What is the point of getting into a discussion with somebody who doesnt acknowledge that they might be wrong about the topic at hand?
It wouldnt even be a discussion.
These people do exist.
The point is that it might be possible to get through to them. Failing that, as I usually do, at least you can make them look really stupid as a cautionary tale to anyone else who might be considering thinking like that.
I guess it could be benifical if you have an audience if you could both keep it civil...
good points
when you factor in the audience aspect of things, keeping it civil might not even be a necessity
good eye good eye
More effective if the other side degenerates into circular logic and personal attacks as quickly as possible. That way you don't waste much time making what's usually a fairly obvious point.
Quote from: SillyCybin on December 26, 2006, 05:36:35 PM
More effective if the other side degenerates into circular logic and personal attacks as quickly as possible. That way you don't waste much time making what's usually a fairly obvious point.
troof
the strike-first tactic dont usually work anymore
especially on these online situations
maybe somebody will start keeping stats one day
my guess is that 9 times out of 10 the person who strikes first ends up looking like a chump
even if your opponent in a debate isn't serious about getting to the bottom of a topic, it can still be useful to talk to them. you can learn your own argument more thoroughly, or learn a few things about why idiots think like they do.
and sometimes, they don't consider the possibility that they're wrong, because they aren't.
I agree with vex, sometimes it might be nothing more than a mental excercise for you. Of course, you might get lucky, and get a little barb underneath their armour that they'll contemplate later when they are alone.
LHX, the point is to keep hammering away until they relent, just a little, that they may be wrong, or be sticking to one point of view a little too much.
From that crack comes a torrent.  And the dam comes down.
At least the way I do it.
erosion and building momentum
yall are some beautiful motherfuckers these days
...because it's more interesting than always talking to a bunch of yes-men or at the very least people who think like you do. Bo-RING!
Differences of opinion, especially stubborn holders of said opinions, are fodder for much livelier discussion than a bunch of "yeah, yeah, sure, yeah, you're right"'s.
You can learn from that...but I think you learn and expand more when there's stuff in there you either don't agree with or have to use to explain yourself better.
Jenne:
yeah, you're right.
:thanks:
(appreciating the irony, vex)
Quote from: Jenne on December 26, 2006, 06:37:16 PM
...because it's more interesting than always talking to a bunch of yes-men or at the very least people who think like you do. Bo-RING!
Differences of opinion, especially stubborn holders of said opinions, are fodder for much livelier discussion than a bunch of "yeah, yeah, sure, yeah, you're right"'s.
You can learn from that...but I think you learn and expand more when there's stuff in there you either don't agree with or have to use to explain yourself better.
You missed out - great situation to work on really brutal putdowns. If I can't make you see things my my I'll settle for making you weep like a little bitch.
Eh. Bound to be other opportunities to do that, SC.
Quote from: Jenne on December 26, 2006, 06:37:16 PM
...because it's more interesting than always talking to a bunch of yes-men or at the very least people who think like you do. Bo-RING!
who said anything about yes-men?
i said 'people who dont acknowledge that they might be wrong'
that has nothing to do with 'yes-men' or people who think alike
meat eaters and non-meat eaters can get into a discussion about nutrition and how a body breaks down and assimilates food
its all about people being mentally prepared to acknowledge a better (more useful/more adaptable) perspective or point of view
some people arent at that point
It's been my experience that those who hold strong opinions tend to be rather stubborn.
Getting them to the point of admitting they might be wrong is no small exercise of patience...esp if you share said propensity to believe YOU might be right, other viewpoints wrong.
All of the previous reasons before mine came from the premise that the person engaging the "person who doesn't acknowledge they might be wrong" was someone else...not themselves.
Blame the 2 for one carling again...
You make me wanna justify my bullshit
by I aint gonna cos then I'd be a hypocrite
You think you're winning I don't see the attraction
I just conceded so you'd choke on satisfaction
You make we wanna kill someone I've never met
typing crap into a forum on the internet
you think I'm jaded hell you aint seen nothing yet
Your golden future is just another safe bet
You make me wanna try to get a message through
you're under my skin and I haven't even met you
but don't go thinking that's something to be proud about
You'll be forgotten in the time it takes to call you out
You make me wanna choose my words like ammunition
making you look stupid is my one ambition
I keep on posting as an excercise in contradiction
I've forgotten what you said to piss me off cos now I'm on a mission
motherfuckin 2 for 1 carling
Quote from: Jenne on December 26, 2006, 07:13:39 PM
Getting them to the point of admitting they might be wrong is no small exercise of patience...esp if you share said propensity to believe YOU might be right, other viewpoints wrong.
QFT. I don't bother sharing my beliefs most of the time, because I know that I can't always defend them rationally. And if I can't defend them rationally, then any attempt to discuss them rationally is going to end up perceived as an attack.
Though I'd like to think it's less a matter of "I'm right everyone else is wrong" and more like "This is right for me and anyone else's model would be wrong for me". That's how I justify staying quiet, at least.
Quote from: DJRubberducky on January 03, 2007, 04:41:35 PM
Quote from: Jenne on December 26, 2006, 07:13:39 PM
Getting them to the point of admitting they might be wrong is no small exercise of patience...esp if you share said propensity to believe YOU might be right, other viewpoints wrong.
QFT. I don't bother sharing my beliefs most of the time, because I know that I can't always defend them rationally. And if I can't defend them rationally, then any attempt to discuss them rationally is going to end up perceived as an attack.
Though I'd like to think it's less a matter of "I'm right everyone else is wrong" and more like "This is right for me and anyone else's model would be wrong for me". That's how I justify staying quiet, at least.
That's a great way of putting it, DJR. Also an aspect I hadn't thought of, so thanks for bringing it up.
I think a lot of people aren't even aware that's really what is keeping them from getting their points across...they see it not as their own inability to explain effectively but the other person's lack of ability to understand.
Could even be both, in a lot of cases.