This is anecdotal, but every time I say I have a bad feeling about something
(See: Elon and companies, alleged grassy knoll ear shots, LLMs, cryptocurrency, Gamergate, project 2025)
And I get tech people yelling at me in the comments,
Within two years I’m proven extremely right.
@cford I think it's mostly that many a) men, and b) people in tech do honestly believe that they have a more reasonable, more logical, more correct view of whatever is being discussed than the layman, and sometimes even than people with somehow less knowledge on the subject (or at least they think the other party has less knowledge, often without bothering to check). The urge to correct somebody may stem either from an honest desire to teach them, or from an egotistical desire to demonstrate one's own superiority. Combine the two, and men in tech are, in some ways, indeed the worst.
Please note that I am not excusing anybody's behavior; people MUST learn to question their own PoV, and people absolutely MUST learn to treat others as human beings.
And yes, I do say all of this with a full realization that I have behaved like the man in tech that I am many times, and sometimes do it still.
@mrrmot @cford @hacks4pancakes
Regarding 'Why do we think "debate" is the right way to explore points of view?',
If someone knows of practical workable other ways of resolving our differences of opinion, I'd love to hear about them.
Yes, I'm a man. And I have an ego that gets out of control at times. But I strive to understand other people's perspectives, and to give them appropriate "weight" — which might not be much. I do find myself being wrong at times, and strive to correct my mistakes.
@mrrmot @cford @hacks4pancakes
I might be crazy, dysfunctional, or a bad person. But I have always thought of software development and design being inherently about conflict resolution. I find that we often have different beliefs about how things are, and what would be best, for both short and long term.
Different opinions on observable facts about reality should be easy to resolve, I'd think. But often turn out to be surprisingly difficult to get agreement on.
@mrrmot @cford @hacks4pancakes
Once we agree on the basic observable facts, I find that predictions about the future can be quite subjective. And rational decision making must involve expectations about likely future consequences, I would think.
@kentenmakto @mrrmot @cford @hacks4pancakes
A response that seems to keep fading in and out of accessibility with 404 and 500 errors:
Patrick Morris Miller
@kentenmakto
@JeffGrigg @mrrmot @CFord @hacks4pancakes
Debate is not 'practical' or 'workable'.
https://mastodon.social/@kentenmakto@mastodon.ie/116193760507688125
@kentenmakto @mrrmot @cford @hacks4pancakes @CFord @hacks4pancakes
Arguing can be destructive.
Debate can be fraught.
Respectful Discussion is desirable. Keeping it positive and productive can be difficult.
What good alternatives do we have for resolving our differences?
Ignoring legitimate disagreements or trying to pretend that they don't exist also has its "downsides."
"Agree on the basic observable facts" is not a thing in at least one country with an enormous lot of highly concentrated power and wealth.
@JeffGrigg Seems like there's been quite a bit of discussion that I haven't kept up with...
To answer your question about other ways of resolving differences of opinion, my take is that you can discuss ideas and resolve conflicts without an adversarial system. I don't think I'm debating you now, because we haven't taken opposing stances that we are prosecuting. Yet I hope that we're learning from each other.
Lesley Carhart 
Chris Ford 
The cat who walks thru walls
Jeff Grigg
Isocat
Patrick Morris Miller