Has anyone here had any success asking a "think for yourself" reality-denier if they've ever allowed the possibility to dawn on them that people who think differently than they do *are* actually thinking for themselves?
I mean, it's such an unserious argumentative gambit, but it's still attempted with surprisingly regularity, with apparently unassailable levels of pomposity.
@sumpnlikefaith They'll use words like "thinking" and "truth" and "common sense" as if they knew what those things were.
They think "thoughtful" "intelligent" and "correct" means people agree with them.
They think "stupid" and "ignorant" mean the person disagrees with them.
@AskTheDevil @sumpnlikefaith I have to basically agree with the Devil here. Those people have a different set of definitions for these words, a simpler set. When a person derives their understanding of the world from different sources than reality, it's hard to change that foundation. I think such argumentation just isn't going to work. That doesn't mean it's wrong to try. I would happily be incorrect.
@danielbsmith @AskTheDevil The conversation I witnessed which sparked my question revealed a shared, principled mistrust of politics & corporations...or could have.
It just ended up in right-vs-left bickering. The best this can do is point to the-other-side's faults & failings, ignoring the faults & failings of one's own side.
We are not solving anything by entrenching the divide. We need a deep reconstruction of values -- intelligence means something less egocentric than "I'm convinced."
@danielbsmith @AskTheDevil It should be a mistrust of corporations, because the inherently irresponsible nature of corporations is pointing us toward inevitable planetary collapse.
But it doesn't get there because Brand X and Brand Y keep leveraging all their cultural tools to foment attraction and competition. All they need is a certain number of customers to survive. They can successfully ignore the damage this does to their social fabric, and the delicate planet we all depend on.