“Gen Z isn’t bad at discussion, everyone at the workplace has bad opinions and we shouldn’t have to discuss”
Reality:
Offices aren’t filled to the brim with evil people and yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level. Gen Z probably really does have issues with actual high level discussion because they’ve grown up their whole life surrounded by Internet echo chambers. This includes right wingers.
This is a continuation of the dance around what’s being talked about. The reaction isn’t that ‘other people’s opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion is not genuine opinion, and cannot be tolerated in a peaceful society. But yeah, let’s minimize the opposing view like a cable TV news anchor.
The reaction isn’t that ‘other people’s opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion
The assumption is that this is about oppressive behavior and you’re entitled to hold firm in this mindset. The reality is that there’s likely a genuine issue here and that issue is happily driven and worsened by these sort of assumptions.
Take some time to read up on the person making the claims. Female CEO of a large news network isn’t exactly part of the old boys club.
The article is an opinion piece that is intentionally leaving out what topics they claim are not being debated.
At a time when science has been politicized, it is safe to say these topics are not up for debate. Reality isn’t up for debate. Especially when it is evidence vs opinion.
Offices aren’t filled to the brim with evil people
It depends on what you mean here. If your politics say that LGTBQ+ people don’t deserve to live, that some children just need to die (school lunches being cut), that it’s ok to force raped children to give birth, then, yeah you’reat least a little evil. If you believe that women or people of a different skin color are less than you you’re at least a little evil. Even if you’re a pleasant conversationalist, even if you donate time and money, are kind to children and animals, if you have evil opinions, or support people who do, you are a little evil.
I mean it’s a problem with a lot of Gen Z in the west yes. But where I live someone’s opinion does not affect how well you get along with them, probably because people aren’t addicted to the internet as people are in the west. Also if anything you’re the one who isn’t accepting other’s views lol.
You literally are though, you’re acting as if my views are invalid. I fully respect your beliefs but from the way you’re writing these replies, it doesn’t seem like you’re respecting mine
Actually no, this is not true at all. It’s just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people’s dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Actually no, this is not true at all. It’s just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people’s dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Yeah I agree, the guy who thinks I should solve this database file location issue by standardizing the call and making a change in every class we have to prevent future work, but necessitating lots of testing, is a hate-filled extremist.
Obviously my position that we should take the existing structure and write a simple base-class level method to handle it and then assume future edge cases may pop up is the only ethically correct stance. Maybe he’s trolling.
LOL, no lie. Well, let’s see how that pans out for them socially and in the workplace. We’ll have a Social Darwinism kind of experiment, see who gets along best in the long run.
Social Darwinism- the theory that individuals, groups, and peoples are subject to the same Darwinian laws of natural selection as plants and animals. Now largely discredited, social Darwinism was advocated by Herbert Spencer and others in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and was used to justify political conservatism, imperialism, and racism and to discourage intervention and reform.
I don’t understand why you’re advocating for social darwinism, but it may be my lack of communication skills at fault.
LOL, not that exactly. Just saying that the ability to get along with people, even people with wildly different viewpoints, is a predictor of workplace success.
It is hilarious that this thread proves the article right.
Cause you’re seeing views you disagree with and can’t handle it?
It literally does the opposite but ok
Proposition:
“Gen Z is bad at discussion”
Reaction:
“Gen Z isn’t bad at discussion, everyone at the workplace has bad opinions and we shouldn’t have to discuss”
Reality:
Offices aren’t filled to the brim with evil people and yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level. Gen Z probably really does have issues with actual high level discussion because they’ve grown up their whole life surrounded by Internet echo chambers. This includes right wingers.
This is a continuation of the dance around what’s being talked about. The reaction isn’t that ‘other people’s opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion is not genuine opinion, and cannot be tolerated in a peaceful society. But yeah, let’s minimize the opposing view like a cable TV news anchor.
The assumption is that this is about oppressive behavior and you’re entitled to hold firm in this mindset. The reality is that there’s likely a genuine issue here and that issue is happily driven and worsened by these sort of assumptions.
Take some time to read up on the person making the claims. Female CEO of a large news network isn’t exactly part of the old boys club.
Then they should provide examples. And not just talk in big general terms.
The article is an opinion piece that is intentionally leaving out what topics they claim are not being debated.
At a time when science has been politicized, it is safe to say these topics are not up for debate. Reality isn’t up for debate. Especially when it is evidence vs opinion.
It depends on what you mean here. If your politics say that LGTBQ+ people don’t deserve to live, that some children just need to die (school lunches being cut), that it’s ok to force raped children to give birth, then, yeah you’reat least a little evil. If you believe that women or people of a different skin color are less than you you’re at least a little evil. Even if you’re a pleasant conversationalist, even if you donate time and money, are kind to children and animals, if you have evil opinions, or support people who do, you are a little evil.
Bootlicker spotted…
Have you worked in the office?!
I mean it’s a problem with a lot of Gen Z in the west yes. But where I live someone’s opinion does not affect how well you get along with them, probably because people aren’t addicted to the internet as people are in the west. Also if anything you’re the one who isn’t accepting other’s views lol.
This is like textbook behavior from people who have a problem with discussion. Phrasing disagreement as if it’s “not accepting my view”.
You literally are though, you’re acting as if my views are invalid. I fully respect your beliefs but from the way you’re writing these replies, it doesn’t seem like you’re respecting mine
I mean, all you’re doing is saying anyone who disagrees with you is the problem.
Actually no, this is not true at all. It’s just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people’s dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Yeah I agree, the guy who thinks I should solve this database file location issue by standardizing the call and making a change in every class we have to prevent future work, but necessitating lots of testing, is a hate-filled extremist.
Obviously my position that we should take the existing structure and write a simple base-class level method to handle it and then assume future edge cases may pop up is the only ethically correct stance. Maybe he’s trolling.
😁
He’s a fucking Nazi that’s what he is.
LOL, no lie. Well, let’s see how that pans out for them socially and in the workplace. We’ll have a Social Darwinism kind of experiment, see who gets along best in the long run.
I don’t understand why you’re advocating for social darwinism, but it may be my lack of communication skills at fault.
LOL, not that exactly. Just saying that the ability to get along with people, even people with wildly different viewpoints, is a predictor of workplace success.