Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by brlewis on Monday July 20, 2020 @01:02PM
(#23899742)
Why is expressing disbelief less furthering of discussion than citation-free expression of belief?
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by clairity on Monday July 20, 2020 @01:28PM
(#23900000)
because in the first instance, all you're saying is "prove it", implying that the prior reasoning was deficient without specifying the insufficiency. that's vague, lazy, and ultimately unproductive/stifling. at least point out the deficiency, thus furthering the discussion.
the counter is not a non-furthering "citation-free expression of belief", but rather a rationale, a chain of observations leading to a reasonable conclusion, which can largely stand on its own and also furthers the discussion.
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by brlewis on Monday July 20, 2020 @03:02PM
(#23900834)
A full rationale is a nice ideal, but if you don't have time to research and compose a full rationale, silence is not always the best alternative.
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by clairity on Monday July 20, 2020 @04:45PM
(#23901709)
agreed, no one expects footnoted essays in discussion forums, but just saying "prove it" is lazy and no rationale at all. folks have to put some effort in to further the discussion. they shouldn't expect a response otherwise.
either the argument was indeed faulty, in which case the responder should call out the weakness directly, or the responder has no specific objection but wants simply to object. it's lazy and should be discouraged (e.g., downvoted). another lazy response is providing links without summarizing the linked content, but i digress.
citations can buttress but never make an argument.
this of course is different from the memes that the author seems to be targeting, which don't make sound arguments in the first place, and no citation will make them rational. it's best to simply ignore those.