To pwn a believer?
Download as pptx, pdf1 like283 views
This document outlines different types of believers and how conversations with them can devolve. It discusses the psychology of argument and defines various believer types based on their openness, confidence, and sincerity. It suggests that the ideal conversation seeks mutual understanding rather than persuasion. However, conversations often spiral downward when there is a lack of common ground or one party engages in obfuscation, obviation, or obstinacy. It raises questions about when it may be appropriate to publicly humiliate or "pwn" another's beliefs.
To pwn a believer?
- 1. To pwn a believer?An investigation into the vicissitudes of conversation
- 2. Definition: What is to pwn?Slang from to ownTo appropriate or conquer; to gain ownershipFrom gamer cultureImplies domination or humiliation of a rivalUsed in YouTube Pwnage Olympics
- 3. OutlineWho are our interlocutors?Psychology of argumentDifferent personality types of believersThe purpose of conversationPower or Truth?Ways conversation can devolveThe varieties of bad faithExamples of pwnageQuestions for discussion
- 4. Who are our interlocutors?How our psychology affects the way we argue
- 5. Kinds of believersBouquet of believersExamplesPrivate believer, easily offendedInsecure, but public believerInsincere, public believerSincere, but insecure believer
- 6. OpennessPrivate BelieverRegard beliefs as personalDoubt their beliefs affect othersEschew evangelismPublic BelieverConsider beliefs societalConfident beliefs can affect the worldTend to proselytize
- 7. ConfidenceInsecure BelieverUnsure about reasons for beliefsOffended by criticismIncendiary or standoffishSecure BelieverReady with justification for beliefsWelcomes scrutinyCalm in deliberation
- 8. EarnestnessInsincere BelieverBelief not motivated by rational warrantTraditionFamilyFriendsUncommitted to any particular beliefBad faithRegards beliefs as conditioned by circumstances or conventionsEvade responsibilitySincere BelieverBeliefs formed on reflectionTakes beliefs as motivating actionLives as though their beliefs were trueGood faithActs in accordance with states beliefsAccountable to beliefs
- 9. Believers we want to engage
- 10. Purpose of ConversationOur aim in engaged dialogue
- 11. History of DialecticWill to PowerPurpose to publicly overcome opponentEndorsed by Callicles, ancient Greek rhetoricianIn Gorgias, Socratic DialogueExpanded upon by NietzscheSocratic idealInvestigate truth in dialogueSpark of truth emerges from clashing ideas
- 12. Suggested IdealMutual exchange of ideasSeeking two-way understandingEmpathy is the underlying motiveCritical examination as a way to articulate beliefs, valuesNot persuasion-orientedNo expectation except to understand
- 13. Cost?Benefit:No attachment to result Mutually non-threateningCon:Susceptible to being taken advantage of by insincere interlocutorTime investment when conversation devolves
- 14. Ways conversation DevolvesThe downward spiral of argument
- 15. Lack of Common GroundCommon groundFactsDescriptions of the worldValuesWays we want the world to beLogicExplanations and implications we see fittingToo few shared values, facts or logicNo room to reason, despite sincere interlocutors
- 16. Three Os of DevolutionObfuscationPurposefully make the discussion obscureConfusing the issueChanging the topicConflating distinct termsObviationAttempting to sidestep conversationPascals WagerFeigning offencePrivacy fallacyWaxing ObstinateRefusing to budge despite reasonDogmatic assertionIgnoring arguments
- 17. Examples of PwnageWhen it becomes appropriate to humiliate
- 18. Pwnage ExamplesRichard Dawkins, What if youre wrong?Sam Harris, Stem Cells and MoralityChristopher Hitches, Free Speech
- 19. QuestionsAt what point do we give up on conversation?Not making progressBad faithWhen is it alright to humiliate?To shame heinous rhetoricTo expose bad faith or insincerityDoublespeakDishonestyWhen the belief is just wildly wrong?Does pwninghave public value?Making a show of wrong beliefsDiscouraging insincerity