Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I generally find 'Whataboutism' to be an incredibly annoying form of argument. Sometimes though there are useful arguments about priorities of the form: 'x is a problem but y is such a larger problem that spending time and energy on x instead of y is actually an additional problem'. Is there a useful strategy to help distinguish such an argument from 'Whataboutism' when constructing such an argument?

(Note: I don't think the grandparent's argument is of this form as there don't seem to be any obvious shared constrained resources which could be applied to reduce precious metal mining that are instead directed at reducing bitcoin mining ... I'm curious though if you have any suggestions for how to shift one's thinking when _trying_ to make an argument about priorities so as to help prevent oneself from making arguments that amount to whataboutism ...)



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: