This is a useful exploration, and it could do with a small summary of other options. “If you don’t understand, and can’t be confident in your steelman, you should …”
In interactive scenarios (when discussing something in good faith among individuals or a small group where status among outsiders is not hugely at stake), “active listening” is a great way to gain the understanding, and steelmaning someone’s ideas BACK TO THEM is a great way for them to correct you, where strawmanning just makes them defensive. Depending on the person, simple questions may be more effective than either.
In public scenarios, questioning and asking specifically about points you don’t understand is often better than offering steelman suggestions for them to accept or correct.
In advocacy scenarios, especially broadcast-like ones where there’s very little followup, strawmanning is annoyingly effective. There really are a lot of readers who have soldier mindset rather than growth.
This is a useful exploration, and it could do with a small summary of other options. “If you don’t understand, and can’t be confident in your steelman, you should …”
In interactive scenarios (when discussing something in good faith among individuals or a small group where status among outsiders is not hugely at stake), “active listening” is a great way to gain the understanding, and steelmaning someone’s ideas BACK TO THEM is a great way for them to correct you, where strawmanning just makes them defensive. Depending on the person, simple questions may be more effective than either.
In public scenarios, questioning and asking specifically about points you don’t understand is often better than offering steelman suggestions for them to accept or correct.
In advocacy scenarios, especially broadcast-like ones where there’s very little followup, strawmanning is annoyingly effective. There really are a lot of readers who have soldier mindset rather than growth.
This is really useful feedback, thank you.
I really like this: inviting them to correct me.