Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I enjoy 'free' debate where I can be the devil's advocate for unpopular opinions. Talk like this is more or less banned on Reddit. Lemmy is a much freer. I think the are sensible boundaries on certain topics where debate must not turn into advocacy. This takes nuance and good sense though. Completely dead on Reddit, still alive here. So carry on..
Do you actually feel conviction behind the claims and arguments, or is it more performative? I have people in my life who take it way to far almost to the point of chronic bad faith and making them annoying to talk to about anything...
Yes. I think what happens in many difficult topics is people know how they feel but have never really thought through the detail. And because of that they backfill with black and white thinking that I think is bad for several reasons.
I) often even though I agree on the central issue, the black and white thinking contains overreactions that I disagree with that in themselves cause other problems. So I see value in developing an emotional black and white view into a nuanced dark grey / off-white view.
ii) black and white thinking leaves us ill equipped to understand others or find compromises
iii) although we all do it, relying on strong emotional convictions is fine for day to day life but leaves us out of practice articulating exactly why we think things should be a certain way and therefore vulnerable to articulate bad actors
I would never take a contrary view just to be annoying. And I generally only do it on moral issues, not matters of strong consensus that would veer into conspiracy. (E.g. practising reciting the evidence for why we understand the Holocaust is real is a useful historical skill but not the kind of thing I'm talking about)