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

351–360 of 599 posts

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#351

Post by duped »

al_borland wrote: post #321
anthonypasq wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. this is a pithy think to say but its really not true, and every person that has lost their religion and been convinced by rational argument is a counter example.

Do people really lose their religion because of logic and reason? I’ve never seen this. There is usually some deeper story. If someone asks me why I don’t believe, despite being raised in the church, I’ll simply say it didn’t make sense and babble on about reason and logic if they push. This is just a shield to avoid sharing the truth with people I don’t trust on a very deep level.

Yes. Your experience is not every experience.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#352

Post by maiti_ma »

jdw64 wrote: post #101

孟子曰：「人之患在好爲人師。」 Mencius said: "The trouble with people is that they are too fond of being teachers to others." 仁者如射，射者正己而後發。發而不中，不怨勝己者，反求諸己而已矣。 The benevolent person is like an archer. The archer corrects their own posture before releasing the arrow. If they shoot and miss, they do not blame the one who surpasses them, but simply turn around and seek the cause within themselves. 孟子曰：「愛人不親，反其仁；治人不治，反其智；禮人不答，反其敬。行有不得者，…

`Mencius said: "The trouble with people is that they are too fond of being teachers to others."`

I never thought about this but I really believe it to be true and would love to know why is that. For example, whenever I want to get an interaction going with very small kids, I would pretend to not know something and they'd be super happy to teach me - works every time.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#353

Post by dahart »

khalic wrote: post #65
auggierose wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every "fact" you state really includes the opinion that the "fact" is indeed a fact. Is climate change man-made?

Are you arguing against the existence of an objective reality? Seems a little extreme. There are countless facts, indisputably so. Gravity, death, the fact you wrote me an answer, the fact I'm writing you an answer. These aren't opinions

> There are countless facts, indisputably so.

True, but isn’t the problem here that even though there are many facts, no one of us knows most of those facts with absolute certainty, and we learned them from other people, therefore we primarily hold opinions about facts as opposed to know them first hand.

My experience of gravity correlates with the explanation I was given in physics class, but I haven’t myself proven anything about it, and I just trust other people’s stories when they tell me gravity affects light or time.

I think about this often when contemplating arguments; there’s almost nothing I personally know first hand. Like you I believe in facts, but I recognize that I’m not the source of most facts, and I’m relaying a story someone else told me. I’m guessing this is one of the reasons facts can be so easily argued, because there are gaps between facts being established and facts being told and shared. Like, it’s pretty common for scientific research results to be oversimplified and told & shared in a way that doesn’t capture the entire truth, right?

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#354

Post by JumpCrisscross »

prmph wrote: post #339
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nor does it depend certainty that what I perceive or remember is what is It absolutely assumes a unitary conscious experience versus what increasingly seems to be the case, a bunch of narratives our brains thread into a cohesive story ex post facto . Put another way, there very well may be hard limits to how much a human-like consciousness can understand itself.

> a bunch of narratives our brains thread into a cohesive story ex post facto That is exactly the reality I am asserting, whether or not they actually describe an "external" reality

I guess my argument is you can’t be absolutely certain about what your internal reality is. Perception, as a measure, even when pointed entirely internally, is fundamentally fuzzy.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#355

Post by p-e-w »

throw4847285 wrote: post #340
Dumblydorr wrote: post #4

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…

I agree. Despite ending on a note of self-improvement, I wasn't really convinced that the author has any self-awareness to speak of. For example: > When you argue with someone, you think you’re debating an idea. Often you’re not. You’re challenging their sense of self. Oh, they're going to acknowledge that there are emotional reasons for their addiction to arguing. > So I’ve drawn a line. I only discuss pros and cons…

Debating is always primarily a game of power and only secondarily about truth or correctness. If it were about truth alone, the person who is right could be content with being right and not caring what others believe, just like they don’t care about 99.9999% of beliefs held by others either.

But it’s not about truth, it’s about imposing your beliefs on others. And while rational arguments are a socially blessed method for doing so, they don’t change the underlying motivation.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#356

Post by satvikpendem »

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…

The goal is karma farming and the feeling of smug superiority over others, especially when they get downvoted or flagged and you don't.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#357

Post by felooboolooomba »

A lot of the theoretic today and the 'logic' behind it bears strong resemblance of as it were from a cult follower. Reasoning doesn't really work as a argument.

There have been many books written on cults written by reputable people and some are even on youtube talking about this.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#358

Post by post-it »

Johanx64 wrote: post #72
hakunin wrote: post #25

One of the most cancerous developments of our generation is a bunch of people isolating themselves from everyone else, and having their perfect unchallenged audience captured views spread far and wide. On a more personal level, the reason people are frustrated about arguing is because they can’t fully articulate their reasons. They don’t realize it themselves. The older you get and the more practiced you get at argui…

The frustrating part about arguing - on the internet: 1. Infinite supply of people. 2. 90%+ of times before you get anywhere, you find out the person doesn't have "what it takes". At minimum you have to filter out 90%+ of people that simply don't have the mental faculties to evaluate what is and isn't a valid argument, before you even get started. All this just takes energy and there's just no benifit. Its like imagi…

> At minimum you have to filter out 90%+ of people that simply don't have the mental faculties to evaluate what is and isn't a valid argument, before you even get started.

I don't think this is true. There are times when I do think it's true, and when I start feeling that way I know it's time to step back because I can no longer engage constructively.

Text is a hard medium to have a back-and-forth in. The features that make it useful for explaining also make it easy to feel ignored and insulted.

I think a lot of people also go online and write things when they feel argumentative, so comment sections self-select for people who want to argue.

Whenever I feel intellectually superior to someone, I try to remind myself that I can barely change the oil filter in my car, and there's a lot of people out there who can't write a line of Python but who save tens of thousands of dollars doing their own maintenance.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#359

Post by mathgladiator »

hakunin wrote: post #25

One of the most cancerous developments of our generation is a bunch of people isolating themselves from everyone else, and having their perfect unchallenged audience captured views spread far and wide. On a more personal level, the reason people are frustrated about arguing is because they can’t fully articulate their reasons. They don’t realize it themselves. The older you get and the more practiced you get at argui…

Knowing when to stop is a key learning in wisdom.

When I reflect on it, we are in a state of hyper-individualism on every single front. Is it wrong? Well, yes and no. It is a consequence of freedom. What I ultimately see happening is that we solved evolution on a biological level. Now, it is evolution on an ideological level.

What makes me sad is that some people don't have friends that can call them out and argue in good faith. I'm a very disagreeable person, and I have a good friend group that I can argue with without any fear.

Post reply on HN