Hacker News Reader

I forget where I read/saw it, but someone once made the point that because there are an infinite number of questions that can be asked, someone is always making some kind of statement based on a conscious decision about which questions to ask, and which not to ask.

I think this is especially true when someone is repeatedly ask the same kinds of questions while simultaneously ignoring lots of other really good questions.

How are you determining what people (strangers) "already believe"?

Talking to them on the internet/real life over the past ten years

To me, that feels like a broad brush and lazy way to shut down any uncomfortable conversation. If you find it works for you, more power to you

Epistemologically you can't be completely sure, but when someone's discourse is habitually interwoven with rhetorical gambits and logical fallacies it's not unreasonable to conclude that they're actually a bullshit artist.

AKA https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/JAQ_off

>Don't buy into the bad faith arguments.

the little known super-power : spotting bad-faith arguments flawlessly.