Comment by 1970-01-01
Comment by 1970-01-01 3 days ago
Humans constantly consume microplastic. This is a bad faith argument.
Comment by 1970-01-01 3 days ago
Humans constantly consume microplastic. This is a bad faith argument.
I will disagree. Stating an obviously empirically false, easily observed statement immediately does set the table for a bad faith argument IMHO.
It's only in bad faith if the poster knows the statement to be false. You can't prove that they do, therefore it's pretty rude (to say the least) to accuse them of bad faith. It's also not remotely "easily observable" that humans constantly consume microplastic.
> It's also not remotely "easily observable" that humans constantly consume microplastic.
https://www.google.com/search?q=do+humans+eat+plastic
Less than 500ms on my end. This is turning into a knock-on bad faith argument. I'll end it here, before I need to defend that the earth isn't flat
Just because an argument is wrong (and in this case gp is very wrong), does not mean it is in bad faith. Arguing in bad faith requires intent. I see no evidence of intent in gp's message. Ironically, if it didn't then one could say that dismissing arguments as bad faith (without evidence) of such is itself a form of bad faith, meaning your dismissal would be in bad faith. However, I see no evidence that you intended to argue in bad faith.