Conceding an argument?

[RetiredGySgt]

Lies, all lies! The fact is...some of us are never wrong.

Rule number 2, when in doubt refer to rule number 1.

Rule number 1, I am never wrong.

 

[manifold]

To some people, accepting that their argument has been bested, or admit they are just wrong, wrecks their carefully constructed "world." People on political mesage boards are especially susceptable to that since they are expressing their ideals and most base their lives and decisions on their idealism.

How shrill they get just depends on how much of their argument is based on emotion and how much is based on fact.

If we were all the same and open-minded and willing to accept that we may be wrong we would probably all get along and the political divide in this country wouldn't be what it is.

Excellent points. And I guess I can see why I'm different. I don't base my life or decisions on any particular philosophical ideal. I'm a selfish prick and almost always base my decisions on what's best for me. That affords me a kind of freedom to discuss ideas and ideals without being emotionally, intellectually, or in any way wedded to them.

 

[Ravi]

In other words, you're never wrong because you don't have any actual convictions.

 

[manifold]

In other words, you're never wrong because you don't have any actual convictions.

Your words, not mine.

 

[dread]

To some people, accepting that their argument has been bested, or admit they are just wrong, wrecks their carefully constructed "world." People on political mesage boards are especially susceptable to that since they are expressing their ideals and most base their lives and decisions on their idealism.

How shrill they get just depends on how much of their argument is based on emotion and how much is based on fact.

If we were all the same and open-minded and willing to accept that we may be wrong we would probably all get along and the political divide in this country wouldn't be what it is.

I agree with all of what you said but the "shrill part". Sometimes, on a message board, people are not arguing with their emotion but rather are just being trolls.


In the real world, when face to face with someone, ones body language gives that away. On this format we cant tell if they are being serious or just saying stuff to piss people off.

 

[Shogun]

I agree with all of what you said but the "shrill part". Sometimes, on a message board, people are not arguing with their emotion but rather are just being trolls.


In the real world, when face to face with someone, ones body language gives that away. On this format we cant tell if they are being serious or just saying stuff to piss people off.

Are certainly are a troll expert, arent ya? don't you have a palestine and israel forum to patrol, bitch?

 

[dread]

Are certainly are a troll expert, arent ya? don't you have a palestine and israel forum to patrol, bitch?

Wow! I must really piss you off.

 

[TopGunna]

To some people, accepting that their argument has been bested, or admit they are just wrong, wrecks their carefully constructed "world." People on political mesage boards are especially susceptable to that since they are expressing their ideals and most base their lives and decisions on their idealism.

How shrill they get just depends on how much of their argument is based on emotion and how much is based on fact.

If we were all the same and open-minded and willing to accept that we may be wrong we would probably all get along and the political divide in this country wouldn't be what it is.

I think Gunny nailed it. I also think there's sort of a catch-22 when you realize you've been out-debated.

On the one hand, you can concede defeat, but you're essentially admiting that your original position had holes in it. On the other hand, you can deny defeat, clinging to your original position in spite of the new evidence. This can get you characterized as an idealogical crazy who can't stand to reason.

Neither appeal to me all that much, so I try not to get out-debated.

 

[Paulie]

How could anyone get out-debated when there's Wikipedia?

 

[Paulie]

How could anyone get out-debated when there's Wikipedia?

I probably should have edited to add the proverbial , as some are a bit slow in recognizing sarcasm.

 

[Gunny]

Excellent points. And I guess I can see why I'm different. I don't base my life or decisions on any particular philosophical ideal. I'm a selfish prick and almost always base my decisions on what's best for me. That affords me a kind of freedom to discuss ideas and ideals without being emotionally, intellectually, or in any way wedded to them.

That in itself is a philosophical ideal.

You would think the easiest ones to argue would be the ones you don't care about, but such is not always the case. Invariably, someone is going to presume a position for you -- just not agreeing with some means you an extremists 180 degrees opposite of them -- and you spend your time trying to explain to the brick you are arguing with that no, you really don't support one thing because you disagree with another.

 

[Diuretic]

That in itself is a philosophical ideal.

....

Indeed it is, a form of ethical egoism I would think.

 

[manifold]

Indeed it is, a form of ethical egoism I would think.

Hey, who asked you anyway you criminal spawn!

 

[Ravi]

Indeed it is, a form of ethical egoism I would think.

More like a cop out, imo.

 

[manifold]

More like a cop out, imo.

 

[Eleutherios]

You have a valid point, but i disagree.

It is not an unwritten rule, at least for me. I do so all the time.

 

[roomy]

I play devils advocate for entertainment as do many others, I usually state my true beliefs somewhere down the line though they are often ignored or misconstrued, either way I don't care.As far as I am concerned if you can argue for either side and hold your own, you are worth your salt, as soon as you choose a side you cannot begin to uphold by any standard, you are undone.

 

[Gunny]

You have a valid point, but i disagree.

It is not an unwritten rule, at least for me. I do so all the time.

Welcome to the board. Anyone in particular you are responding to?

Please shorten your signature to 7 lines to comply with board policy.

Thanks,

Gunny

 

[Gunny]

I play devils advocate for entertainment as do many others, I usually state my true beliefs somewhere down the line though they are often ignored or misconstrued, either way I don't care.As far as I am concerned if you can argue for either side and hold your own, you are worth your salt, as soon as you choose a side you cannot begin to uphold by any standard, you are undone.

You've actually stated a belief somewhere?

 

[roomy]

You've actually stated a belief somewhere?

Not so you'd notice