The implication of emoticons in serious debate - Yay or Nay? - OG Myth-Weavers

Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


The implication of emoticons in serious debate - Yay or Nay?

 
View Poll Results
The implication of emoticons in serious debate - Yay or Nay?
...this is considered an actual serious problem? O.o 4 66.67%
It is inappropriate for a serious topic and I do not enjoy it. 2 33.33%


The implication of emoticons in serious debate - Yay or Nay?

So it came up in debate recently that emoticons weren't considered appropriate by some in serious debate, because it was too silly for super-serial topics like immigration and so on. Apparently, a common method to express emotions over the internet or defuse a situation was considered inappropriate by enough people and a moderator, so I figured it posed the legitimate point; is it okay to use emoticons in a serious debate?

This also brings up the discussion of whether or not it's okay to be silly about a serious topic at all. Famous movies, such as Life is Beautiful (which is a favorite of mine) portrayed the Holocaust in a humorous, but still respectful manner. It made light of a terrible situation and in doing so was able to show the absolute absurdity of the issue at hand, while still being faithful to the original information. In this way we could perhaps talk more in depth about a terrible situation, by being able to witness it without reflexively cringing at something horrible put in front of us; in other words, it made it easier to digest, and thus absorb the message. It was only the Jester who could speak ill of the King, because he did it in a way that wasn't too deriding. Stephen Colbert and John Stewart got huge Republican followings, because they could speak to them in a manner that was humorous when criticizing them, and have even been able to criticize their own fellow democrats. Can humor be used in a super serious discussion, can sillyness or a break in extremeness or, should it be avoided?


Let me know what you think, Mythweavers!

There is a tricky topic. I think humor in debate is perfectly fine, but it should never become the main focus of your message.

Emoticons, however, aren't humor. They are placeholders for words and tone. Especially in a live debate setting, they should never be used. Text-based debates, it's best to find other ways to make your message clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snakeman830 View Post
There is a tricky topic. I think humor in debate is perfectly fine, but it should never become the main focus of your message.

Emoticons, however, aren't humor. They are placeholders for words and tone. Especially in a live debate setting, they should never be used. Text-based debates, it's best to find other ways to make your message clear.
If you can use an emoticon to denote a humorous message or express emotion, shouldn't it be used in that context, then?

And why should they never be used; also, why does everything have to be super serious, all the time? If we take things way more seriously than they are, I.E. an internet conversation which can lead to an informal debate at best, than don't we lose sight of the context? People already are so harsh to each other online because they take what's online too seriously as is. I think we need to defuse that, rather than promote it and isolate ourselves in a perpetual state of unnecessary agitation.

Emoticons have their place, primarily in short-form communication where tone can't be conveyed due to a lack of content/context. Single sentence text messages, for instance, which could be seen as passive-aggressive can have their intent conveyed more accurately with an emoticon at the end.

Once upon a time I was a purist about these things, but I see that emoticons have some utility that's not available otherwise without a ton of extra work.

For a place like Worldly Talk? I don't find them appropriate in general, except maybe following a deliberately sarcastic statement or humorous aside (to clarify that its intended to be sarcastic/humorous). Whether such sarcasm or humor is, itself, in good taste is another question.

Impact is greater than intent: while you may intend emoticons to mean a certain thing, they are vague enough that their meaning is easily misconstrued. It is the gross imprecision of them that makes them unsuitable for "serious" debate.

The reason why everything has to be super serious all the time is that humor is serious business: even when you are using it, it plays a very powerful role, and so should be used with all due respect and caution. Humor can be a wonderful way to get people to lower their natural defenses, making them more likely to consider a position that they'd otherwise reject out of hand. That's good, certainly. But humor can also be used to reinforce rigid social norms: you find this most common in the "us vs them" or "those blankity blanks are so blankity" types of jokes (at the same time, it can help strengthen other social bonds as well). Additionally, humor is a common ploy used by unscrupulous people to attempt to deflect valid criticism levied against them (the classic "I was only joking" response.)

But as Snakeman pointed out, nothing about emoticons is inherently humorous. If your joke can't be understood as a joke on its own merit, then you've either misjudged your audience or simply aren't funny (though the two could arguably be considered the same thing). You wont make an unfunny jest suddenly funny because you put a poop emoji after it.

Likewise with expressing emotion -- as the saying goes: show, don't tell. If you have to tell me that you're happy, or sad, or whatever, then you're failing at communication. If you are communicating effectively, those emotions will come through what you've actually written, not what you've tagged on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thought View Post
Impact is greater than intent: while you may intend emoticons to mean a certain thing, they are vague enough that their meaning is easily misconstrued. It is the gross imprecision of them that makes them unsuitable for "serious" debate.

The reason why everything has to be super serious all the time is that humor is serious business: even when you are using it, it plays a very powerful role, and so should be used with all due respect and caution. Humor can be a wonderful way to get people to lower their natural defenses, making them more likely to consider a position that they'd otherwise reject out of hand. That's good, certainly. But humor can also be used to reinforce rigid social norms: you find this most common in the "us vs them" or "those blankity blanks are so blankity" types of jokes (at the same time, it can help strengthen other social bonds as well). Additionally, humor is a common ploy used by unscrupulous people to attempt to deflect valid criticism levied against them (the classic "I was only joking" response.)

But as Snakeman pointed out, nothing about emoticons is inherently humorous. If your joke can't be understood as a joke on its own merit, then you've either misjudged your audience or simply aren't funny (though the two could arguably be considered the same thing). You wont make an unfunny jest suddenly funny because you put a poop emoji after it.

Likewise with expressing emotion -- as the saying goes: show, don't tell. If you have to tell me that you're happy, or sad, or whatever, then you're failing at communication. If you are communicating effectively, those emotions will come through what you've actually written, not what you've tagged on.
If I have to use incredibly lengthy and wordy sentences to convey my emotions instead of a single emoticon, doesn't that sort of slow things down a bit? Or should I put in parenthesis [intended to be taken as somewhat of a joke] instead of using an emoticon?

Body language is 70% of communication, and trying to explain all that through text is not really a good idea. It's what sarcasm doesn't travel well over the internet. To simply say it's the fault of the user when emoticons were built in explicitly for this purpose, seems like it would only be their fault if they didn't use the specifically built in emoticons.

Also, why are emoticons considered bad in general? Why can't they be considered serious, or why can't someone take a momentary break from the seriousness in a serious conversation? What if not every point is serious? This seems like an oddly specific rule to have.

Quote:
The reason why everything has to be super serious all the time is that humor is serious business: even when you are using it, it plays a very powerful role, and so should be used with all due respect and caution.
Disagreed.

Except we aren't addressing its value (or lack of value) in formal argumentation here, but rather the rules of the forum itself which require behavior above, beyond, and sometimes completely out of relation with formal logic.

For example, Worldly Talk has rules against profanity. That's not a logical fallacy because it doesn't address logic in any way. Profanity simply isn't allowed here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLastForgot View Post
Except we aren't addressing its value (or lack of value) in formal argumentation here, but rather the rules of the forum itself which require behavior above, beyond, and sometimes completely out of relation with formal logic.

For example, Worldly Talk has rules against profanity. That's not a logical fallacy because it doesn't address logic in any way. Profanity simply isn't allowed here.
Regardless of whether or not we're talking about formal argumentation, its use here appears to be an attempt to shut down (rather than promote) discussion, on the basis of tone. As for the behavioral requirements of the rules of the forum, I see no possible way that the use of emoticons could possibly be in violation of the number one rule to, "be excellent to one another."




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2024-03-28 07:20:00pm local time
Myth-Weavers Status