• Lib: China bad
  • Actual leftist: It's not that simple and you're being lied to.
  • Lib: ok but China still bad
  • Actual leftist: Here are some sources to read up on.
  • Lib: ugh don't make me research, it's probably propaganda, and anyway, let me reiterate my point--China bad
  • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
    ·
    4 years ago

    there’s no reason to criticize “reading articles on the internet,”

    There is when that is taken to be research in of itself.

    But this definition isn’t a good one, anyway, as research often involves nothing more than finding an authoritative source and processing what it has to say

    Lot of heavy lifting being done by 'processing' there, ignoring what it means for a source to be 'authoritative'.

    If I’m researching how to fix the brakes on my bike I don’t need to synthesize new knowledge

    Yes you absolutely do. I can and have read all about baking a certain type of loaf or fixing the sagging brake cable on my bike, but is not accurate to say I know how to fix it, because the application of what I read did not lead to a fixed brake cable.

    When you read a source on subject matter, it's important to not confuse the knowledge of "what a source has to say about the subject matter" with "knowledge of the subject matter itself." This point totally uncontroversial when it comes to calling out mainstream US reporting but is apparently anathema when applied to anything else.