post 2/2 of my drivel
>there are other ways of progressing
There are but I have to admit, tech is also the first thing I think of, but we also have universal suffrage, secularism, diverse food, health, and so on... I also like utilitarianism and egalitarianism. How much of it is tied to tech or how much is tech tied to it?
>Going back to what I was saying earlier regarding positivity, I think that having a negative view on things does hold some value, but there's only a specific amount of things you are able to achieve through having a more negative view on things. Positivity opens way more doors. I think that when you approach an argument, or an idea, with a positive outlook, you are allowing the person the freedom to form their own individual point of view without scrutiny. When you do the same thing negatively, you are essentially negating the person's idea or point of view, implying that the person should distance themselves from the conclusion they might have reached.
Again so much to unpack, I prefer a neutral but curious position, maybe that is positive? But there is also "healthy scepticism" I guess? There are ideas and topics I know nothing about and there are cases were I know a lot, so maybe I am dick for dunking on "bad" ideas after or even before I stated my position and backed it up.
I do not not much about roads or roads for cars, I know jack shit about the materials and construction and I do not know a lot about infrastructure I guess. Lets say the current asphalt-concrete whatever cover is "worse" than current-future solutions where the "standard" concrete is improved, the concrete is mixed "plastics" on petrol or plant base, a new high tech cover consisting of new materials is on the table. If it is evident that the older methods are "shit" (worse for environment, degrade faster and so on) I am not gonna be thrilled about them. Some ideas are just shit or out of date as in bad compared to current implemented ideas and deserve scrutiny so I might end up.
>implying that the person should distance themselves from the conclusion they might have reached.
Open minded vs so open that "spirit science Martian Jews" tier ideas fall into ones head? I am not gonna consider drivel. I am not an engineer but even I can see the tower of Pisa is tilted, but I might need a degree in (quantum) physics to properly discuss quantum mechanics...
Have you heard about "Street Epistemology"?
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Street_Epistemologyhttps://www.youtube.com/@magnabosco210>I think that when you approach an argument, or an idea, with a positive outlook, you are allowing the person the freedom to form their own individual point of view without scrutiny.
That is good and I agree
>When you do the same thing negatively, you are essentially negating the person's idea or point of view, implying that the person should distance themselves from the conclusion they might have reached.
While that is bad and the person may learn less, some ideas are just shit, but everyone is obviously free to discuss whatever topic or idea. But in the end you are right, maybe I am just a piece of shit. ::X---DDD
Jokes aside, I decide what I waste my time on, fruitless discussions about "inane", debunked topics with dishonest actors may not be the wisest way to use ones time, but to each their own. If you get paid or have other rl duties but people in a professional setting like a hospital bring up healing aura stones and Feng Shui, they can fuck off, not gonna waste my time. I am an IT specialist, if people outside of work who know little want to discuss horse shit ideas or snake oil, at best I tell them they are wrong if they believe in such rubbish, I tell them why and I tell them that I will not discuss such topics, at worst I just say yer wrong or "yeah, nah" or stay silent.
>For example, for places like universities, there's a feeling you get that you are a developing person, and you are given positivity along with many others who get support from not only teachers but even other students. It allows the person to grow, you get confidence in your way of thinking and you develop based on this confidence.
Yes, but you also learn how to properly source and your critical thinking is demanded.
>Negativity does not possess the same qualities, it doesn't really give a lot of potential for a person's outlook on life to progress and grow
Well, maybe.
>someone faced with a lot of negativity is more likely to be more diverse in their knowledge rather than being more specifically knowledgeable as a method of coping.
I am not sure. I have some people who are like that but I dunno if the statement is true. Those people tend to criticise academics as "one trick ponies", "they just know their field and nothing else, nothing about REAL.TM lyfe!!1". Yeah, right, Peter - truck driver, just because my other lad m8 has a masters in maths does not mean... Ahh forget it, annoying pricks.
>When someone tries to specialize themselves in a specific subject, faces negativity, said person could take this feedback and start from scratch.
Well... Or double down.
post 2/2 of my drivel
>there are other ways of progressing
There are but I have to admit, tech is also the first thing I think of, but we also have universal suffrage, secularism, diverse food, health, and so on... I also like utilitarianism and egalitarianism. How much of it is tied to tech or how much is tech tied to it?
>Going back to what I was saying earlier regarding positivity, I think that having a negative view on things does hold some value, but there's only a specific amount of things you are able to achieve through having a more negative view on things. Positivity opens way more doors. I think that when you approach an argument, or an idea, with a positive outlook, you are allowing the person the freedom to form their own individual point of view without scrutiny. When you do the same thing negatively, you are essentially negating the person's idea or point of view, implying that the person should distance themselves from the conclusion they might have reached.
Again so much to unpack, I prefer a neutral but curious position, maybe that is positive? But there is also "healthy scepticism" I guess? There are ideas and topics I know nothing about and there are cases were I know a lot, so maybe I am dick for dunking on "bad" ideas after or even before I stated my position and backed it up.
[Show 19 more lines]