zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. imarti+(OP)[view] [source] 2018-02-15 10:08:18
Neither. I only was critizing what I think is a flawed argument, nothing else. I didn’t make any mental connection to what you bring up. I understand why your impression is that I must have meant something more, as this usually is the case with comments about polarizing topics like this.

That aside (and not meant as criticism against you), it’s super frustrating how when it comes to this specific topic, it’s unbelievably hard to express a thought in a way which is not being misunderstood by others. We all seem to have a mental concept of the debate in mind and then just match everything we read to this existing concept, which leads to all kinds of misrepresentations.

replies(1): >>shard9+4T6
2. shard9+4T6[view] [source] 2018-02-18 23:05:14
>>imarti+(OP)
I initially read the comment as you positing your chain of thought (instead of theirs) and i was trying to work out the underlying fact being such a chain of logic.

I guess what ill say is that having a mental concept of debate, i personally find useful in getting to the root of ideas.

Of course circling the wagons in your echo chamber by always taking on the debate in your favour isn't good, asking people to further explain thoughts and arguments you don't understand/don't agree with i think is good and people should do more of it.

[go to top]