Back when people were saying that unlimited access to knowledge was possible, they were also saying “don’t feed the trolls”.
When you engage with someone making a stupid statement or argument, you lend them your intellectual legitimacy. You implicitly acknowledge that, “this viewpoint is grounded enough to be worthy of debate”. In reality, some viewpoints are so absurd and ridiculous that they are not worthy of debate, and you get a societal benefit from simply laughing at them rather than engaging with them like they are legitimate people that can be persuaded by science and debate.
Where this approach falls apart is where the argument they’re making is convincing enough that it might appear legitimate to a less informed reader than you. The reader may not engage with the comment, but, if there’s no counter-argument, instead go away believing it may have some validity.
Obviously thus doesn’t apply to the more blatant forms of trolling, but even that distinction can be blurry.
Back when people were saying that unlimited access to knowledge was possible, they were also saying “don’t feed the trolls”.
When you engage with someone making a stupid statement or argument, you lend them your intellectual legitimacy. You implicitly acknowledge that, “this viewpoint is grounded enough to be worthy of debate”. In reality, some viewpoints are so absurd and ridiculous that they are not worthy of debate, and you get a societal benefit from simply laughing at them rather than engaging with them like they are legitimate people that can be persuaded by science and debate.
Stop feeding the trolls.
Where this approach falls apart is where the argument they’re making is convincing enough that it might appear legitimate to a less informed reader than you. The reader may not engage with the comment, but, if there’s no counter-argument, instead go away believing it may have some validity.
Obviously thus doesn’t apply to the more blatant forms of trolling, but even that distinction can be blurry.