this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
132 points (87.1% liked)

You Should Know

32338 readers
6 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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%20Thinking%20Article_0.pdf

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I can tell you're a very separate knower.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And now in a human language, please.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In human language: You are completely and absolutely devoid of any degree of empathy or compassion and thus your own worst enemy when it comes to persuading others. You are far more likely to damage any cause you espouse than to promulgate it.

Human enough for you? If you'd rather have it in binary bits, let me know which ISA you are programmed in and I'll write the program that explains it to you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Really? Leaving people to believe stupid, damaging, dangerous things just because you don't want to make a scene or don't want even the least hint of rudeness (probably because you learned that extreme politeness, even at your own expense, is a value) seems a lot less empathetic to me.

But you do you and follow "your own truth".

Are you defending leaving the people believe whatever they want, however wrong, damaging, wrongheaded, contrary to evidence or inane, just to avoid offending them? If not, what is your fucking point?!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Yes. That's exactly what everybody here is saying.

I resubmit: you lack all capacity to comprehend any viewpoint other than yours and will only damage anything you believe in as a result.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I think you've missed the core point of this whole thread.

You're also conflating empathy with acquiescence.

Separate knowing is understanding someone's position logically or factually. Connected knowing requires an understanding of the context.

You can't reason someone out of an unreasonable position.

Hitting a flat earther with logic and facts will obviously be counter productive. Even a modicum of empathy and curiosity as to why someone thinks the way they do will serve you well.

Conversations are about much more than who is wrong and who is right.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

You can't reason someone out of an unreasonable position.

Hitting a flat earther with logic and facts will obviously be counter productive. Even a modicum of empathy and curiosity as to why someone thinks the way they do will serve you well.

But in that case, the battle is already lost. I cannot engage with the person in a manipulative emotional way to use their emotions to shock them out of their mistaken positions. Any further communication regarding the matter is useless. And glossing over some topics is being an accomplice, but apparently that's the only viable response.

Knowing why they believe ss they do will do nothing to help me show them their mistake.

Conversations are about much more than who is wrong and who is right.

Departing with people espousing damaging views for society, given that as you say reason is not a tool that works, is pointless.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's only pointless if your sole objective is to demonstrate to everyone how right you are about everything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Or if you don't want to be a silent accomplice of certain evils in society.

Would you have nice chats with a mass murderer about art?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Sorry you've lost me.

We usually lock up murderers to prevent them from harming others. That being the case, I guess you could chat to them about art if you were really interested in that.

That said, if you were trying to prevent future murders of course you'd need to try to understand the murderers perspective.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

You’re also conflating empathy with acquiescence.

Indeed. This is because he lacks actual empathy so doesn't actually comprehend the very concept.