Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

wangcong.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 599 posts

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#281

Post by ikidd »

malfist wrote: post #45
MichaelApproved wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point being made is to pick your battles. The author’s point is that, even if you are correct 100% of the time, fighting every battle is toxic to yourself and everyone around you. They are saying to look past the fact that you might be right and consider that it’s not worth the effort anyway. Now, I will attempt to put down my phone and not respond to any replies I get to the contrary. Sweating intensifies…

I've been reading the writings of stoic philosophers each morning and journaling about what I read and I think this fits in well with that philosophy. We're all here on Earth to enrich ourselves (and I don't mean materially) and those around us. Arguing with strangers online is antithetical to that premise. You don't better yourself by engaging in pointless squabbling, and you don't enrich the other person or those a…

I waver between "I'm not going to convince anyone anyway, and they'll retreat to their echo chamber and be right back where they were" and "The world would be better if we fight for what's right, and speech is the only ethical way to do that".

I'm tired, Boss...

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#282

Post by alkyon »

Nice quote from Tao Te Ching about complexity and simplicity completing each other.

The rules of go could be explained to a 4 years old. On the other hand, the superficial complexity of so many framworks/systems is just a facade and nothing more.

The same goes for NP-hard problems where complex solutions have trivial verification methods.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#284

Post by cogman10 »

juleiie wrote: post #245
cogman10 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the goal when you start arguing with someone online? Is that goal achievable? For me the goal is twofold. I'm arguing for the people reading the comment chain, not necessarily the commenter's sake. I know it's nearly impossible to convince someone you are arguing with. But also I do try and have an open mind. It's not common that I change my position, but it does happen. For example, I was once a climate ch…

Honestly if you change your opinion under effect of some online strangers then it wasn't a strong conviction in the first place

The online stranger's argument was convincing because they brought a lot of evidence from research papers to general climatologist opinions which completely debunked a lot of the talking points I'd used (without me exposing those in the conversation).

It also made me go back on my own sources and question where they were coming from. Let's just say the anti climate change positions become a lot less convincing when you dig into their sourcing and find a large number of them literally funded by the likes of Koch industries or Glenn Beck's personal companies.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#285

Post by TheAmazingRace »

playorizaya wrote: post #258

Right/Wrong is almost useless in 2026+ People will know they are wrong, but if they are supporting a friend's case or boss's they will choose them over you (naturally) even if you can definitively prove them wrong. There's upside and often no downside to being wrong or even outright lying in some cases, so people do it. People will know 1 of the 4 in the group is right, but they don't want to be outnumbered or cast i…

Honestly, one of my colleagues said it best.

"Do you want friends? Or do you want to be right?"

Sometimes there really is no glory on those hills you die on.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#286

Post by NetOpWibby »

A few months ago I came to this same conclusion. I watched this YouTube video[1] that argued needing to be right and thinking we can save people is our own ego at work. It helped me realize why I felt anger towards people I cared about deeply, not seeing what's obviously to me the RightThing™ to do; I think I can save everyone.

Also see this video[2], which extrapolates on the types of people you shouldn't try to save. Gives pointers on how to deal with narcissists (both videos use AI-generated imagery and narration, which I typically despise but I had both playing in a background tab so I didn't have to see it at least).

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TspV1odsXo

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTMj28NS7to

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#287

Post by csrse »

juleiie wrote: post #245
cogman10 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the goal when you start arguing with someone online? Is that goal achievable? For me the goal is twofold. I'm arguing for the people reading the comment chain, not necessarily the commenter's sake. I know it's nearly impossible to convince someone you are arguing with. But also I do try and have an open mind. It's not common that I change my position, but it does happen. For example, I was once a climate ch…

Honestly if you change your opinion under effect of some online strangers then it wasn't a strong conviction in the first place

Why? If the argument is well argued, and makes you have better understanding of the issue, does it teally matter who you argue with? Can you only have your deeply held convictions changed from your own sphere? The implications are a bit disheartening in that case.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#288

Post by malfist »

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #230
malfist wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm arguing for the people reading the comment chain, not necessarily the commenter's sake. I'm not sure people are reading comment chains deeply enough to be swayed by two strangers arguing online. All too often these days, folks are just engaging in point scoring type arguments and readers just agree with their tribe. Not saying it doesn't happen, nor that it's a good goal taken with care. But me personally the R…

> I'm not sure people are reading comment chains deeply enough to be swayed by two strangers arguing online. Counterpoint, literally doing that right now in this thread as I’m considering the merits of online discourse in the context of stoicism.

I'm glad to be wrong!

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#289

Post by mathgladiator »

In career, I found infrastructure a great place to work in the sense that data wins arguments since the nemesis is physics. In product spaces, I flounder because there is no real data as products depends on people and people can massage data any way they want.

In life, I've learned "don't cast pearls before swine" as you have to understand if someone wants to learn something. I fully accept that I can be wrong, but I look at results I drive and I would like to believe others want similar results. This is far from true since some people just like complaining about problems and doing nothing about it. I don't understand this mindset, at all, but I've come to learn that I will tell what I'm doing, answer questions to the curious, and then stop there.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#290

Post by Jtsummers »

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #266
AussieWog93 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blog goes back to 2007. Every single post made prior to ChatGPT has a very strong irreverent sense of humour as well as specific Chinese-English phrases. If you speak to Chinese migrants/colleagues/suppliers you'll recognise it immediately: https://wangcong.org/2009/04/09/got-a-new-job/ https://wangcong.org/2019-03-14-how-to-pretend-to-be-a-linux... https://wangcong.org/2008/12/25/when-i-was-in-portugal/ Then mag…

Curious how he ignores evidence and instead replies to other comments to make ad-hominem attacks.

Trolls will troll, they don't care about truth or facts, just making noise and disrupting conversation.
Post reply on HN