this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
747 points (96.3% liked)

Comic Strips

12583 readers
3966 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
747
Sealioning (lemmy.world)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by ahlooolahhh@lemmy.world to c/comicstrips@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Would you mind providing evidence of a scenario in which it’s good to be irrational?

I think I found the seal club, guys.

Asking someone to provide evidence of a scenario in which something is irrational is an irrational thing to ask. I'll state why with a kind of example. So, say you have the choice between two boxes of corn flakes. You look between the two, and you decide to pick one. You, you specifically, decide to pick one. Perhaps, the red one, over the blue one, I can't state this for you. Make up a reason why you chose that box. Now, this reason, which you have chosen, would it necessarily be a rational reason, for you to have chosen the box you did?

Presumably, yes, unless you're going to argue against yourself, and say that, in this instance, it's actually good to be irrational. In this instance, then, you've made a rational decision, you had a reason to believe the thing that you did. Now, taking this example, and what I've formerly said, about you not being irrational, in mind, can you think of any given scenario in which you've ever made an irrational decision? Perhaps you can, even, and it was bad, but also, presumably, you thought it was a rational decision at the time. It was probably (here is maybe where it gets iffy) only in hindsight, that you thought your previous belief was irrational.

Taking this into account, and extrapolating off of that experience, we can intuit that they probably didn't mean what you meant when you (not you, the other guy, but also you right now I suppose) said the word "irrational", they don't share your definition of it. Because, kind of, based on these examples I've given, there would never be a circumstance in which it would make sense, i.e., "be rational", for someone to make an irrational decision. This is a straight paradox, if we take that definition to be what they meant.

Then, considering this, right, we can assume they probably meant something else, other than what you have assumed. I will not claim to know what they meant.

Blam, sea lion that, motherfucker. You probably can if you tried really hard, but blam. Sea lion it. (this could be a pretty good example of sea-lioning, too, I gave you some pretty low-stakes, specific stuff to contest, there, that isn't really part of the main argument, i.e. it's the definition of a sealion).

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

Nah, I don't feel like it. But if I were to do so, I'd probably say something like "this is laughably absurd, come back when you know how to debate" so as to avoid letting you steer the conversation.