Hi folks!
Been a long minute since I’ve done some kind of Bootcamp post (on a side note, cancer absolutely sux and takes up a lot of time and energy, but enough about my problems), and although I don’t have a juicy Cognitive Bias or Logical Fallacy lined up, I did want to take some time to talk about some critical thinking, and recognizing a particular form of trolling known as “Sea lioning.”
Wait, sea lions? As in, the seagoing mammals with flippers? What does that have to do with trolling, you ask?
The name for this type of trolling comes from an online comic called Wondermark by David Malki, specifically one of the series posted on September 19, 2014 and titled “The Terrible Sea Lion”. Aaaand which, for some reason unknown to me I am unable to provide a link for, as any links to the Wondermark comic or this one specifically are giving me “Server Not Found” errors, dammit. So I presume as I write this the site is having technical issues, since I was quite easily able to access it but a few short hours ago. In any case, if you wish to visit the site, go to www.wondermark.com. ‘Tis a fine comic, IMO, and one that I follow personally.
Anyway, I was able to find the original online in any case:
So, ok.There’s the origin story for the name. So what exactly IS “sea lioning?”
Sea lioning is the classic “I’m just asking questions” trope that trolls use (and FOX News). In this type of trolling or online harassment, the troll continually feigns ignorance and asks questions. The questions asked are often tangential or non sequitur, continually goading others with these questions while feigning politeness and ignorance.
Once others become frustrated with the sea lioner and push back, the sea lioner then feigns victimhood (“hey, I’m just trying to have a civil discussion!”, “ I’m just asking questions!”). And of course if you try to end the conversation, you may be accused of not knowing what you’re talking about.
Now, this should not be confused with people GENUINELY asking questions! There is a difference! A person who is genuinely trying to engage and learn is NOT a “sea lion.” Sea lioning requires that the person doing is arguing in bad faith, trying to steer the conversation away from the real topic or trying to get under the skin of others with incessant questioning (even of questions already answered) while feigning politeness and often feigning offense when called out for their behavior.
One tactic used by sea lioners is to continually ask for proof, usually involving moving goalposts, so that once proof is provided, they demand more, or different, proof. Often such questioning involves basic information that’s fairly easily found with a simple online search, which adds to the victims’ frustration.
Sea lioning has been compared to denial-of-service attacks, in that the sea lioner “floods the zone” with a flurry of bad-faith questions, hoping to clog up or stop real discussion of the topic at hand by derailing the conversation using irrelevant questions and still pretending not to understand when answers are provided, resulting in more bad-faith questions.
Sea lioning is also a close cousin to the Gish Gallop. In the Gish Gallop, the debater floods the debate with a high number of usually weak arguments without much regard for evidence, logic or strength of the argument, counting on the inability of the opponent to address all the points thrown out. When the opponent fails to address every point, the Gish Galloper claims victory, saying that their opponent was unable to debunk all their claims.
In a similar vein, the sea lioner will use the fact that opponents eventually become weary of the constant bad-faith questions and begin ignoring them as proof that the opponent doesn’t really know what they’re talking about.
To stress one final time, though, that the key here is INTENT. If someone is genuinely not understanding something or genuinely curious, that isn’t sea lioning. If they are doing it to goad, confuse, or obfuscate a discussion, that’s sea lioning. So don’t be TOO quick to judge, as online especially it can be hard to gauge intent. But it should be obvious at some point if someone is just behaving in an utterly obtuse manner and seems unable to grasp even simple answers that they are trying to sea lion.
And on that note, have a good one, folks! I have linked below to all of my previous “Bootcamp” posts, though as I said, it’s been awhile since I’ve had the time and energy to get back to them. But if you’re new to them, or just want to give them a revisit, links are below.
Edit: Fixed a plethora of typos.
Prior Bootcamp Installments
Logical Fallacies Bootcamp:
The Strawman
The Slippery Slope
Begging the Question
Poisoning the Well
No True Scotsman!
Ad Hominem
False Dilemma
Non Sequitur
Red Herring
Gamblers Fallacy
Bandwagon Fallacy
Appeal to Fear
The Fallacy Fallacy
Appeal to Personal Incredulity
Appeal to Authority
Special Pleading
Texas Sharpshooter
Post Hoc
Appeal to Nature
Furtive Fallacy
Alphabet Soup
Cognitive Bias Bootcamp:
Bystander Effect
Curse of Knowledge
Barnum Effect
Declinism
In-Group Bias
Hindsight Bias
Survivor Bias
Rhyme-as-Reason Effect
Apophenia (& Paradoleia)
The Dunning-Kruger Effect
Confirmation Bias