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

What if I’m wrong? (2023)

behavioralscientist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 294 posts

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#171

Post by The_Colonel »

ggm wrote: post #3

I've grown used to being corrected, to the point that it's a pleasant surprise to be told I might be right. What I notice more and more, is the "you're wrong" is used to buttress opinion masquerading as fact. If you preface "I think that.." to asserts it doesn't stop the "you're wrong" but it at least puts the discussion into the realms of conjecture about things, including facts, rather than simple asserts of facts…

Arguing by analogy is indeed problematic. You can often find rough analogy which supports the argument, but also a different analogy which disproves it.

Additionally, I think arguing by analogy is a sign that you lack real / structural arguments, real understanding.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#172

Post by edanm »

knightoffaith wrote: post #145
Ensorceled wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I became an Atheist in large part because I took Latin my first year in high school and realized that the Roman's actually believed in their gods the same way that I believed in the Christian god. And I…

>This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I don't think this is really the right way to think about Christianity for many believers. C.S. Lewis says, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." It's not so much that Christianity is just another fact lying out there that…

> No - it's a belief that shapes the very way we understand the world. It's a worldview.

For Christians. You kind of do have to grapple with the fact that billions of people do not have that worldview, and therefore you do have to compare the Christian worldview to the non-Christian worldview.

> >they were told from a young age that this was real and just kept believing as they grew up.

> This is true, but if the implication is that belief in Roman paganism is on just as firm intellectual ground as belief in Christianity, that seems unfair given the rich intellectual history spanning millennia of the latter to which the former isn't really comparable at all.

Maybe that's the case with Roman mythology (though I don't have the dates), but what about Hinduism? Buddhism? Islam? Judaism?

All of these have comparable histories.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#173

Post by edanm »

jibalt wrote: post #168
gwd wrote: post #79

I think the more important question is, "How would I know if I were wrong?" As a thinking Christian, and I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong; I'd be interested in what kind of evidence Dennet would accept to show him that his atheism was wrong.

"I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong" I don't believe this. "I'd be interested in what kind of evidence Dennet would accept to show him that his atheism was wrong." Perhaps the reason you aren't aware that he has addressed this at length is that you don't have have his name right. Also, as Chris Hitchens noted, religion poisons everything,…

You're being unnecessarily mean and confrontational, that isn't a good fit for HN.

You can take parent at their word that he's thought about it and engage, or you can choose not to engage. No reason to disparage them.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#174

Post by heresie-dabord »

wombatpm wrote: post #129
ggm wrote: post #3

I've grown used to being corrected, to the point that it's a pleasant surprise to be told I might be right. What I notice more and more, is the "you're wrong" is used to buttress opinion masquerading as fact. If you preface "I think that.." to asserts it doesn't stop the "you're wrong" but it at least puts the discussion into the realms of conjecture about things, including facts, rather than simple asserts of facts…

My inner jerk likes to assert Hitchin’s razor: what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence

That's Hitchens, of course. Here's a set of philosophical razors. [1]

There are social contexts where clarity of statement and lucidity of thought *are not* among the tools/objectives of an encounter/interaction.

But in debate or education or in any other case where clear words and ideas are indeed among the tools/objectives, avoiding them or undermining them is being a different kind of jerk.

[1] _ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_razor

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#175

Post by circlefavshape »

gwd wrote: post #147
Ensorceled wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I became an Atheist in large part because I took Latin my first year in high school and realized that the Roman's actually believed in their gods the same way that I believed in the Christian god. And I…

> This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? It sounds like maybe some people are taking this as a challenge from me to atheists. I'm not really; just like Dennet is in TFA, I'm talking about general principles for someone trying to live as a rational creature: each of us should examine our own beliefs, and not only ask "What if I'm wrong?" but "How would I kn…

I myself am an atheist, but I gotta say that this is very well put

> so the Romans believed in supernatural beings, and the Christians also believed in supernatural beings (and of course so did the Greeks, and the Persians, and the Babylonians, and the Egyptians, and...); but instead of this being evidence that there were supernatural beings of some sort [...] you decided this was evidence that there weren't supernatural beings?

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#176

Post by randomdata »

tsunamifury wrote: post #156
randomdata wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish more people would help me be “constructively wrong” What's the value proposition? As you noted, not even your own wife will help you until she sees some kind of return for herself (abating her tiredness). Online actors pointing out irrelevant wrongness get to laugh at the meltdown of the maladjusted "intellectual" that usually follows. This is what consultancy is for. You pay someone to look at what you are…

I get your point, but to be genuine with you I have paid. Very very few people you are paying with genuinely critique or disagree with you for very obvious reasons. However I can’t help but point out that you’re being exactly as I’ve described redditors…argue an adjacent point to just say the original point is ‘stupid’. It’s a waste of good brain cells.

