I tend to think one ought to look at literature on persuasion before making large claims about what is and isn't persuasive. Just saying!
-
@SIN_Notung@PhilosophyExp Cynically, I think it's a method of just feeling superior to others. Using snark implies opponents = idiots.
@Humanisticus @SIN_Notung But there are instances where snark has been devastatingly effective - e.g, the way Kinnock was annihilated...
-
-
@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung Of course, I am not claiming any absolutes. Also I can imagine snark is more persuasive when you are 1/Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung the target e.g. in a debate, it might be helpful in persuading viewers, fence-sitters. 2/ -
.
@Humanisticus@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung Or locking in people who are members of the tribe but might waver. Mix of cruel pleasure and fear.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung But I would guess less effective in persuading your more direct opponents simply because the use of snark 3/Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung implies opponents are dumb. People reacted less amicably to being insulted.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.