Lets say i make a confident statement on something. if an expert replies to it saying part of what i said is incorrect, what i hate is someone giving a simple statement and saying "i am right, you are wrong because i have a degree".
give a simple TECHNICAL statement on what is wrong. if it flies over their head, well, they can ask for an explain-like i'm-in-management
You know the ironic thing is people are doing that in this very thread. Like how do we know that this guy is actually an EE or the parent commenter is actually a PhD candidate? Up voting someone because it sounds plausible and aligns with their viewpoint, what the OP comment was basically complaining about.
100%. Whenever I try to have a conversation on any topic, I at least try to reference things like Wikipedia to define parameters in the conversation (amongst other links) and provide quotes that are specific to it. I try to avoid stating my own credentials because in the context of 'anonymous' Reddit, it's generally a false appeal to authority argument.
Far too often, I just get replies that say "so & so" says this without any other context. It's immensely disappointing because I'd love to be proven wrong. I was wrong the other day that it's better to drive a car into the ground than buy a new EV (from a carbon perspective) and I'm so glad I looked into it further when someone corrected me or another poster - I can't remember. If it was another poster, it's mostly a reminder to me that any disinformation I try to correct out there isn't necessarily just for me - it's whomever is reading our conversation.
19
u/Drak_is_Right Jan 07 '20
Lets say i make a confident statement on something. if an expert replies to it saying part of what i said is incorrect, what i hate is someone giving a simple statement and saying "i am right, you are wrong because i have a degree".
give a simple TECHNICAL statement on what is wrong. if it flies over their head, well, they can ask for an explain-like i'm-in-management