Live data from Hacker News

Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

wangcong.org

201–210 of 599 posts

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't better yourself by engaging in pointless squabbling Not always, but it is at least always entertainment. If the alternative you would have chosen is watching a mindless movie then you're no worse off. > and you don't enrich the other person or those around you by doing so. It is inherently a solitary activity. You are right that the likelihood of a bystander gaining anything from it is nearly zero, but th…

Engage in arguments that decide the direction of a project.

[deleted]

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#203
I used to think, when I disagreed with someone, we were on a journey together to find out what the truth is. Maybe my understandng was wrong, maybe theirs, maybe it's something neither of us thought of.

But then I realized that most people don't think that way. It's more important to not be alone than to know the truth, and people tie their individual identity to their group identity - if a fact contradicts their group identity's approved list of observances, they'll take it as a personal attack. So I just say 'ok' now.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#204

They never mention they could’ve been wrong. The author assumes they’re always right, but that trying to convince others and argue them to their right side is not valuable. How about: maybe I’m wrong and I didn’t let their ideas influence me. How about: even when I think I’m right, it will be better to calmly kindly discuss, listening as much as talking, not debating or arguing or speaking over them, but attempting t…

Or maybe they are rational and just let go of their mistakes once they have seen sufficient data to prove them otherwise?

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, simply vote the submission down; that won't clutter the discussion for other forists who want to talk about the actual content. I think this is what the voting system is fundamentally for ; we don't have to, and probably shouldn't, justify our votes aloud.

What actual content? It's AI slop.

[flagged]

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#206
I added this post to my HN favorites.

I experienced myself at least two of those points. In different words:

Never teach to people that did not ask you to teach them. They will not listen to you. They will forget. They will not thank you. Time wasted. As a corollary, I'm sorry for most teachers at school and even at universities.

You can change your mental state. A friend of mine told me about 3 years ago "When X happens I can't change the way I react" and she was not necessarily reacting in a good way. My answer was "Your mental state is the only thing you can control." She stopped talking and started thinking. I don't know if it had an effect. Changing the way one reacts to a stimulus takes time and effort but it can be done.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#208

They never mention they could’ve been wrong. The author assumes they’re always right, but that trying to convince others and argue them to their right side is not valuable. How about: maybe I’m wrong and I didn’t let their ideas influence me. How about: even when I think I’m right, it will be better to calmly kindly discuss, listening as much as talking, not debating or arguing or speaking over them, but attempting t…

One thing I genuinely try to do is fully grasp the other persons points, and eventually I back away from an argument because some people will not change their minds, but I do try to have a take away. I also admit if I'm wrong, I hate when people don't do this just to spite you during an argument. I don't care about being proven wrong, especially if we're discussing tech, please show me why I'm wrong, otherwise, if you're wrong, don't take it personal.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#209
post #60

Here's a simple idea: You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. And three interpretations to consider: 0: The default: That person is irrationally attached to being wrong. Best to walk away, argumentation will be futile, and I have a life to lead. 1: Whoa! Sometimes that person is me. 2: If they didn't reason themselves into it, how did they get into it? What if their position rep…

My style of online participation has been shaped by 2 ideas: 1. I rarely fully understand my own positions on minutia 2. Writing is rewriting. I write forum posts to solidify my understanding of my own interests, beliefs, and reasoning. I often edit them multiple times before moving on and ignoring the responses thereafter. I can reference them and have to other people who ask my opinion. Sometimes I do respond back…

> I often edit them multiple times before moving on and ignoring the responses thereafter.

"Sorry this letter is so long as I did not have time to make it shorter."

* https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/28/shorter-letter/

Post reply on HN