Ignorance (for one definition) is “A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge which one may acquire and it is his duty to have.”
So how’s this seen as ignorance when I’m actively, and proactively, engaged in acquiring knowledge…?
Naivety perhaps. Ignorance seems clumsily over-strong and just wrong.
To query if that’s ignorance, seems ironic… especially if that’s intended as a rhetorical assertion, rather than a genuine question. Asserting something contrary to as just evidenced, would be “denying the antecedent”, or more simply put: “ignoring evidence”. See? Irony. n_n
You’re feigning curiosity, but you have made up your mind about the world, and the conclusions you have decided upon are simply not true. That’s ignorance, and it’s deliberate. In fact, there’s a name for it now. It’s called Sea Lioning
Well that struck me as utter implausibility, trolling, hypocrisy or some such. Left me trying to work it out in chat (pasted as is, beneath)…
Maybe this is a case of… if not hanlon’s razor, a lack of mutual charitable interpretation, accepting there are different perspectives (not necessarily stupidity (nor even malice)).
[2026-01- 8 11:39:25] <Digit> anyone else ever been accused of “sea lioning”?
[2026-01- 8 11:39:48] <x2s> What is that?
[2026-01- 8 11:41:18] <Digit> wondering if that’s a common ocurance for autistics [(or intp)] not getting whatever popular social shorthand and aproaching things more literally.
[2026-01- 8 11:41:31] <Digit> “Sealioning is a form of online harassment characterized by relentless, bad-faith requests for evidence or justification, often about basic or previously addressed points, while maintaining a polite and sincere demeanor.”"
[2026-01- 8 11:45:30] <Digit> wondering if it’s something my autistic neurophysio’s approach to things evokes in “normal”(HA!) people, and/or if it’s some kind of hypocrisy or gaslighting like from a narcissist or sadistic troll.
[2026-01- 8 11:50:45] <henk> mhm, yeah, I have, just a few weeks ago
[2026-01- 8 11:54:47] <henk> oh, well, actually I was only told that “someone may have taken your behaviour as sealioning” …
[2026-01- 8 11:55:04] <henk> that’s probably not quite being actually accused of doing it
[2026-01- 8 12:06:09] <The_Camel> I never encountered it but I have seen it done on others.
[2026-01- 8 12:07:48] <The_Camel> I never quite “discerned” it as sealioning; I normally just considered it “ill intent badgering”
[2026-01- 8 12:08:00] <The_Camel> or “shadow pestering”
[2026-01- 8 12:35:25] <Digit> it struck me unexpectedly. was genuinely trying to discern their interpretation and intention, and to be helpful to their cause if genuine.
[2026-01- 8 12:38:13] <Digit> gets me wondering about the psychology, the identification, the social dominance limbic-reactive inconsiderate mode, contrast to (as my autism assessor pointed out to me) how autistic brains are delving into the fore brain more to work things out, rather than relying on the cerebelum and limbic system.
[Edit: and the conversation has gone on 10 times longer yet, with others chiming in saying they’ve been misidentified as sealioning too. Does seem to be a thing autistics have happen to them quite a lot. Perhaps a case of “double empathy problem” strikes again, and different approaches to things. … Is interesting conversation, going into stuff about personality types, personality mapping systems like mbti and astrology, and their veracity, and epistemology, behaviourism, interpersonal difficulties and stuff… but I wont paste it all here.]
So just sincere ignorance?
How’s that work?
Thought I was expressing curiosity…
Ignorance (for one definition) is “A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge which one may acquire and it is his duty to have.”
So how’s this seen as ignorance when I’m actively, and proactively, engaged in acquiring knowledge…?
Naivety perhaps. Ignorance seems clumsily over-strong and just wrong.
To query if that’s ignorance, seems ironic… especially if that’s intended as a rhetorical assertion, rather than a genuine question. Asserting something contrary to as just evidenced, would be “denying the antecedent”, or more simply put: “ignoring evidence”. See? Irony. n_n
You’re feigning curiosity, but you have made up your mind about the world, and the conclusions you have decided upon are simply not true. That’s ignorance, and it’s deliberate. In fact, there’s a name for it now. It’s called Sea Lioning
bs
Well, you’ve proven me wrong by being reasonable.
Well that struck me as utter implausibility, trolling, hypocrisy or some such. Left me trying to work it out in chat (pasted as is, beneath)…
Maybe this is a case of… if not hanlon’s razor, a lack of mutual charitable interpretation, accepting there are different perspectives (not necessarily stupidity (nor even malice)).
[Edit: and the conversation has gone on 10 times longer yet, with others chiming in saying they’ve been misidentified as sealioning too. Does seem to be a thing autistics have happen to them quite a lot. Perhaps a case of “double empathy problem” strikes again, and different approaches to things. … Is interesting conversation, going into stuff about personality types, personality mapping systems like mbti and astrology, and their veracity, and epistemology, behaviourism, interpersonal difficulties and stuff… but I wont paste it all here.]
And I could probably use a toke to loosen up. Been 6 months cut off from supply.