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

441–450 of 599 posts

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#441

Post by mrguyorama »

staticman2 wrote: post #185
yodsanklai wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed that with some people (and possibly most people), it's not even a matter of who's wrong or right, simply asking to justify or explain their claims may be perceived as an attack and enough to trigger an argument.

On the other hand on this web site at least I think people ask questions passive aggressively at times. Instead of honestly saying "I think you are wrong because..." they passive aggressively pretends they are "just asking questions." Of course on non controversial topics a question is likely to just be a question.

Or people who pick a nit and then when it turns out the nit they picked wasn't even a nit, they double down and pick an even smaller it and split ever smaller hairs because they just cannot function if they don't "Win" every discussion

It's insane how reluctant some people are just to say "Oh maybe I was wrong or misunderstood"

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#442

Post by altruios »

miyoji wrote: post #309
altruios wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone who does not believe in god will not be convinced to believe by a proof of god's existence. But of course that's not true. I would believe in a God with proof of their existence. I simply have not encountered such proof that hold up to my standards of proof of such an extraordinary claim.

> I simply have not encountered such proof that hold up to my standards of proof of such an extraordinary claim. And you never will. This is pretty much my point!

I do not believe it exists. If it is never, then it must not exist.

proofs I would accept:

(for Christianity)

Biblically accurate angels descend onto earth, to everyone, and submit themselves to scientific testing, which conclude they are made of something non-physical.

Divinity is proven to be a measurable and testable attribute of reality.

Reality warping magic, demonstrated to not be any sort of trick or technology, and limited to those devout to said religion.

God shows his ass to everyone, the only part of him that - according to the bible - won't make a human insane.

the basis of these proofs can be distilled down to some basic requirements: - It must happen in 'reality' not 'in my head'. - It must be testable, and repeatable. - It must have no 'natural/scientific' explanation. - It must be viewable by everyone.

That's not 'all' of the requirements, but regardless of which religion we are talking about: those are the common primitives.

Nothing I've encountered have met these standards. But if those standards of mine are met...

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#443

Post by EGreg »

I like to think that I change my mind based on evidence, but the more I battle test my ideas in a specific thesis, the less reluctant I am to give it up, and prefer to see a synthesis incorporating the new arguments.

Often though, I find the arguments are things I have already heard before and either incorporated or debunked - either way they do not affect my positions.

https://magarshak.com/blog/why-im-confident-in-my-views/

As for strawmen like “well that’s not true of ALL cases” (I never said it was) or “that’s whataboutism”, those are just bad argumentation:

https://magarshak.com/blog/whataboutism-considered-harmful/

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#444

Post by OkayPhysicist »

miyoji wrote: post #309
altruios wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone who does not believe in god will not be convinced to believe by a proof of god's existence. But of course that's not true. I would believe in a God with proof of their existence. I simply have not encountered such proof that hold up to my standards of proof of such an extraordinary claim.

> I simply have not encountered such proof that hold up to my standards of proof of such an extraordinary claim. And you never will. This is pretty much my point!

If the skies errupted with the sound of trumpets and an angel descended to tell me to do something, my first thought would probably be that I'm having some sort of mental break, but if the person standing next me is seeing it, too, then I'll be the first one carving some commandments or whatever. There's a perfectly achievable standard of proof for you.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#445

Post by goatlover »

auggierose wrote: post #51
bdangubic wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be wrong if I am stating an opinion and I cannot be wrong if I stating a fact. Our society, since it got consumed by “social” media, has lost ability to accept facts, everyone doing their own “research” and all that…

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

Yes it's a scientific fact humans have been causing the current warming by burning fossil fuels since the industrial revoluton.

You can make skeptical arguments against this is you're willing to dismiss empirical data and methodology behind scientific facts. The people who do this aren't consistent and cherry pick which empirical data, models and methodologies to dismiss. It tends to align with some belief challenged by the science. Or their financial interests.

It's much harder to be a consistent skeptic, since empirical data is verifiable, and the scientific method works for all sorts of fields and technologies. But it could all be dream of a mental patient in a simulation god programmed while making a bet with the devil.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#446

Post by josefritzishere »

tryagainian wrote: post #15
josefritzishere wrote: post #3

This is a bizarrely anti-democratic. "Winning" isn't the important part of discussing a topic with multiple points of view.

Do you believe all points of view are equally valuable?

No, but I also didn't say that. I'd say that some arguments are also interesting instead of right or wrong. Some people just have interesting brains. This thread is very meta.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#447

Post by goatlover »

genewitch wrote: post #391
conductr wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 "warme…

Do you doubt that greenhouse gases being emitted into the atmosphere have gone up since humans started burning fossil fuels, and do you doubt the physics of how they trap solar radiation? Do you doubt that climate scientists know how to put sensors in the oceans, in rural areas and released in weather balloons along with satellites to measure temperatures across the planet year by year? Or that they can extract ice cores to measure trapped atmospheric gas from thousands of years ago? That sort of thing.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#448

Post by s4i »

> Help people when they explicitly ask for help. When someone asks, the cause and effect reverse. You’re no longer imposing your judgment on someone who never wanted it.

Maybe this is why pull request reviews can become contentious. The reviewer thinks the author is open for feedback while in fact it’s just the widely accepted practice and team/company enfored that you are supposed to give feedback.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#449

Post by goatlover »

bdangubic wrote: post #301
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?

I made $xxx,xxx.00 last year, that is a fact, I can definitively prove it via deposits to my bank account. It is a fact. Climate change being man-made or not definitely does not fall into “this is a fact”

So it's only a fact if you can verify it, and not if the scientific community can? And you're consistent about this via all scientific findings you haven't verified like the balance in your bank account? You reject as fact any astronomical data or microscopic results you haven't seen with your own eyes? Or any satellite data you haven't analyzed yourself?
Post reply on HN