To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right • Hacker News Board

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#71

Post by douche » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:19 AM UTC

h4nkoslo wrote: post #56

This is also known as the "shit sandwich" (when leavened with another helping of praise on the other end), and is instantly recognizable once you see the pattern. The risk is that your initial praise is seen as disingenuous by its recipients, or that it goes too far and reifies their underlying value system when it actually is contradictory to yours. Incidentally, Barack Obama was particularly good at this constructi…

I hate this pattern. If something is fucked up, tell me, so I can fix it. Don't waste my time buttering me up first and patting me on the back afterwards, just get to the point.

It's one thing I do kind of miss about working shitty, dangerous construction and logging jobs summers in college. There's no time for pussyfooting around when a miscommunication means somebody gets crushed or mangled by heavy equipment. Brusque, unambiguous, often profanity-laced communication is more effective getting the point across rapidly...

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#72

Post by Artoemius » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:22 AM UTC

teen wrote: post #19

rayiner wrote: post #16

Learning how to do this is an essential skill. Most people are not idiots. If they disagree with you, it's probably not because they are being irrational, but because they're starting from a different premise, making different assumptions, or assigning different values to different aspects of the problem. Only when you understand their argument well enough to articulate it in your own words can you effectively presen…

i would argue that most people are in fact idiots

That depends on how you define an idiot.

It's true that one half of people literally has less-than-average intelligence...

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#73

Post by zuminator » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:22 AM UTC

h4nkoslo wrote: post #56

This is also known as the "shit sandwich" (when leavened with another helping of praise on the other end), and is instantly recognizable once you see the pattern. The risk is that your initial praise is seen as disingenuous by its recipients, or that it goes too far and reifies their underlying value system when it actually is contradictory to yours. Incidentally, Barack Obama was particularly good at this constructi…

Although I agree it can be perceived as disingenuous, I think it's perfectly valid to clarify areas of common thought before trying to adjust someone else's way of thinking. Furthermore it doesn't just make them feel better, but in my experience it makes me as the speaker feel good to openly acknowledge the respect I have for the person I'm dialoguing with, instead of just thinking of them as pure adversary.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#74

Post by PakG1 » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:25 AM UTC

jaywunder wrote: post #66

PakG1 wrote: post #62

While this is an important skill to have, I've also learned over time that there are certain types of people where it's easier to let them "be right" and accommodate the consequences. I didn't always think this way. In the past, I would say that people are reasonable, it's always possible to figure out what the truth is, especially if I acknowledge the possibility that I am often wrong. But now I realize that some pe…

> While this is an important skill to have, I've also learned over time that there are certain types of people where it's easier to let them "be right" and accommodate the consequences Generally when that happens to me I've come across what I like to call a "fundamental argument." Where neither party is correct and neither party is wrong. A good example of this is "do you believe in religion" because nobody can prove…

The type of people I am discussing don't have these "fundamental arguments" as you describe them. They have diametric arguments like: "the reason you chose the system you did is because you hate me" or "you're trying to sell me this product because you want to see me suffer", etc. I am the center of the world, the world revolves around me, and anyone who disagrees with me about anything is out to get me, and every situation in the world is designed to be a detriment to my personal and professional well-being; therefore, I must always be in attack mode to prevent the world's population from hurting me. That type of skewed perspective. I did not used to think that these types of people existed. I do now.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#75

Post by Artoemius » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:28 AM UTC

jaywunder wrote: post #66

PakG1 wrote: post #62

While this is an important skill to have, I've also learned over time that there are certain types of people where it's easier to let them "be right" and accommodate the consequences. I didn't always think this way. In the past, I would say that people are reasonable, it's always possible to figure out what the truth is, especially if I acknowledge the possibility that I am often wrong. But now I realize that some pe…

> While this is an important skill to have, I've also learned over time that there are certain types of people where it's easier to let them "be right" and accommodate the consequences Generally when that happens to me I've come across what I like to call a "fundamental argument." Where neither party is correct and neither party is wrong. A good example of this is "do you believe in religion" because nobody can prove…

> nobody can prove or disprove the existence of a higher being or a religion.

