DEV Community

Discussion on: The Future of Programming - Rejected!

 
stereobooster profile image
stereobooster • Edited

No, it is a personal attack. It doesn't lead to constructive conversation. It leads to hate and pitchforks.

I'm not saying that we should tolerate climate change deniers or flat-earthers.

But I'm saying that personal attacks against them:

  • don't put you in a good light
  • don't show why they are wrong
  • increase the temperature of conversation and leads to emotional behavior instead of augmented conversation e.g. you use the same emotional tools that science deniers do. How is that better?

Instead, we should educate people. Show them how to rely on rational arguments, show them how their emotions can be employed to trick them in wrong decisions, show what fallacies are, talk about biases.

Why do quacks exist? Because of lack of education, lack of critical thinking, because quacks use our emotional nature.