• CADmonkey@lemmy.world
      1·
      6 months ago

      And Tom Morello saying he wasn’t aware they had any non-political songs and would remove any he found.

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
    1·
    6 months ago

    But if he did change his mind after reading your sources he would have disproved the sources.

  • Sabin10@lemmy.world
    1·
    6 months ago

    Reminds me of a guy I worked with. He even started the occasional sentence with “contrary to fact” before telling me you can order super powerful quantum computers on Ali express that can run your entire steam library concurrently.

    • cynar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      6 months ago

      One of the biggest general things is giving them a graceful out.

      One of the biggest markers of an intelligent person is the ability to accept they were wrong about something and update their world view. This leads them to finding the best understanding they currently can, rather than the first that stuck.

      For most people this is extremely hard. If you also put them in a position where they feel like an idiot if they agree with you, many will just dig their heels in. Once this happens, the more you push the more they dig in. It has become part of their identity, and you are attacking it.

      Unfortunately, the details about how to guide someone through are different depending on the person. Generally you want to align your new knowledge with their mindset, give them a good reason why they held their previous view, and how updating it improves them.

      It’s analogous to clearing sand with a hose Vs a sledge hammer. The sledge hammer will often compact the sand, rather than move it. Water can wash it away, but the process is slower. It also gets harder if it’s previously been pounded with the hammer.

      And rereading my word salad, I’ve got no idea how helpful it actually is as advice, but I’ll post it anyway, in case it’s actually useful to someone.

  • Hikermick@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    About 13 years ago I had a debate with a friend about some political thing. He repeated something from the media (AM radio) I knew was BS so I told him I’d email him evidence to the contrary, he told me he’d send evidence in support. I sent him a mountain of evidence but never heard from him. The next time we met I brought it up he told me he didn’t have time to read my email, his body language said otherwise. That’s when I realized it was a cult

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      1·
      6 months ago

      Something I find funny - uncanny even - is how easily the roles swap. If someone sent you a mountain of ‘evidence’ for a flat earth or magnetising vaccines, and you threw it out saying obviously it’s BS and you can’t be bothered to read it, the internet would agree and laud you for common sense.

      But OP-of-the-tweet sends her friend two ‘sources’ and we all agree the friend is an idiot for not believing the ‘facts’.

      I suppose what it means is, quantity of evidence isn’t useless, but is only part of the search for knowledge.