It always shocks me just how little regard internet pedants have for the harm they can do just generally. Like, you'll be discussing something particular and they'll jump in with unrelated gender essentialism or medical misinformation or political misrepresentations and you'll feel like you have to teach an entire freshman seminar to correct them just so they don't hurt someone else with their ignorance.
Really appreciate the discussion of this topic, I'm strongly in favour of getting into the habit of ignoring people who just come in with obnoxious pedantry. I think making videos has really revealed how often these people aren't worth spending time and effort on, half the "um actually" comments I get are addressed within the next couple minutes of the video, meaning the commenter either stopped watching the second they found something disagreeable, or they continued watching after posting their comment and either didn't comprehend or didn't care that their "argument" was already addressed. Either way, why on Earth would I give that person the time of day? While I'm complaining, I had a guy try to dismiss my last video as "unsourced" despite citing 37 articles, books, and reports throughout a 26 minute video, as well as dozens of pieces of visual evidence. So increasingly I've got to assume these people just don't watch what they're pretending to critique, they are spiritually Twitter bluechecks and will never see the gates of heaven.
I agree with you when you said it is about power. I find these pedantic attempts are underhanded means to invalidate and wrestle attention away from an argument they have emotional Investment in. There are many instances of logical fallacies in pedantic attacks, most commonly Ad Hominem (as seen in the “concerned trolling” you mentioned, and when they mentioned “uneducated”) and appeal to authority (in the references to Plato and old thinkers). It is laborious to read and engage with, and I don’t feel these comments are made in good faith to engage with the discussion in a meaningful way. I know I am not above feeling pedantic or having pedantic impulses, but I feel they are an emotional impulse, and should be curbed. I would also be affected reading pedantic messages, as they are more like a veiled personal attack in an attempt to control the discussion rather than a well meaning inquiry or add on.
I've definitely had this type of argumentation used against me and I can't think of anything more annoying lmao. It's just someone that refuses to understand your point, regardless of if they can understand it. Had an instance where I was trying to convey my point that art (specifically music) isn't "objectively" good or bad. No matter how much I could name plenty of examples of excellent music made by people that didn't study music theory and/or rejected the idea outright, I just kept getting strawmanned. "yeah well someone could drop a pencil on stage and claim it's music/art and they're just as good as mozart" was the actual argument that we kept being looped back to no matter how much I tried advancing the conversation. Very anti-intellectual, very pedantic, and very fucking frustrating lol.
I don't disagree with the point I think you wanted to make, I just think your arguments are bad. He wasn't strawmaning, he was taking your idea of there being no art that is objectively bad and taking it completely literally to it's logical conclusion. He was being pedantic because you were saying something illogical. You in your head know that claiming a pencil dropping on stage is art isn't what you were trying to say, but instead of modifying your argument you just pressed on trying to build on a bad foundation, which your argument partner could not accept because when taken literally your statement is absurd. You should have just said, "All art MADE EARNESTLY can not be rated as objectively good or bad because it only has to live up to the expectations of the creator or target audience. A pencil dropping in this context isn't being done to express anything, requires no effort, and is not original, so it is bad art. However, Baha Men cannot be called objectively worse than Mozart because they are two completely different things with different purposes and meanings." "No matter how much I could name plenty of examples of excellent music made by people that didn't study music theory and/or rejected the idea outright" I don't see how someone untrained being able to create something that fits into what other people consider good music contradicts the idea that art can be objectively rated. There is more than one theory of music. Even to reject theory requires some acknowledgement of it's existence, and those that are ignorant of it are intuitively creating something that fits into existing patterns from culture, or is trying to make a statement by purposely ignoring them. There are even ways to rate things objectively while ignoring theory by using metrics such as, "How many people like this art?" Sure The Beatles weren't big on music theory, but does that mean you can't use music theory to analyze their music or explain why people like it? No. Does that mean music with lot's of poly-rhythms and chromatic scales is better? No. I say this because pedantry can be important when trying to make logical arguments and if we just start inferring what people mean when they use imprecise language then misunderstanding can be multiplied.
