Most arguments are about ego, not ideas • Hacker News Board

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#391

Post by genewitch » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:03 PM UTC

conductr wrote: post #174

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?

> Is climate change man-made? When having the climate change conversation with deniers I roll it back to; is the climate warming? They almost always[0] agree it is and we agree it’s evidenced. So now we’ve agreed on a fact and have common ground to advance the conversation. Then I can make my case that if we know the climate is warming then we have a responsibility/necessity to reduce our contribution to it and shoul…

i disagree that it' warming, so where do you start with me? I'm not being coy, i 100% believe that all of the warming detected is strictly down to poor placement of sensors and incorrect assumptions thereof in the resultant data. So what we will end up arguing about, if we get past that particularity of my thoughts, is about models. And i hate arguing about models.

edit: i think probably the cities are getting "warmer" but that's not climate change that's city change. In that cities are growing, generally, with more stuff paved over. We need to plant more trees and have less concrete/asphalt in cities if we want to reverse this trend. also less people, but that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#392

Post by snarf21 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:05 PM UTC

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…

This is indeed part of the problem. Life today is just too complicated. Take a simple topic like wind turbines: there is so so much to truly understand about materials, net lifetime carbon offset, environmental issues, recycling, capacity, placement, etc. that is is all but impossible to become a true subject matter expert on this one issue alone. Even gaining a cursory understanding of the issues at hand requires many many hours of reading and research from all positions. And this just makes you knowledgeable on this one small subject.

So what we do in practice is this: Pick the issue I care most about, then assume that any group that agrees with me on that position is a safe source to trust for ALL issues. This is our human need to belong (and tribalism). The problem is that the groups pushing these positions leverage this other'ing to create divisiveness for the sole purpose of making more and more money.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#393

Post by laurentlassalle » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:05 PM UTC

malfist wrote: post #76

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…

> 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…

Personally, I really enjoy reading the back and forth :-)

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#394

Post by Erem » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:05 PM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #355

throw4847285 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 metho…

This is true for a very narrow definition of debate though. At work, choosing to debate can make the difference between a software design that solves the problem vs one that doesn't. Deploying code that causes an incident vs lands safely.

In broader life, public debate can reveal new arguments to seeking minds, help influence and educate people other than the debaters. It can even grow the debaters themselves if they approach with the right humility.

That said, many do approach debate in the way you describe. For those of us trying to avoid futile debate in favor of productive debate, the best choice is to detect these bad faith actors, acknowledge the bad faith publicly, and pull away

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#395

Post by ptmx » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:06 PM UTC

StilesCrisis wrote: post #129

Reeks of AI prose past the first paragraph or two. I don't need to know a bot's opinion on how to convince others.

Yeah, disappointing to see it so highly upvoted. So many tells of AI slop:

> There’s a clean exception to all of this, and it flips the entire logic.

> If letting go of the argument sounds like pure loss, here’s the reframe that turns it into a gain.

> The ego is lowered. The defenses are down. The advice lands.

Even if there was some human insight that went into it, the output could be reduced in length by 80+% without any loss of substance.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#396

Post by Tangurena2 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:07 PM UTC

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

I think that you are thinking of faith rather than something reasoned.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#397

Post by jimt1234 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:07 PM UTC

I removed myself from Facebook years ago because of all the toxic arguments about politics - almost entirely whataboutism and name calling. I've recently rediscovered Facebook and came up with a little game: sit back, watch all the political arguments, and take a drink every time someone concedes a point (not the whole argument, just a single point), as in, "Shit, you're right. I didn't realize that." I'm probably gonna quit soon because it's been around 2 months and I haven't taken a single drink.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#398

Post by ellyagg » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:07 PM UTC

TomasBM wrote: post #57

Other than the obvious, self-reflective question that the author doesn't pose - "what if I'm the one who's wrong?" - I think it's worth arguing if the conditions are right. Because I also like being correct, a debate to me has become something of a game where (ideally) we both win in both end scenarios: either my thinking was correct, and now I verified/validated it, and got you to think differently; or my thinking w…

You would be steel-manning his essay if you assume he’s right in these arguments. Unless you believe that no position is more correct than another or that no one is more often correct than others, you can imagine scenarios where the author is often more correct than the people he is dealing with.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#399

Post by throw4847285 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:07 PM UTC

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…

Put me in the Nietzsche camp: stoicism is self-tyranny. It's a denial of feeling disguised as overcoming it.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#400

Post by kjshsh123 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:08 PM UTC

>If you genuinely believe something others don’t, that’s not a debate to win. That’s an edge. The market rewards being right in a way that no argument ever will. Instead of persuading the skeptic, ship the thing they think is wrong and let reality settle it.

I wonder if victims of religious persecution agree...

Facts do not always win. The evolutionary fitness of an idea is (sadly) not entirely dictated by its truthfulness.