immibis 4 days ago

If you had the chance to debate Hitler, would you start by entertaining the idea that maybe the Jews do need to be exterminated from Germany? Or would you see that as obviously absurd?

2
asimpletune 4 days ago

From a rhetorical point of view, yeah it may have a better chance to change their mind. Start out the idiot, assume they're right, but then ask sincerely why. After they've explained why then go back to trying to understand how their solution does that.

Many people have been conditioned to gain energy and meaning from confrontation. But when you let them explain their views they suddenly become a lot more open to being wrong about some but not all of the details.

Slowly slowly this leads to minds being changed.

I think a lot of technical debates can also be solved this way. Ask people to help you understand what they’re saying, repeat back what they said so they know you got it, and then ask about how it world work in x, y, z scenarios. Talking like this has the best chance of success.

spencerflem 4 days ago

Yeah I'm with you that its the better debate strategy.

I don't have the heart for it though. Block and move on

whatnow37373 4 days ago

While painful I do think that’s a more productive mindset to enter the talk (not debate) with.

His reasons for doing so are presumably not all that rational so I’d steer clear off obvious bear traps like rationality.

I liken it more to how you engage with angry toddlers or teens. Acknowledge the issue first. Share their pain and then you can try alternatives.

Not saying I think “talking” will be helpful with guys like Hitler, but I’m not much of an assassin so if I personally where to be put on the spot I have very few other options than try this route of, at least attempted, understanding.