most of you don't seem to know what 'bad faith' means in either sense & should not use the term. in my opinion

bad faith 

when we're talking about 'bad faith arguments', it means deliberately misrepresenting your intentions. someone would be arguing in bad faith if they pretended to be taking what you're saying seriously, but actually had no intent to, or if they deliberately and maliciously misrepresent what you're saying. someone simply telling you off & not pretending to be otherwise isn't arguing in bad faith (and it could actually be argued you are, since you're pretending they're saying something they're not)

Show thread

bad faith 

this, incidentally, is part of why the facts & logic bro concept of 'ironmanning' (as the opposite of strawmanning) is so ridiculous. 'trying to accurately understand your opponent's position' isn't some kind of a kung fu trick

Show thread
Follow

bad faith 

the second meaning bad faith has is as a technical term in existential philosophy. very broadly, one is acting in bad faith when they pretend they couldn't do otherwise — when they deny their radical freedom. someone justifying their actions, to themselves or others, by saying they're 'just following the rules' or that they're 'it's just the kind of person they are' or w/e is engaging in bad faith: they're eliding that the rule applies only insofar as they choose to follow it, and they're whatever kind of person by choosing to act like such a person

bad faith 

a lot of people seem to use 'bad faith' mostly to mean whenever someone says or does anything in a way they don't like

Show thread

bad faith 

most of the conversations on here, in any other online space, or irl are not formal debates and should not be. pretending they are or trying to apply the (mostly misunderstood) norms of one to them helps noöne and is probably bad faith in both senses i outlined

Show thread

bad faith 

while i said trying to understand someone else's position isn't a special technique, it is also, cynical as this might seem, often not productive. the other person may not have a position, or if they have, they aren't willing to accurately represent it. this doesn't have to be malicious: maybe they're angry or upset and not thinking thru, or they just haven't had time to formulate a coherent view and are going by their first reactions, or they keep shifting their stance w/o realising it

Show thread

bad faith 

in none of these cases is acting as if they have some kind of a crystallised, unambiguously articulatable position you can uncover and then defeat by facts & logic thereby converting them to your side, or acting as if they're trying to do the same, a useful or a healthy framing. try to be mindful of what is actually going on & what you hope to accomplish, and then go about doing that like a person. this is good faith

Show thread

bad faith 

@esvrld i only ever Debate in deliberate bad faith because Logic And Reason people are absurd to me, and turned debate from something i merely didn't enjoy, into a truly poisonous practicei wish to punish people for engaging in

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Octodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!