@@SpencerLemay so i think you're kinda missing my point with the comment just a tad. was just an example i used, i summarized my conversation for brevity's sake but there was a lot more to the arguments i made. though i don't disagree with what you're exactly saying either. in fact, those were a lot of the other arguments i made in the discussion. my ultimate point being that art is not something that really exists on an objective scale when the very nature of art and creation is rooted in human emotion and expression. any creation that involved the labor and thoughts of humans with the intention to simply share an idea or feeling i feel is qualifying enough. i'd argue that even very cynically made products popped out by a corporation are art, albeit shallow art, because it doesn't exist in a vacuum and its mere existence has at least something to offer by examining the circumstances in which it was made. it's just as a fan of a lot of noise music and punk in general, i'm used to people sticking their noses up at it telling me their music professors taught them what is "real" music and that what i like cannot qualify as music. usually on the basis that it does not adhere to some pre-established rules to make music under. it's a very authoritarian attitude to have, that there's the "right way and wrong way" to express yourself, and certain people are more qualified to speak on art than others. i feel that has no place in a space fueled by human desires and feelings.
There is an expression in Dutch that roughly translates to "kicking in an open door". It comes to mind a lot when I am dealing with pedantry. I think it is not wholly dissimilar to the idea of bicycle shedding in some ways. I try to interpret these situations as someone earnestly pointing out the only grain of sand they can identify around my castle. When I think of it as an honest effort, it is easier for me to tap out of walk away because that sort of stupid is beyond my talents. If I think of them as self aware opponents I find myself overcome with desire to continue throwing myself against their shores in pursuit of this prized admission at the core of their stronghold that they do not genuinely hold such and such belief of position, and it is a pursuit that more often than not destroys me. I'm excited for this video!
Hahah okay so I just finished the video. When you sort of apologized for the length of time it was taking at the 25 minute mark I was inspired, and the fact that you went 40+ just hit it home I can't resist. Had you considered, Mr. Masterclass, by virtue of Brandolini's Law, that by educating us on pedantry that you are perhaps killing the cold fusion of the internet? And cold fusion good so maybe this bad? Lol jokes aside I very much enjoyed this. Can't wait to see that big video you got cooking.
@@NightmareMasterclass - you do what you have to. We're grateful to get what we do when you put it wherever. [I have] really enjoyed listening/watching your stuff. Admittedly I came for the Petscop but I stayed because it's all interesting. Gratitude. :)
It always shocks me just how little regard internet pedants have for the harm they can do just generally. Like, you'll be discussing something particular and they'll jump in with unrelated gender essentialism or medical misinformation or political misrepresentations and you'll feel like you have to teach an entire freshman seminar to correct them just so they don't hurt someone else with their ignorance.
Really appreciate the discussion of this topic, I'm strongly in favour of getting into the habit of ignoring people who just come in with obnoxious pedantry. I think making videos has really revealed how often these people aren't worth spending time and effort on, half the "um actually" comments I get are addressed within the next couple minutes of the video, meaning the commenter either stopped watching the second they found something disagreeable, or they continued watching after posting their comment and either didn't comprehend or didn't care that their "argument" was already addressed. Either way, why on Earth would I give that person the time of day?
While I'm complaining, I had a guy try to dismiss my last video as "unsourced" despite citing 37 articles, books, and reports throughout a 26 minute video, as well as dozens of pieces of visual evidence. So increasingly I've got to assume these people just don't watch what they're pretending to critique, they are spiritually Twitter bluechecks and will never see the gates of heaven.
"how do you know a politician is lying?" (their mouth is moving).
"How do you know a pedantic is argumenting? (you're on the internet).
"this is going to be a quick video"
I know, I have a problem.
@@NightmareMasterclass I appraciated the length of the video. I listened to it while studying.
I agree with you when you said it is about power.
I find these pedantic attempts are underhanded means to invalidate and wrestle attention away from an argument they have emotional Investment in. There are many instances of logical fallacies in pedantic attacks, most commonly Ad Hominem (as seen in the “concerned trolling” you mentioned, and when they mentioned “uneducated”) and appeal to authority (in the references to Plato and old thinkers). It is laborious to read and engage with, and I don’t feel these comments are made in good faith to engage with the discussion in a meaningful way.
I know I am not above feeling pedantic or having pedantic impulses, but I feel they are an emotional impulse, and should be curbed. I would also be affected reading pedantic messages, as they are more like a veiled personal attack in an attempt to control the discussion rather than a well meaning inquiry or add on.
I've definitely had this type of argumentation used against me and I can't think of anything more annoying lmao. It's just someone that refuses to understand your point, regardless of if they can understand it. Had an instance where I was trying to convey my point that art (specifically music) isn't "objectively" good or bad. No matter how much I could name plenty of examples of excellent music made by people that didn't study music theory and/or rejected the idea outright, I just kept getting strawmanned. "yeah well someone could drop a pencil on stage and claim it's music/art and they're just as good as mozart" was the actual argument that we kept being looped back to no matter how much I tried advancing the conversation. Very anti-intellectual, very pedantic, and very fucking frustrating lol.