You don't believe in something just because you cannot disprove it. You must have some evidence to believe it in the first place. Otherwise, you would believe in all kinds of celestial teapots.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#76

Post by civilian » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 5:57 AM UTC

Artoemius wrote: post #70

alsetmusic wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only when you understand their argument... I couldn't agree more. As a lifelong believer in science, raised in the Midwest among creationists, I have come into many conversations with intelligent people who somehow place faith in front of evidence. It's demoralizing to realize the frequency that this phenomenon occurs. I've recently scheduled a trip to the Creation Museum to observe the message at its core (half fo…

Sorry, most people are indeed not idiots, but that doesn't apply to creationists. It's one thing to go to a church (there even might be purely social reasons), and it's another thing to discard overwhelming scientific evidence and believe something based on the principle of not needing any evidence at all. I become especially sad when I think of the confused minds of the poor children of these people. On the topic, I…

You're right that creationists are pretty deep into idiot territory.

But alsetmusic's fact-finding mission could still be useful! Right now he doesn't even know where to start on how to construct an argument, because he doesn't know what creationists have been told.

There are probably many pieces of evidence in the creationist museum that are valid "holes" in science, that we're still looking to fill. He'd be able to acknowledge certain fossil gaps and irregularities, while describing how they still fit into the great scientific theory.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#77

Post by regularfry » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 6:06 AM UTC

Artoemius wrote: post #72

teen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i would argue that most people are in fact idiots

That depends on how you define an idiot. It's true that one half of people literally has less-than-average intelligence...

Depends on the distribution. And which average.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#78

Post by flukus » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 6:08 AM UTC

civilian wrote: post #76

Artoemius wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, most people are indeed not idiots, but that doesn't apply to creationists. It's one thing to go to a church (there even might be purely social reasons), and it's another thing to discard overwhelming scientific evidence and believe something based on the principle of not needing any evidence at all. I become especially sad when I think of the confused minds of the poor children of these people. On the topic, I…

You're right that creationists are pretty deep into idiot territory. But alsetmusic's fact-finding mission could still be useful! Right now he doesn't even know where to start on how to construct an argument, because he doesn't know what creationists have been told. There are probably many pieces of evidence in the creationist museum that are valid "holes" in science, that we're still looking to fill. He'd be able to…

> There are probably many pieces of evidence in the creationist museum that are valid "holes" in science

From what I've seen the arguments aren't that sophisticated, they start with an outright rejection of most branches of science. Amusingly, evolution is the one they criticize the least.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#79

Post by ollifi » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 6:09 AM UTC

I find that most of this discussion is framed through being right and needing to school someone. That is pretty easy special case. The useful thing to learn in conversation would be to actually have power to adjust your own beliefs. It's better to be in that end of learning.

Re: To tell someone they're wrong, first tell them how they're right

#80

Post by reitanqild » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 6:18 AM UTC

Artoemius wrote: post #70

alsetmusic wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only when you understand their argument... I couldn't agree more. As a lifelong believer in science, raised in the Midwest among creationists, I have come into many conversations with intelligent people who somehow place faith in front of evidence. It's demoralizing to realize the frequency that this phenomenon occurs. I've recently scheduled a trip to the Creation Museum to observe the message at its core (half fo…

Sorry, most people are indeed not idiots, but that doesn't apply to creationists. It's one thing to go to a church (there even might be purely social reasons), and it's another thing to discard overwhelming scientific evidence and believe something based on the principle of not needing any evidence at all. I become especially sad when I think of the confused minds of the poor children of these people. On the topic, I…

Creationist, son of creationists here :-)

Although I guess there are creationists and there are creationists:

If you ask me about science I will answer with science. I did well in school, including biology and introduction to astrophysics.

If you hold a gun to my head and ask if I still belive this nonsense about the world being created I'd guess I'd say yes (if I can't get around to disarming you, I don't like armed people with strong ideological beliefs going around trying to convince people :-/ )

On a more serious note: For me, the distinction between belief and science disappear somewhere around "all models are wrong, some are useful". For me, both models have been very useful.