Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 9528794" data-attributes="member: 58416">I'm not hedging anything. You asked a question, and I answered what I would do given a situation that you had presented.In return, I asked what you would do given a situation that I had presented.As previous comments had talked about approaches to information and exploring thought patterns, it's a relevant question.It's not any type of gotcha or anything like that.It's simply a question: Given a choice between a distasteful source with accurate information or a palatable source with faulty information, which source of information would you choose?Personally, I would generally want the better information. I certainly do see value in a more human approach to giving/getting information. I think (for me personally) the weight I would give to each of pathos, logos, and ethos depends upon what I am learning. If I am training for combat (or combat sports -which I have,) I find value in a harsh teacher. Sometimes, the best way to fix a hole in a technique is to feel what it's like to be hit. In such a case, I would choose the teacher with better information and actually want more harshness.If I am exchanging information conversationally or having a philosophical discussion, being hit in the face is neither desired nor necessary. My own (brief) anecdotal experience with pre-Elon Xwitter was that it was a high amount of harshness combined with a low amount of value. As such, I chose not to use it.</blockquote>

Verification