this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2024
159 points (86.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35780 readers
1011 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

And when you have a billion people doing this, that's a lot of insanity. Like, world-spanning plague-level insanity.

all 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] key@lemmy.keychat.org 84 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The ability to learn from other people without needing the same first hand experience is a hallmark of intelligence. It's one of the things about our species that allowed us to develop past just being yet another animal in the wild. Education is largely based on that principle; your history teacher didn't experience the horrors of trench warfare firsthand.

So I wouldn't call social media insanity so much as potentially addictive, which can cause you to overindulge in those behaviours. Admittedly addiction can feel like insanity when you're in the throes of it.

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It is not the obvious function of knowledge that's at issue, it is its quality. When the observation and the knowledge get too far apart, the words cease to refer to the observation and begin to refer only to themselves.

And then the quality becomes poopoo. A solipsistic black hole.

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I have never verified 99% of the knowledge I read in textbooks either. But aside from math little in the textbooks held much truth. Especially the economy books.

[–] isles@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

All the economic textbooks in the US at least basically boil down to "Neo-classicalism works guys... no really. No really, really"

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People have been spouting authoritative-sounding bullshit about things they have no business talking about for as long as humans have had language. The only difference is that now, any single humans bullshit is able to reach everyone on the globe with a smartphone in seconds.

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Agreed. It's an old problem. Call it "bad epistemology" (BE).

The method of Science was arguably contrived to combat BE (or at least to offer an advantageous alternative).

Which gives us a nice spectrum. On one end strong reference to observation, delivering high-quality knowledge (IE science etc). On the other end a recursive BE machine.

Social media has turned the BE into a kaiju. A reverse scientific enlightenment.

[–] Restaldt@lemm.ee 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So exactly how the world worked before the internet except instead of getting your misinformation from aunt Becky you get disinformation from xXxFrenchmansCumsockxXx a12 year old in a foreign country... or a bot

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Here's a couple of differences

Millions of us communicate our ideas to millions every minute. (Think of that. 10E6^minute. Such a churn.)

An idea can go anywhere in the world instantly.

So there's that vast amplification. A cannon vs a pistol.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People blather about nothing and things they know little about in basically every setting. It's what people do, and is commonly called conversation.

[–] ickplant@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sometimes it’s called the Joe Rogan Experience.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Is the "stupid question" if it's literally insane? If so then no, that's not what insanity means. But I think this is a thinly-veiled vent more than a question...

[–] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 13 points 9 months ago

It was a thing before social media you know the bar talk about train are alwuys late, you just need to do that, that and that, or teacher don't use proper pedagogy with kids and tons of other.

It's eusy to talk about something you don't know

[–] set_secret@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

not only that, but occasionally someone with significant professional experience will contribute, but will be immediately downvoted if their professional take isn't in line with the uninformed consensus.

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

Oh yes. All the time.

[–] H_Interlinked@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Every AI discussion I've read this morning following the SORA promotional release.

[–] overzeetop@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

But, also, this describes every response to a ML prompt.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Your explanation is wrong, though. People might have experience, but you don't know who, because they can lie. And if you think about it, a lot of what we learn is stuff we haven't experienced directly, for a variety of practical reasons.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't matter . I had an anti vaxx lady wave a meme in my face and tell me doctors can't be trusted.

They not only have experience they have proof. Confirmation bias is a bitch I guess.

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social -1 points 8 months ago

Antivaxxers tend to be uneducated people with agendas. They are actually wanting to see more people get sick and die, because they think it "eliminates" undesirable (ie, educated liberal good people) from the world. When it fact, it only eliminates their own ignorant breed. That's why I don't argue with them, I let them go ahead and exhaust themselves on their cross of ignorance.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Remember, reddit didn't do it.

[–] hightrix@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

When this happens on a topic with which you have expert level knowledge, it is so blindingly obvious and eye opening just how wrong every other conversation may be. It strongly suggests having a highly critical eye on any topic.

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

The popular criteria for sane conversation appear to be

  1. logically consistent more or less

  2. sounds like something that I already agree with

There you go. Stick to those rules and you can have a conversation about goddamn vulcan brain surgery. And everybody involved will wisely nod their heads.

[–] teft@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Do you think people only talk about things online that they haven’t experienced irl?

Personally I tend to only talk about things I’m sure about or have first hand experience in.

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

PSA: The antagonist of FarCry 3 is not a credible source for what does or doesn't constitute "literally insane"

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

When somebody's ideas about reality, and reality itself, are really different, we say that person is fantasizing or hallucinating or suffering a fugue state. More or less insanity.

What I describe could be a personal insanity. Or a social kind of insanity, where society is insane. Like, the meme-structure from which our culture is made has assumed a pathological form.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

literally

Adverbs are fun. Know any others?

When we repeat statements from scientists in that particular field, and it's a well-proved assertion that has survived regular scientific challenges, it's a different thing from parroting the verbal drool of someone paid to say outlandish and unfounded gibberish.

If we're talking vaccines, give me an army of epidemiologists vs a street-preacher like Joe Rogan.

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

Credulously, conventionally, smugly, provincially, dogmatically, unironically

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Sounds like real life

[–] hiramfromthechi@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Source: trust me bro

[–] OpenStars@startrek.website 3 points 9 months ago

Um... why do I feel like I should ask: do you have any experience organizing social media conversations? :-D

[–] Quik@infosec.pub 2 points 9 months ago

As others pointed out, having the feeling of knowing (about) things without actually having experienced them yourself is a core feature of what one might call intelligence, and as such not insane.

I would argue instead that the problem isn’t with arguments over stuff you haven’t experienced yourself, but rather people caring too much about their fixed opinion and not about actually trying to find the truth (e.g. though argument) as they might proclaim.

(I am relatively certain of this point as I’ve seen seemingly good counter examples to this provided by the LessWrong community, where people often discuss topics they do not necessarily have experience with, but rather try to find the truth and therefore not have a fixed opinion beforehand.)

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

Is there a question here? Or are you just complaining?

[–] thorbot@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And that’s why I don’t use social media

[–] Dr_Satan@lemm.ee 0 points 8 months ago

There's a lurking assumption that anything this complex, coherent and fervently argued must surely be true. But it just ain't so. The creation of entire galaxies of utter bullshit is actually quite trivial.

[–] sugarfree@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

It's insane, but I love it.

[–] half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Team peepee

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social -1 points 8 months ago

Oh Dr. Satan. I wouldn't call it insanity so much as willful ignorance. People only want to hear what they want to hear. So they tend to reject anything that's a new idea or that challenges their world view and it's easier just to repeat the things they've been brainwashed to believe.

As an LGBTQ plus a bunch of other letters person, trust me when I say I've come against this wall many times. People who are relatively young with little world experience trying to tackle huge issues without much wisdom to back it up. The result IS a kind of mass insanity, where people are more willing to trust misinformation and silliness. That truly is a horrible consequence of not being open minded and willing to be educated.