As before, I am humoured by the meltdown, which has not failed to disappoint. There is no other value proposition online.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#177

Post by haswell »

Jensson wrote: post #131
haswell wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To split hairs a bit, analogies can support arguments, but are not considered a conclusive form of evidence/argumentation in and of themselves in formal logic. While the analogy may have been instrumental in helping change your mind, it likely did so by helping you understand the actual underlying argument.

If a human based their views solely on formal logic then they wouldn't have an inconsistent world view in the first place, so I don't see why you bring up formal logic here. > While the analogy may have been instrumental in helping change your mind, it likely did so by helping you understand the actual underlying argument. The world would be a much better place if that was true, but sadly people base their world view…

I agree that people are often swayed by feelings, and that we don’t operate as perfectly logical/rational beings.

But if the only thing that convinced you of a thing is an analogy or emotional appeal, and if in being convinced you learned nothing about the underlying argument the analogy is supporting, you are susceptible to being convinced by similarly compelling analogies or emotional appeals that may or may not have any grounding in a solid argument.

I’m not claiming that people can’t be convinced this way. I’m pointing out that this form of persuasion is problematic and insufficient. “Argument from analogy” is considered a fallacy for this reason. It can lead people to take on new beliefs for bad reasons, even if the position they take is the “right” one.

While emotions absolutely influence our beliefs, it’s not accurate to downplay the role of formal logic, which is often implicitly invoked by emotional dialogue. The two are not mutually exclusive, and they work together.

For example: in a discussion about climate change, a purely logical presentation of facts about the temperature of the ocean and receding ice is not compelling without understanding the implications. Painting a picture of potentially cataclysmic outcomes and mass extinction events and migrations evokes an emotional response that is also necessary for humans to take action.

In this example, either one without the other can be problematic. Pure facts logically presented are hard to interpret, especially if you aren’t a climatologist. And if there is no logical foundation whatsoever, the argument is on shaky ground and the person who now believes it will have no reason not to believe the next emotionally compelling thing.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#178

Post by namaria »

haswell wrote: post #47
ggm wrote: post #3

I've grown used to being corrected, to the point that it's a pleasant surprise to be told I might be right. What I notice more and more, is the "you're wrong" is used to buttress opinion masquerading as fact. If you preface "I think that.." to asserts it doesn't stop the "you're wrong" but it at least puts the discussion into the realms of conjecture about things, including facts, rather than simple asserts of facts…

> I also notice that argument by analogy is being over-used This one seems especially pernicious, not because of extremely over-wrought comparisons, but because sometimes the analogy fits really well on the surface. But beyond the structural fit, it does not really help prove anything. Too often I'll encounter an analogy wielded as if it proves the underlying point, when the reality is that it breaks down quickly if…

Someone making a point through analogy is pretty much a caricature of bad reasoning. It's a pretty common trope.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#179

Post by palata »

circlefavshape wrote: post #175
gwd wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? It sounds like maybe some people are taking this as a challenge from me to atheists. I'm not really; just like Dennet is in TFA, I'm talking about general principles for someone trying to live as a rational creature: each of us should examine our own beliefs, and not only ask "What if I'm wrong?" but "How would I kn…

I myself am an atheist, but I gotta say that this is very well put > so the Romans believed in supernatural beings, and the Christians also believed in supernatural beings (and of course so did the Greeks, and the Persians, and the Babylonians, and the Egyptians, and...); but instead of this being evidence that there were supernatural beings of some sort [...] you decided this was evidence that there weren't supernat…

Not the OP, but I would say that I do not see this as evidence of anything other than "humans have beliefs".

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#180

Post by palata »

bglazer wrote: post #90
gwd wrote: post #79

I think the more important question is, "How would I know if I were wrong?" As a thinking Christian, and I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong; I'd be interested in what kind of evidence Dennet would accept to show him that his atheism was wrong.

Personally, if there was an easily verifiable, continuous example of a phenomena that violated basic physics and it was arranged in such a way that it sent a clear message confirming the existence of a deity, then I’m easily done with atheism. Like if the gases of a nebula got rearranged to spell out “God is real”, then sure yeah I guess they are real.

I used to define myself as "agnostic", as in "well I don't know, right now I don't have any reason to believe in , but if you could prove it I would obviously change my mind".

But then I changed my mind: now I believe that agnosticism is just a "shy" way of being atheist, somehow trying to say "I don't believe in a particular deity, but I can't commit to saying that I believe there is no deity". But that's the whole point of a belief: I could be wrong, and it would be okay to change my mind. A belief is not a proven fact.

So I am an atheist: I don't believe in any particular deity, and in fact I do believe that there is no such thing. But obviously if you proved my belief wrong, then I would change my belief :-).

Post reply on HN