diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md | 13 |
1 files changed, 3 insertions, 10 deletions
diff --git a/content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md b/content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md index 7330f0b..db3ee8c 100644 --- a/content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md +++ b/content/entry/its-not-necessarily-irrational-to-believe-things-you-cant-justify-to-others.md @@ -2,16 +2,15 @@ title: "It's Not Necessarily Irrational to Believe Things You Can't Justify to Others" date: 2022-04-12T00:00:00 draft: false -makerefs: false --- There's a certain mistake seasoned debaters often make when interacting with lay people and the mistake is that just because the unprepared lay person cannot presently argue a point, the seasoned debater concludes they hold that belief without justification. I'll explain why this conclusion isn't necessarily correct. -Remember the "Change My Mind" guy, Steven Crowder[1]? If you're not familiar with him, he's an American-Canadian conservative political commentator and the subject of a popular meme format. He used to set up a table on college campuses to debate college students. I don't know if he still does it. I don't follow him. Anyways he goes into these debates where he picks the topic, one which he's knowledgeable about and has lots of points in his favor already in working memory, and he goes up against unprepared college students. +Remember the "Change My Mind" guy, [Steven Crowder](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Crowder)? If you're not familiar with him, he's an American-Canadian conservative political commentator and the subject of a popular meme format. He used to set up a table on college campuses to debate college students. I don't know if he still does it. I don't follow him. Anyways he goes into these debates where he picks the topic, one which he's knowledgeable about and has lots of points in his favor already in working memory, and he goes up against unprepared college students. I don't consider what Steven does unfair in the slightest, because the college students voluntarily go and debate him, so it's up to them to be ready for the heat. It's not like he screens students before he debates them to make himself look good. But I fear that some people may get the impression that he's correct just because he can look smart in front of unprepared college students. # Hacker News Comment -There's this idea that people who can't defend a belief to others are always unjustified in it, but this conclusion is wrong. What's really happening might be better explained by Hacker News commenter TameAntelope[2]: +There's this idea that people who can't defend a belief to others are always unjustified in it, but this conclusion is wrong. What's really happening might be better explained by Hacker News commenter [TameAntelope](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31004980): > "I think this is why it's hard sometimes to argue in support of something you believe, even if you're right. > @@ -30,7 +29,7 @@ TameAntelope hits the nail on the head here. Believing something you cannot just Do I think this applies equally to everyone? Of course not. Lots of people, probably even a majority, just believe whatever their parents or friends believe. They're not critical thinkers and, most likely, they were never at any point justified in most of what they believe. # Human Memory -If two equally skilled debaters go up against each other on a public platform, they shouldn't be saying "Well, I remember a time when I justified X to myself in the past, so I'm going to keep believing it despite your counterpoints". They should prepare for the debate ahead of time, bringing their best cards to the table. But it's different when a seasoned debater like Steven Crowder challenges random college students, or an experienced public debater like Destiny[3] challenges random viewers of his stream. That's not an equal debate and it should be acceptable for the unprepared party to cut the debate short with "I don't remember enough about X to refute you right now. Let me see if I can find what originally convinced me of X and I'll get back to you". +If two equally skilled debaters go up against each other on a public platform, they shouldn't be saying "Well, I remember a time when I justified X to myself in the past, so I'm going to keep believing it despite your counterpoints". They should prepare for the debate ahead of time, bringing their best cards to the table. But it's different when a seasoned debater like Steven Crowder challenges random college students, or an experienced public debater like [Destiny](https://yewtu.be/channel/UC554eY5jNUfDq3yDOJYirOQ?dark_mode=true) challenges random viewers of his stream. That's not an equal debate and it should be acceptable for the unprepared party to cut the debate short with "I don't remember enough about X to refute you right now. Let me see if I can find what originally convinced me of X and I'll get back to you". If I smoke a ton of weed, assuming I don't forget what I believe entirely, I'll have a hard time justifying certain beliefs because I won't remember the justifications, only the beliefs. I'll remember that sober me could've justified my beliefs, or that sober me could've remembered a time when I justified them, and that'll be good enough justification for intoxicated me. Obviously that doesn't convince anybody else of what I believe, unless they just have lots of faith in me. @@ -59,9 +58,3 @@ I immediately thought of this Destiny debate after reading TameAntelope's commen Instead of Destiny realizing this was what was happening, he got extremely frustrated and continued to argue with this person for at least half an hour to an hour if I remember correctly when he should've just said "Go get me the facts you think you remember and then come back". To his credit, I think he might've said something like this towards the end. I think recognizing these indirect yet still valid ways people reason can help us all have better conversations and also help us not be assholes. - - -Link(s): -[1: Steven Crowder](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Crowder) -[2: Hacker News Comment](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31004980) -[3: Destiny](https://yewtu.be/channel/UC554eY5jNUfDq3yDOJYirOQ?dark_mode=true) |