On top of that, I don’t think most people realize how that level of dehumanization affects the conversation as a whole. We are not replying to people, we are replying to walls of text, abstract concepts, hypotheses, and we treat one another as such. It’s why anonymous internet discussions so quickly devolve.
It depends on the topic. If you talk about personal or emotional issues the other person is more important.
If you’re are arguing history or technology for example, then topical arguments and facts are more essential. Ideally you attack the arguments, not the person.
The devolvement is usually because there’s little social consequence to being obstinate and uncompromising.
A conversation can be about discovering new information by sharing perspectives and accumulating ideas and facts. If it devolves into a fight about who is right, then it’s about power, dominance, performance, not learning and discovery.
Places like this on the internet are also filled with people who are mentally unwell, have issues with social interactions, etc… That affects the quality of the conversation as well.
Getting into an argument gets you attention, dopamine, excitement and so on. You can be a mighty keyboard warrior fighting for whatever cause you find worthwhile. This makes you feel great while you’re actually a lonely NEET screaming into the void.
I’m speaking from experience here. I attended a group for internet addiction for a while. Half were gamers, the other half lonely NEETs wasting away their days by arguing on the internet.
On top of that, I don’t think most people realize how that level of dehumanization affects the conversation as a whole. We are not replying to people, we are replying to walls of text, abstract concepts, hypotheses, and we treat one another as such. It’s why anonymous internet discussions so quickly devolve.
It depends on the topic. If you talk about personal or emotional issues the other person is more important.
If you’re are arguing history or technology for example, then topical arguments and facts are more essential. Ideally you attack the arguments, not the person.
The devolvement is usually because there’s little social consequence to being obstinate and uncompromising.
A conversation can be about discovering new information by sharing perspectives and accumulating ideas and facts. If it devolves into a fight about who is right, then it’s about power, dominance, performance, not learning and discovery.
Places like this on the internet are also filled with people who are mentally unwell, have issues with social interactions, etc… That affects the quality of the conversation as well.
Getting into an argument gets you attention, dopamine, excitement and so on. You can be a mighty keyboard warrior fighting for whatever cause you find worthwhile. This makes you feel great while you’re actually a lonely NEET screaming into the void.
I’m speaking from experience here. I attended a group for internet addiction for a while. Half were gamers, the other half lonely NEETs wasting away their days by arguing on the internet.