this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
222 points (94.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43816 readers
1236 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It is difficult for me to ascertain when the person I am communicating is using a logical fallacy to trick me into believing him or doubting my judgement, even when I realise it hours after the argument.

I have seen countless arguments in Reddit threads and I couldn't figure out who was in the right or wrong unless I looked at the upvote counts. Even if the person is uttering a blatant lie, they somehow make it sound in a way that is completely believable to me. If it weren't for those people that could exactly point out the irrationality behind these arguments, my mind would have been lobotomised long ago.

I do want to learn these critical thinking skills but I don't know where to begin from. I could have all these tips and strategies memorised in theory, but they would be essentially useless if I am not able to think properly or remember them at the heat of the moment.

There could be many situations I could be unprepared for, like when the other person brings up a fact or statistic to support their claim and I have no way to verify it at the moment, or when someone I know personally to be wise or well-informed bring up about such fallacies, perhaps about a topic they are not well-versed with or misinformed of by some other unreliable source, and I don't know whether to believe them or myself.

Could someone help me in this? I find this skill of distinguishing fallacies from facts to be an extremely important thing to have in this age of misinformation and would really wish to learn it well if possible. Maybe I could take inspiration from how you came about learning these critical thinking skills by your own.

Edit: I do not blindly trust the upvote count in a comment thread to determine who is right or wrong. It just helps me inform that the original opinion is not inherently acceptable by everyone. It is up to me decide who is actually correct or not, which I can do at my leisure unlike in a live conversation with someone where I don't get the time to think rationally about what the other person is saying.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] VisualCicada@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've noticed this when I used to lurk in subreddits related to what I'm most knowledgeable about. So much misinformation getting upvoted because it's said confidently

[โ€“] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Except that saying things confidently isn't enough. I have been downvoted so much for saying the truth on fields I'm an expert in

[โ€“] lasagna@programming.dev 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reddit was a lot more about getting in early than anything else.

That's not to say other things didn't matter but how often did we see newer replies get to the top?

[โ€“] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know why but it feels different here

[โ€“] Bagel@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

For one thing the user base is much smaller and having relevant comments buried happens a lot less.

[โ€“] DrQuint@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I HAVE seen people turn around discussions when they have evidence of being more in the know than the established flow of Karma. Hell, I've seen it happen with people who only managed to produce complex evidence hours in and that I myself had commented in disbelief they could be right.

But it's a rare occurrence even among discussions that do have a person who's such. Often, post scores pre-dispose the new people coming in into choosing who to agree and disagree on, and even the actual expert who objectively "wins the fight" will continue to get downvotes just because the other downvotes were there. This often leads to the whole "Highschool America is asleep, it's okay to post X" mentality you'd see in some communities.

Personally, I think that scoring systems have a useful place. Even downvotes. Sorting things is useful. But I see no reason to actually show the numbers. If scores were hidden, we'd have no more and no less benefits. But that stuff is instance-admin policy and I don't really feel like fighting for it. Right now, Lemmy isn't having enough issues like that that I'm bothered, and I don't know if it'll ever grow to the point it will.

[โ€“] iByteABit@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is why critical thinking is such an essential skill. So many people out there are convinced about things with bullshit arguments, just because the person talking is charismatic/confident or popular and influential.

Note: Critically thinking doesn't mean denying everyone and everything and holding controversial beliefs in order to feel smarter than others, it often starts with admitting your very own mistakes first. Just like with other's arguments you should be applying the same checks to your own thinking and notice your own fallacies to correct them.

[โ€“] wifixmasher@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Started noticing this when it comes to other forms of media too.

[โ€“] bitcrafter@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I've had enough bad experiences with this that I actually ended up unsubscribing from many of the science subreddits.