and context from what’s being said and tries to only argue the “facts”. But facts, and the things people say, don’t just occur in a vacuum. It often is the case when people are arguing past each other, like on the internet.

Connected Knowing is approaching the thing someone said with the understanding that there is a context, humanity, biases, different experiences, and human error that can all jumble up when people are sharing information.

Maybe even just knowing that there’s different ways to know would be helpful for us to engage in a different level of conversation here. I’m not sure. I just wanted to share!

https://capstone.unst.pdx.edu/sites/default/files/Critical Thinking Article_0.pdf

  • Boozilla@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Something I’ve encountered constantly online is the pedantic type who simply wants to “win” the argument at any cost, and will very much argue in bad faith and ignore (or pretend to not understand) a solid counter-argument or facts that don’t fit their narrative.

    I think making a good effort at radical empathy and trying one’s best to see the other side can potentially help expose the bad faith arguments. But, there are a lot of dirty tricks out there like the Gish Gallop, etc.

    • moistclump@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      And I don’t always have the energy if I’m being honest! Connected knowing takes energy and heart and it’s not always available for me to use. I have to pick my battles with this one too.

      • Boozilla@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same here. I prefer discussion with reasonable folks. When it starts getting nasty I usually disengage or even block the person. I respect the radical empathy approach, and I try to use it with people I engage with in person. But I have little patience with online trolls and pendants anymore. It’s a waste of time and energy.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      the pedantic type

      The pedantic type is one thing; the propagandist troll is another. “Making a good effort at radical empathy” won’t do a damn thing against the latter; in that case the correct tactic is to call out their bullshit and mock them mercilessly until they’re driven away (or get the mods to ban them, but you can’t always count on that).