Quote:
But it's the way that those responses are worded that is the problem. There is nothing wrong with stating a different opinion, it's just when people come off with a 'holier than thou' attitude that people take offense.
Point taken.
Note to self: turn down blunt-o-meter.
Here's how I look at it: If I wanted to argue with fools the livelong day, there are no shortage of forums for that purpose.
When you are the minority opinion,
even though you may be right, you are vulnerable to the
Gish Gallop--so much wrong stupidity concentrated into a single thread that there is no way to refute ALL of it. I mean, prove with scientific proof that the Tooth Fairy, flying unicorns and 2+2=5 ISN'T true, right? Where do you think that quarter came from, if not from the Tooth Fairy? My mommy told me the Tooth Fairy AND unicorns exist, and she wouldn't lie. And once I heard from a cousin's best friend's buddy who read it in a magazine that some crackpot somewhere proved that 2+2=5, so there you go. Because Google University is way better than
actually studying a subject with intellectual rigor for decades, right?
So the real goal is to lead people to objective truth as a concept they can discern for themselves. E.g., Cousin's friend's buddy said that ducks sink in water. Well, we've got ducks, let's go check for ourselves, right? And that's a task that must be done with delicacy and tact rather than confrontation. If you say, "Dude, ducks float, here's a pic of my duck swimming, it's obvious and by the way you're a fool," then they are going to feel like jerks next time they're in a public park, right? And somehow that triggers a piece of the reptilian, anti-intellectual brain labeled "denial" and suddenly YOU'RE the bad guy who is somehow wrong because there MUST have been a duck that didn't float somewhere, once, and by gawd they will find it.
If you're very skeptical by nature, it's hard to understand people who are not. Generally, most people don't handle correction well, if it's not taught to them at a very early age.
