Lots of people use "productive conversation" as a euphemism for "everyone ends up agreeing with everything else" which is a weird worldview to me as someone who seeks truth

submitted by Klenvastergan from self.whatever

The thing about productive conversation, where "productive conversation" is conversation that produces truth, is that it leads to lots of disagreement and people getting mad, because liars don't like to be challenged on their lies, and people with false beliefs (often resulting from being lied to) don't like to be challenged on their false beliefs.

When "productive conversation" just means "get everybody to say they agree" you just get a lot of lowkey shitty behavior in the service of lies that pretty much everyone in the conversation knows are lies.

all 24 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]polync 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

A recepie I discovered recently for myself: be the person least concerned in a subject in a room. Then productive would mean you wasted minimal amount of time on another irrelevant thing.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

It seems like the end point of that view would be never caring about anything or doing anything, and thus never producing anything.

That's a weird way to define "productive."

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

The space between the earth and the sky is like bellows.
It doesn't care about your path, just fans your flame, and you produce more and more.
While it just stays there empty, and spend no energy, have nothing, thus is never exhausted.

People gather data and ideas, and use it to create the truth they need for their path.
Give them what they want, don't try to control the result, you won't succeed anyway.
When there is a lot, you're bound to find something for yourself.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Nobody creates truth.

Truth is that which is true, not what you believe is true.

[–]StrategicTactic 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Using a term to describe itself is a recursive fallacy. A better definition that I heard:

Truth is that which comports to reality.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Reality is that which is true.

Truth is that which is.

[–]NodeThis is my flair. There are many like it, but this one is mine. 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The slight problem is that humans "have difficulty" apprehending reality. We would pretty much need to be God to perceive actual reality. And so, there's no agreement on what constitutes truth.

Even the everyday practical working 'truths' you're referring to will lead back to this problem, if pursued far enough.

[–]killerjavi98 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To comprehend that which is incomprehensible one must comprehend that there are incomprehensible things. The Laws of Physics is a truth we all understand but we understand that the cause might be incomprehensible because how we currently experience our state of consciousness. However we can uplift humanity to understand the truths and apply it to our current state of consciousness or reality. Then maybe we can understand these obscure metaphysical concepts like AIN SOPH

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Any 2 ideas can be combined to create a new idea. When you have 2 ideas, you have millions of them. All these ideas can be truthful.

Because, what is at the core of truth? The change in our sensory organs? The difference between what is and what wasn't? The truths that can be created by combing any 2 physical sensations are endless.

The amount of truth in the world is infinite. You can't consume it all with your finite head. Attempts to force the truth from your head into the heads of other people, won't succeed. Their heads are also finite, and aren't empty.

So just let them collect what they want to.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lots of ideas are false.

True ideas are good.

[–]NodeThis is my flair. There are many like it, but this one is mine. 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Depending on how you're defining 'sky', that space expends tremendous amounts of energy every second.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

expends

When do you think it will be fully depleted?

[–]NodeThis is my flair. There are many like it, but this one is mine. 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's locally fueled by interactions with various processes on our sun, so it should exist as long as earth continues to orbit.

[–]wendolynne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Truth seeker, how will you know when you have found it? Will you know that you are not believing lies?

[–]killerjavi98 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Gravity

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Someone like you will get really mad at me for saying it.

[–]wendolynne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you mean to say that you will know it is true if it makes people angry? or only certain people, people like me? I doubt if you know all that much about me.

[–]Artistic-Mastodon-25 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

A productive conversation is one where people make concessions from their best position, and come to a consensus about what they know, what they dont know, and the parameters of future negotiation.

There is no such thing as "Truth" beyond consensus. That's what a productive conversation is-- the reaching of consensus on the relevant facts. This is why legal briefs begin with a statement of the facts, and the reply brief proposes a counter statement that accepts, or demurs to, the factual averments set forth in the complaint.

I've negotiated many contracts, settlements, and plea agreements. The parties rarely care about "objective truth."

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Nope, Truth exists, sorry.

Consensus isn't truth, it's just consensus, which is quite boring, and often just based on lies.

Imagine coming to a website on the internet to fight against Truth and for lies. How sad.

[–]Artistic-Mastodon-25 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Say one thing of consequence that is "true", that's not a tautology, and that isnt so abstract as to be unfalsifiable.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You said "of consequence" because you're going to play dickheaded word games no matter what I say to deny the truth.

There you go, that's the true statement you wanted.

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Of course truth exists, but obviously no one person sees the whole truth. That's why there is need for consensus.

[–]Klenvastergan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No lol, consensus isn't truth.

Truth is truth.

If you grab the compass needle and turn it around with your hand the earth doesn't flip on its axis.

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's not what I said. I said no one person can see the full truth, so we have to combine the things we've seen to get the full picture.