Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#101

Post by russelluresti »

qznc wrote: post #4

> This is the problem with America today, the technology that was supposed to bring us together actually isolated us into echo chambers and drove us further apart. Everybody knows where the other echo chamber is. As a democrat, you are free to watch Fox or read Breitbart. The hard thing is to read it open minded. The average democrat HN visitor probably looks there and stops after two sentences. Then leaves ranting a…

I see a lot of people blaming the technologies, and I think that's a problem.

The technology is just a tool. Tools that we choose how and when to use.

If an echo chamber exists, it's only because we, as individuals, create it. We like and comments on posts on Facebook that agree with our existing opinions and we unfollow the people who have different opinions. Our own actions create the echo chamber.

We also get our news from one or two sources, and we avoid the sources that lean the other way. Not all media has a liberal bias - there are many media outlets with conservative views, we just choose not to read them.

The tools aren't to blame - we are. The result we see and the America we live in are direct consequences of our actions. To rid ourselves of the echo chamber, we have to change our own actions. We have to specifically search out information that challenges our beliefs. We have to interact with people who have different values.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#102

Post by mannykannot »

ilolu wrote: post #14

When Hillary lost to one of the worst candidates ever in Trump, then its her fault. But from what I seen in social media, Hillary's supporters are just blaming everyone else for the loss rather than finding fault in their candidate. I have even seen tweets claiming all Trump's voters (60 million people) are sexist, racist etc. It could just be a simple fact that people value other things more than just sexism and rac…

The issue that the democratic party should probably be taking a look at is how Clinton set herself up as the presumptive candidate even before the primaries.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#103

Post by mannykannot »

notacoward wrote: post #37
qznc wrote: post #4

> This is the problem with America today, the technology that was supposed to bring us together actually isolated us into echo chambers and drove us further apart. Everybody knows where the other echo chamber is. As a democrat, you are free to watch Fox or read Breitbart. The hard thing is to read it open minded. The average democrat HN visitor probably looks there and stops after two sentences. Then leaves ranting a…

> Everybody knows where the other echo chamber is. Brilliant. Thank you for that excellent summation, and no, I'm not being the least bit sarcastic. That's awesome. > I have no idea how to fix this. Neither do I, really, but let's not jump to the solution before we're done with the diagnosis. Here's an idea: critical thinking is overtaught. Yes, over . I know the common belief is that there's not enough critical thin…

Listening to the other side is part of critical thinking, so I do not see how a lack of it may result from overteaching critical thinking. It might be a result of superficially teaching critical thinking, which could result in people being able to name fallacies but not be able to see them.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#104

Post by notacoward »

mannykannot wrote: post #103
notacoward wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everybody knows where the other echo chamber is. Brilliant. Thank you for that excellent summation, and no, I'm not being the least bit sarcastic. That's awesome. > I have no idea how to fix this. Neither do I, really, but let's not jump to the solution before we're done with the diagnosis. Here's an idea: critical thinking is overtaught. Yes, over . I know the common belief is that there's not enough critical thin…

Listening to the other side is part of critical thinking, so I do not see how a lack of it may result from overteaching critical thinking. It might be a result of superficially teaching critical thinking, which could result in people being able to name fallacies but not be able to see them.

Where did you get the idea that listening - really listening, not just mining for quotes you can refute - is part of critical thinking? Where is it taught that way? Where is it practiced that way? They're both valuable and important skills, but they're pretty much independent of one another and too rarely both present in the same person.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#105

Post by [deleted] »

notacoward wrote: post #104
mannykannot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listening to the other side is part of critical thinking, so I do not see how a lack of it may result from overteaching critical thinking. It might be a result of superficially teaching critical thinking, which could result in people being able to name fallacies but not be able to see them.

Where did you get the idea that listening - really listening, not just mining for quotes you can refute - is part of critical thinking? Where is it taught that way? Where is it practiced that way? They're both valuable and important skills, but they're pretty much independent of one another and too rarely both present in the same person.

[deleted]

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#106

Post by mannykannot »

notacoward wrote: post #104
mannykannot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listening to the other side is part of critical thinking, so I do not see how a lack of it may result from overteaching critical thinking. It might be a result of superficially teaching critical thinking, which could result in people being able to name fallacies but not be able to see them.

Where did you get the idea that listening - really listening, not just mining for quotes you can refute - is part of critical thinking? Where is it taught that way? Where is it practiced that way? They're both valuable and important skills, but they're pretty much independent of one another and too rarely both present in the same person.

Ha! - if you are suggesting that I mined your post for something to refute, I would argue that you presented that point as being central to your reply to the second quote that you picked from Qznc's post (and I also think it was central to that reply, so I don't think I am taking it out of context.)

I actually went so far as to do a little search into how others defined critical thinking, and they uniformly included being informed and fact-based. It seems unlikely to me that one can participate informedly in a debate without having really listened to the other participants.

Given how prevalent and easily accessible that view of critical thinking is, I am curious as to what informed your apparent view that this is not part of critical thinking.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#107

Post by notacoward »

mannykannot wrote: post #106
notacoward wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get the idea that listening - really listening, not just mining for quotes you can refute - is part of critical thinking? Where is it taught that way? Where is it practiced that way? They're both valuable and important skills, but they're pretty much independent of one another and too rarely both present in the same person.

Ha! - if you are suggesting that I mined your post for something to refute, I would argue that you presented that point as being central to your reply to the second quote that you picked from Qznc's post (and I also think it was central to that reply, so I don't think I am taking it out of context.) I actually went so far as to do a little search into how others defined critical thinking, and they uniformly included…

> if you are suggesting

I am doing no such thing. There was nothing in what I said to suggest that it was directed at you specifically. This would be a very bad time to construct a strawman.

> hey uniformly included being informed and fact-based

"Informed and fact-based" is not the same as listening to one's opponent. I wasn't talking about what tools can be used to rebut another's argument; I was - pretty clearly - talking about listening to it before the rebuttal starts. You've pretty much just proven my point.

Re: Dear Democrats, Read This If You Do Not Understand Why Trump Won

#108

Post by mannykannot »

notacoward wrote: post #107
mannykannot wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha! - if you are suggesting that I mined your post for something to refute, I would argue that you presented that point as being central to your reply to the second quote that you picked from Qznc's post (and I also think it was central to that reply, so I don't think I am taking it out of context.) I actually went so far as to do a little search into how others defined critical thinking, and they uniformly included…

> if you are suggesting I am doing no such thing. There was nothing in what I said to suggest that it was directed at you specifically. This would be a very bad time to construct a strawman. > hey uniformly included being informed and fact-based "Informed and fact-based" is not the same as listening to one's opponent. I wasn't talking about what tools can be used to rebut another's argument; I was - pretty clearly -…

If I had unconditionally stated that you had suggested that, you might have a small point, but I think it is a plausible possible reading and that there's nothing wrong with getting it out of the way, one way or another.

Your response to my position misses my point. You questioned where I got the idea that critical thinking encompasses listening, and what you wrote or thought you were saying up to that point is immaterial to that question. You distinguish between an initial time of listening and a subsequent time of rebuttal, but listening itself involves thinking, whereby one understands and evaluates the information, and it is from that that any rebuttal begins.

BTW I agree with much of what you have written recently about the election, especially your point that Bernie also lost, and with regard to the idea that markets are the solution to everything.

Post reply on HN