Inheriting their worldview from consensus or comfort, never having to earn it through actual thought.

  • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    This is the same “good faith” argument that cultists, religious recruiters, libertarians, and racists use.

    You don’t have to engage with morally abhorrent arguments out of loyalty to some platonic ideal of intellectualism. You’re allowed to tell people to fuck off.

    • 3abas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      You tell them to fuck off because you engaged with it and found it completely meritless/abhorrent, not because you’re above engaging with it. If they present new evidence for lizard people, you should skeptically examine the evidence and tell them to fuck off when it doesn’t hold up.

      You don’t have to engage with them and waste your time debating them, but you absolutely should be open to challenge your own positions.

        • 3abas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I’m stating my opinion on the matter…

          I think you should engage with challenging ideas as the post says, I don’t think it’s an “ideal of intellectualism”, I just think it serves your own interests to be open to realize you’ve been mislead.