To me it is about gaslighting and arguing for the sake of arguing. We’ve long been in this realm of society now where nobody wants facts or truths, they just want you to be wrong. I have before, cited resources in arguments I’ve shamefully invested in, knowing that it will not matter in the end. Because I’m still going to be called a liar, I’m still going to be subjected to insults and be baited and gaslit.
And the same people still turn around and expect credible sources to be provided to them? Why ask when you don’t care?
It is one thing for someone to make outrageous, blatant and unclaimed arguments than it is another who talks of something and it has a resemblance of truth to it.
Where I was going with that is if you’re going to bother investing in an argument you know is a waste of time with these kinds of people, it is kind of shameful. That is basing what you already know to be factual. Double-checking isn’t wrong either but again, doesn’t apply to people who’re not open-minded.
it’s called sealioning and it is shameful, but not as shameful as when they will only accept sources that confirm their beliefs; it gets even worse with those sources take efforts to hide their biases like the new york times.