167
submitted 1 year ago by x4740N@lemmy.world to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net

Sharing this post from mildyinteresting Community because I think you'll be interested in it over here in the solarpunk community

Sorry if I have accidentally reposted it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Right... And you don't see any glaring differences between to two?

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

There are differences, obviously, but I don't know which of those differences would make one of them natural. Nature didn't create either of them; they are both man-made constructions.

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But using your intuitions, which one do you think the person responded to above meant as more natural?

Probably the one that doesn't use electricity, right?

It feels like being obtuse for no reason.

[-] x4740N@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You are correct

I used the words "natural technology" because it felt like the best word to describe natural solutions like the air tower in the image

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So, electricity is unnatural and hence bad? Is that the point being made here? Because the original opinion was that we should focus on natural solutions over artificial ones, and I asked the question in an effort to understand why they would say that.

Instead of arguing against a guess (or "intuition") of what they mean, I think it's constructive to find out exactly what they mean first. That way we're not just talking past one another in the typical, polarized internet fashion.

[-] x4740N@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's not what being said at all

Electricity is a form of energy but its created using other forms of energy and there are losses from conversion becsuse we don't have 100% efficency so it would be better to use other forms of energy that are naturally present when possible to avoid losses of energy from converting them to electricity

Then you only need to use electricity as necessary

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Where did I say any of that?

I'm not arguing for good or bad anything. What do you think this conversation is?

Reread this discussion. I was exclusively talking about how it's blatantly obvious that a tunnel with water to chill air is more natural than an AC unit - and you're pretending to not understand that.

Stop trying to fight and we wouldn't be taking past each other.

OP didn't even say one was worse or better. He just said to look for lower maintenance and energy use. And again - that's blatantly obvious between an AC unit and a TUNNEL WITH WATER.

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not claiming you said anything was good or bad. The very top comment, which is what I responded to, said "we should really use natural technology first amd supplement it with artificial technology". That's not your comment. And then you got into the discussion with all these non-answers to my question, implying that something is "blatantly obvious" instead of actually answering my simple question. It only needed to be a single plain answer, but here we are knee-deep in noise and passive-aggressive attacks.

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I want to to write out, so it's in a permanent record on your account that you don't know which one of those two is more natural.

Copy and paste this if you truly can't tell: "I, tias, have no clue what's more natural - an AC Unit or a tunnel with water."

Because that's what you're saying right? You can't tell right?

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Can you honestly not tell which is more natural between an AC UNIT and a TUNNEL WITH WATER? You really can't tell?

P.S. You 100% said I was arguing that electricity was bad.

You: "So, electricity is unnatural and hence bad? Is that the point being made here?"

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Again, in that instance I wasn't talking about what you are arguing. The only thing I've wanted to find out since the beginning of this discussion is what the original comment meant. This isn't about you.

And no, to me "natural" means created by nature and "artificial" means created by humans. So neither is natural. But that's not relevant because we're not talking about my definition of natural. We're talking about what they meant.

Do you not see that my whole point of asking is to understand the other person's view instead of adding my own assumptions? That words do not mean exactly the same thing for everyone? I don't know why this makes you so upset. Is it bad to try to understand the other person's ideas before arguing about them?

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've never seen someone other than my middle school students resist critical thinking this hard.

My first comment was asking you what you THOUGHT THEY meant. And you said I don't know. You couldn't even try to work it out? When it's blatantly obvious. When they even explained it in their comment? They literally outlined what they wanted in their comment. Why did you ignore that part of it to focus on natural vs unnatural?

You're also already arguing about them - even after you said you don't know. Its getting real fucking obvious you're just looking for a fight. That's why you had to push an argument onto me - that you then pretended you didn't do.

[-] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yikes. Putting someone this rigid and unempathetic in a teaching position makes me worried for society. These kind of values are what makes people polarized and unable to understand one another. It's the opposite of what we need right now.

You've gone to doing exactly what I was trying not to do with OP, i.e. to put words in my mouth. Somehow you now think your assumptions about what I meant are more valid than what I say I meant. I don't see a point in continuing this conversation since I'd just be a hostage to your interpretations. Bye.

[-] Platomus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Get called out for being disingenuous and then run away. Nice.

When did I put any words in your mouth? What did I say you said? What did I imply you said?

Edit: lololol at not even taking accountant. Just going to downvote and run away. Can't say what words I put in your mouth can you? Because I didn't. I asked you question for clarification and you took it as an attack.

this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
167 points (97.7% liked)

Solarpunk

5332 readers
68 users here now

The space to discuss Solarpunk itself and Solarpunk related stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.

What is Solarpunk?

Join our chat: Movim or XMPP client.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS