Do forums reward intellectual honesty?

[potatoes chip]

Example of a discussion - one of many:

Person A makes an argument

Person B responds with a counter argument that I call “counter argument 32554”

Person A then quotes “counter argument 32554” and responds by saying: “We are both correct my friend” followed by what person A believes to be an “on point” explanation on how person A and Person B are BOTH correct.

Person B then says something implying that person A has not responded to “counter argument 32554”.

Person A then chooses to stop.  He wonders if the provided explanation was in fact “on point” or if Person B missed seeing the explanation.

This forum is absolutely great!    It allows people to freely ask questions and give opinions on anything related to piano and music and every other subject under the son.

Now my question: Do forums reward intellectual honesty?

My experience has been that people often divide into 2 competing camps.  Both sides cherry pick facts and responses and ignore others.  There appears to be no attempt at a good faith search for the truth.  Instead, people just double down on their beliefs and are rewarded for their cherry picked facts and responses that often escalates to name calling and insults.

I saw a response from someone that might be the best way to give an alternate point of view.  Someone said most of composer X’s etudes have no musical value.  To which another person responded: “That's funny, I think rather the opposite. There are many really boring Etudes out there but the composer X’s Etudes are actually enjoyable as pieces of music.” And that was the end of the discussion. 

I apologize if this thread topic or my opening post here offends anyone.  I’m hoping there will be no name calling or insults made in this thread. 

[essence]

How many accounts do you have?

[potatoes chip]

How many accounts do you have?

Fair question.  I have maybe 25+ accounts, but I lose access to my prior account before creating a new account using my secret method.  I can never log in to one of my old accounts. 

Why am I doing this?  I don't have a good reason and I can see how this would be extremely annoying to others and so I apologize. I keep telling myself that forum participation FOR ME does not work largely because I believe it fosters bad faith (intellectually dishonest) arguments.  This is something that I am passionate about.  But I believe Piano Street is the BEST of ALL forums.  I do not participate in any other forum. 

Do I always argue in good faith?  I'm not perfect.  But I try my best and I always keep asking myself - have I considered the other person's point of view?  I wish I could teach others the concept of intellectual honesty by demonstrating it in my forum posts.  I try my best but I am unable to succeed.

Is AI good or bad?  For me and some others it's good.  For some others it is bad.  Will it be good or bad 100 years from now for humans and our planet?  I don't know.

Are there misunderstandings on forums with imprecise use of the English language?  Absolutely!  And often times people are arguing 2 completely different questions without realizing it!  I am absolutely guilty of not expressing myself accurately and precisely.  And this can add to the problem.   But not arguing in good faith (intellectual dishonesty) is BY FAR the biggest problem in forum communication IMO along with the associated name calling and insults. 

Liszt:  Why did I bring your "octave spam" definition to the AI thread?  Because I thought YOU redefined the word "spam" so it would make your statement saying something to the effect of "[The Liszt sonata passage in question] is octave spam" a fact.  I said to myself: How can I have a discussion with someone that changes the definition of a word on the spot just so he can say his statement was fact, not an opinion?  Well, I was wrong and I apologize.  I still find your octave spam definition to be hilarious - sorry!

[potatoes chip]

Thinking back, I’m terrible at teaching intellectual honesty and empathy! 

In one discussion, I pointed out that millions of people still love the Chopin competition.  I was hoping to get just one of the haters of the competition to admit that maybe it would be best to consult with others before unilaterally abolishing the contest.  No, the President of Poland cannot unilaterally abolish the International Chopin Piano Competition.  I must have not communicated that this is all I was looking for.  I am a terrible communicator and I take full responsibility for not making my intentions clear.

I was only looking for a statement from just one of the haters saying they would not unilaterally abolish the Chopin contest that millions love - like a dictator might do - IF they had the power to abolish it unilaterally.

Again, I’m terrible at teaching intellectual honesty and empathy. Oh well  .  But that's okay! 

Hey everyone, just a quick reminder to please be kind and avoid name-calling. It’s totally fine to share different perspectives, but let's make sure we keep it polite! 

__________________________________________________________________________________
Edit:  Proposed statement by benevolent dictator: 

As great dictator with unrivaled empathy and intellectual honesty, and out of respect for the millions who love the Chopin competition: I will form a large committee that will consult with many musicians and comrades who love the competition and an equal number of those that don’t like it to discuss ways to improve the competition.  I will be a committee member and will have no more power than any other committee member.  The goal is simply to improve the competition.  I hereby pledge to not be a ruthless dictator like Stalin who enforced his very oppressive laws on music that made the lives of musicians and composers miserable and scared everyone to death.

[j_tour]

No, not especially.

No more than IRL actual people "reward" various desired behaviors.

Use more punctuation, son.

Not any offense intended to you in particular, but your OP is a bit dense.

New word for you, for the day:  the pilcrow.

Or even the silcrow will do. 

Ask a Finn.  They'll tell you about the proper use of the silcrow.

[gasplamey]

Frodo as I saisd on the Chopin thread youfr way of arguing is insane. Your the least 'intellecutally honest' person on this forum.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Frotato has seemingly defined “being intellectually dishonest” as “arguing in bad faith:”

bad faith (intellectually dishonest) arguments.

In this case, the answer to the question posed by the thread is “not really.” Forums don’t really reward any sort of rhetorical nuance, and often the most extreme positions will rise to become the most popular ones (the various chan boards are a good example, and for your own safety don’t “look for yourself”).

On anonymous forums, it's also easy to simply create an alternate account and effectively start with a clean slate.

