• cRazi_man@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Agree. But if you’re not going to argue in good faith, if you’re not going to discuss with an open mind, if you’re going to add toxicity…then best to stay silent. Shouting your opinion at other people (no matter how ignorant their opinion is) is never going to change their mind.

    • RAM@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I can see where you come from, but as a gay man, I would go crazy if I had to enter every homophobic encounter with an open mind.

      Also, entering an argument might not change the other persons mind, but it might change the mind of bystanders

      • maniclucky@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Most of the time when I get into an argument with someone on Lemmy (formerly Reddit) it was for the people who may read it more than the other person. The best outcome in those cases is civil disengagement, not changing their mind. But the goal is to reveal some faulty logic and dismiss some disinformation for random strangers.

      • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yes, I’m serious. Depends on if you want to actually change minds, or if you want to try to take a punitive approach to try to shout down narrow minded people (which doesn’t really achieve anything).

        If a black man can convert high ranking KKK members through conversation alone, then it certainly is possible. Daryl Davis was directly responsible for between forty and sixty, and indirectly over two hundred people leaving the Klan. Or if you want to hear detail about the process then there’s a podcast episode about this as well.

        • Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I think what you mean with “open mind” is not what I think of. To me that would include (the possibility of) accepting their way as “correct”, so to accept their concept of reality. Like in a debate about how much wine is good (if) and when it starts to be bad. But objectively wrong things are not something I need to be open about. I can discuss it with someone without dismissing their view etc. but I would never be open minded about it.