I don't disagree with the point I think you wanted to make, I just think your arguments are bad.
He wasn't strawmaning, he was taking your idea of there being no art that is objectively bad and taking it completely literally to it's logical conclusion. He was being pedantic because you were saying something illogical. You in your head know that claiming a pencil dropping on stage is art isn't what you were trying to say, but instead of modifying your argument you just pressed on trying to build on a bad foundation, which your argument partner could not accept because when taken literally your statement is absurd.
You should have just said, "All art MADE EARNESTLY can not be rated as objectively good or bad because it only has to live up to the expectations of the creator or target audience. A pencil dropping in this context isn't being done to express anything, requires no effort, and is not original, so it is bad art. However, Baha Men cannot be called objectively worse than Mozart because they are two completely different things with different purposes and meanings."
"No matter how much I could name plenty of examples of excellent music made by people that didn't study music theory and/or rejected the idea outright"
I don't see how someone untrained being able to create something that fits into what other people consider good music contradicts the idea that art can be objectively rated. There is more than one theory of music. Even to reject theory requires some acknowledgement of it's existence, and those that are ignorant of it are intuitively creating something that fits into existing patterns from culture, or is trying to make a statement by purposely ignoring them. There are even ways to rate things objectively while ignoring theory by using metrics such as, "How many people like this art?" Sure The Beatles weren't big on music theory, but does that mean you can't use music theory to analyze their music or explain why people like it? No.
Does that mean music with lot's of poly-rhythms and chromatic scales is better? No.
I say this because pedantry can be important when trying to make logical arguments and if we just start inferring what people mean when they use imprecise language then misunderstanding can be multiplied.
@@SpencerLemay so i think you're kinda missing my point with the comment just a tad. was just an example i used, i summarized my conversation for brevity's sake but there was a lot more to the arguments i made.
though i don't disagree with what you're exactly saying either. in fact, those were a lot of the other arguments i made in the discussion. my ultimate point being that art is not something that really exists on an objective scale when the very nature of art and creation is rooted in human emotion and expression. any creation that involved the labor and thoughts of humans with the intention to simply share an idea or feeling i feel is qualifying enough. i'd argue that even very cynically made products popped out by a corporation are art, albeit shallow art, because it doesn't exist in a vacuum and its mere existence has at least something to offer by examining the circumstances in which it was made.
it's just as a fan of a lot of noise music and punk in general, i'm used to people sticking their noses up at it telling me their music professors taught them what is "real" music and that what i like cannot qualify as music. usually on the basis that it does not adhere to some pre-established rules to make music under. it's a very authoritarian attitude to have, that there's the "right way and wrong way" to express yourself, and certain people are more qualified to speak on art than others. i feel that has no place in a space fueled by human desires and feelings.
is your new icon you as a 3d worker island person
mayyybeee
There is an expression in Dutch that roughly translates to "kicking in an open door". It comes to mind a lot when I am dealing with pedantry. I think it is not wholly dissimilar to the idea of bicycle shedding in some ways. I try to interpret these situations as someone earnestly pointing out the only grain of sand they can identify around my castle. When I think of it as an honest effort, it is easier for me to tap out of walk away because that sort of stupid is beyond my talents.
If I think of them as self aware opponents I find myself overcome with desire to continue throwing myself against their shores in pursuit of this prized admission at the core of their stronghold that they do not genuinely hold such and such belief of position, and it is a pursuit that more often than not destroys me.
I'm excited for this video!
Hahah okay so I just finished the video.
When you sort of apologized for the length of time it was taking at the 25 minute mark I was inspired, and the fact that you went 40+ just hit it home I can't resist.
Had you considered, Mr. Masterclass, by virtue of Brandolini's Law, that by educating us on pedantry that you are perhaps killing the cold fusion of the internet? And cold fusion good so maybe this bad?
Lol jokes aside I very much enjoyed this. Can't wait to see that big video you got cooking.
Releasing all the exclusives!😊
Yeah, I really don't like keeping things behind a paywall tbh.
@@NightmareMasterclass - you do what you have to. We're grateful to get what we do when you put it wherever. [I have] really enjoyed listening/watching your stuff. Admittedly I came for the Petscop but I stayed because it's all interesting. Gratitude. :)
great video