Something that forums do reward is toxic/bad faith “debate tactics” that look smart, but are really just people being sh_tty human beings. According to Frotato’s definition, these are “intellectually dishonest” as they are forms of bad faith argument. A few examples include:
- Whataboutism (saying “what about ______” instead of making a real counterargument).
Example:

6) What about a played sideways scale?  How does OC sound played sideways?

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=65776.msg693757#msg693757 (reply #22)


- Taking tiny portions of a long conversation and not giving context in order to frame someone else as “unreasonable” or something to that effect.
Example:

In one discussion, I pointed out that millions of people still love the Chopin competition.  I was hoping to get just one of the haters of the competition to admit that maybe it would be best to consult with others before unilaterally abolishing the contest.  No, the President of Poland cannot unilaterally abolish the International Chopin Piano Competition.
...
I was only looking for a statement from just one of the haters saying they would not unilaterally abolish the Chopin contest that millions love - like a dictator might do - IF they had the power to abolish it unilaterally.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=80470.0 (reply #3)
Original context: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=72517


- Sockpuppeting multiple accounts to agree with you and create a false sense of consensus.
I don't feel the need to give an example of this one.


- Sealioning (harassing someone, usually with insincere requests for evidence, while being “unfailingly polite”).
Example:

What evidence can I offer to the FBI about the money laundering problem that you describe?

I absolutely agree that you (Rach) are correctly identifying a money laundering scheme!

Gentlemen:  We are in agreement.  Rach has correctly identified a money laundering scheme.  Where we may differ:  I believe these criminals need to be put in jail.  I have faith that the FBI will do this if we can get enough evidence.  We are just a little short of evidence, but we are close.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=66555.300 (replies #324 and #331) (This is also a case of a strawman; see below.)


- The Jordan Peterson thing where you obsess over the exact definitions of words that often have zero relevance to the discussion.
Example:

OCTAVE SPAM – Please explain why you are using the word "spam". 

Spam is any unsolicited, bulk digital communication. The term typically refers to unwanted emails, text messages, social media direct messages, or phone calls. It is primarily sent out for commercial advertising, phishing (stealing personal data), or distributing malware.

Yes, outside of the specific brand of canned meat, the word "spam" almost exclusively carries negative connotations. It refers to unwanted, intrusive, or malicious content, and is synonymous with annoyance and digital clutter.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=80403.0 (reply #14 in a thread about LLMs)
Original thread: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=80392.0


- Variations on strawman arguments, red herrings, and moving the goalposts.
Example:

Is AI good or bad?  This is my original question. ... The question may have been better written as follows:

Will AI ultimately be shown to be good or bad for humans and our planet 100 years from now or 1000 years from now or 100,000 years from now?

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=80403.0 (reply #27)

- Argumentum ad hominem (attacking the character of the person making an argument, usually because you can’t defeat the argument itself).
Example:

And I would ask that you reflect on you dictatorial impulses.  Do you guys have wives, children?

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=72517 (reply #35)



I’ve listed a few other things that I would definitely say are arguing in bad faith below. I may add more to this list in the future.
- Any form of bigotry, e.g. transphobia.
Example:

How can I have a discussion with someone that changes the definition of a word on the spot just so he can say his statement was fact, not an opinion?

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=80470.0 (reply #2)

- Leaving an argument in one thread by moving to a different thread to have that argument.
Example:

Someone says "All the contestants of the Chopin competition are white and East Asian."

The prior statement does have a quantifier - the word "All". Assuming the prior statement is true (which I would argue is not true), is the following a true statement?

The competition's appeal shows that the emotional intensity of Chopin's work—from the haunting melancholy of his nocturnes to the fiery passion of his ballades—transcends cultural and historical differences.

The answer is YES.  It transcends cultural and historical differences. It transcends cultural and historical differences of the white and East Asian communities.

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=7833.6800 (reply #6837; as someone else said in response, “You said you were done engaging then responded to my comment in a different post.”)
Original context: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=72517

How many accounts do[es Frotato] have?

I’ve been meaning to get this straight as well…

The ones that I’m 100% certain about:
Georgey
Jacobson
“maybe a couple others, like newperson”
Frodo 1-7
Frodo_explanation
Frodo 8-11
Fender
Frodo 12-13
Ghost_of_frodo13
Potato_chip
Potatoes chip

Total: 21+
Source for the first three lines: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=71907.msg737082#msg737082

The ones that I’m pretty sure about:
Pashkuli
Balbolka
Newbie2
Potato12
Ghost_of_potato

New total: 26+
Source: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=72381.0 (starting at reply #23)

I think thorn was right that all five of these accounts were the same person (reply #28 in the above thread), and newbie2/potato12/ghost_of_potato have the exact same writing style as Frodo, and have a similar username scheme.

I lose access to my prior account before creating a new account using my secret method.  I can never log in to one of my old accounts. 
...
I do not participate in any other forum.

If thorn is correct, then both of these claims are untrue. Pashkuli/balbolka and newbie2/potato12/ghost_of_potato were frequently active at the same time, spamming in the same three troll threads. Several of them also mentioned being banned from other forums in the past. I believe the offending threads have been removed.

Frotato (as ghost_of_potato) already denied that they were the same person as pashkuli/balbolka. Ultimately, regardless of whether they are the same person, the fact that Frotato has made so many alts means that I personally have a hard time believing that claim. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this is one place where I just can’t do that.

And regardless, the first rule on the forum is ”one account per person.” Not “one account per person at a time” or something to that effect. https://www.pianostreet.com/forumrules.php