Editor's Note: You're Wrong
- Thread starter Russ Pitts
- Start date
I never realized it before, but this is precisely why I love to proofread and edit. It's a accepted way for me to tell people that they're wrong and I'm right. I wield my red pen and encyclopedic knowledge of structure and grammar with pride and perhaps a bit of superiority.
When it comes to other things, I'm working on the whole "admitting I'm wrong" part.
When it comes to other things, I'm working on the whole "admitting I'm wrong" part.
You're wrong!
Only insofar as thinking it's a problem with gamers more than anyone else, anyway. Everyone likes to think they're right. Most people will stick to their guns at the cost of having their eyes opened. Just think of all the classic debates. Religion, politics, ethics; everyone has something they believe in emphatically.
Anyway. Looking forward to reading this week's articles. I like to learn.
Only insofar as thinking it's a problem with gamers more than anyone else, anyway. Everyone likes to think they're right. Most people will stick to their guns at the cost of having their eyes opened. Just think of all the classic debates. Religion, politics, ethics; everyone has something they believe in emphatically.
Anyway. Looking forward to reading this week's articles. I like to learn.
One word: Schadenfreude.
As a species we are competitive, so in order to 'feel' superior to someone we need to first make them inferior (or at least in your own mind they are inferior).
By saying "You're wrong" it is by far the easiest method of self induced Schadenfreude.
As a species we are competitive, so in order to 'feel' superior to someone we need to first make them inferior (or at least in your own mind they are inferior).
By saying "You're wrong" it is by far the easiest method of self induced Schadenfreude.
It's one of the biggest problems, people not accepting other's opinions, they can disagree with you and not be 'wrong', just of a different viewpoint.
I've long suspected that humans have an intrinsic need to tear other people down, perhaps because it seems easier to knock others down than to build oneself up?
Granted, I already know I have a pretty negative view on humanity, but it's the closest thing to a reasonable argument I can come up with.
Side note: Perhaps "argument", the word, is the whole problem. Philosophically, I think, it's supposed to mean more like a "debate", and imply that there are different viewpoints but the people that hold them still respect each other. I think we've lost that, and we turn "argument" into "proof of inferiority": a suggestion and often a direct challenge that "because you don't agree with me, you're not only wrong, you're worthy of my condemnation and my hate, and I'm entitled/obligated to hate you because of it".
Granted, I already know I have a pretty negative view on humanity, but it's the closest thing to a reasonable argument I can come up with.
Side note: Perhaps "argument", the word, is the whole problem. Philosophically, I think, it's supposed to mean more like a "debate", and imply that there are different viewpoints but the people that hold them still respect each other. I think we've lost that, and we turn "argument" into "proof of inferiority": a suggestion and often a direct challenge that "because you don't agree with me, you're not only wrong, you're worthy of my condemnation and my hate, and I'm entitled/obligated to hate you because of it".
Honestly, when you said this, I was half-expecting you to start singing:Russ Pitts said:
Anyway, as much as I hate to admit it, I do sometimes have trouble admitting that I am wrong about something, since I am highly opinionated. However, I personally rarely say "you're wrong". I generally perfer using "I am sorry, but that is not true" or "with all due respect, I disagree".
We like to discuss things, as human beings, and part of the discussion process usually involves disagreeing with someone's point of view. Even if you agree with them in general, you might feel that they're missing something that you consider important, though maybe they don't see it that way.
There are, of course, many ways to tell someone they're wrong, but simply disagreeing with someone isn't tearing them down or attacking them, but engaging their ideas and pitting them against your own. Many times we'll challenge what someone says, thinking they're wrong, and either they come around to our point of view, or they come around to ours, but in the process both people have learned something.
The crucial element in this is being able to conduct civil discourse with a give and take of ideas. I think there's this fear among some that even listening to a different point of view is threatening, and that's typically the sign of someone unable to fully defend their own opinions.
So, in this case, you're not wrong at all!
There are, of course, many ways to tell someone they're wrong, but simply disagreeing with someone isn't tearing them down or attacking them, but engaging their ideas and pitting them against your own. Many times we'll challenge what someone says, thinking they're wrong, and either they come around to our point of view, or they come around to ours, but in the process both people have learned something.
The crucial element in this is being able to conduct civil discourse with a give and take of ideas. I think there's this fear among some that even listening to a different point of view is threatening, and that's typically the sign of someone unable to fully defend their own opinions.
So, in this case, you're not wrong at all!
I'll post lengthy comments explaining exactly why I may differ in opinion from another person, but I try to reserve calling that person "wrong" for only misstating or misusing hard, proven facts. Being different from me doesn't make a person wrong.
Someone I may not care to ever meet in person, but not wrong. XD
The "easier to tear down than build up" bit I dig. Entropy is natural.
Someone I may not care to ever meet in person, but not wrong. XD
In my high school debate class we defined "an argument" as something which happens between two parties and "a debate" as something which happens between two parties under the moderation of an indifferent third party.Sabrestar said:
The "easier to tear down than build up" bit I dig. Entropy is natural.
Hey I wonder if what I got going on there was what inspired you...Russ Pitts said:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.223840-Former-Teacher-Acquitted-of-Videogame-Massacre-Threat?page=6#7622948
Maybe not, but if we did inspire you, is there a badge for that ? (just kidding)
A big problem is that the Anglo-saxons totally ignore the art of Dialectics (look it up, everyone!), and think that it's all sterile disputes when it's (sometimes) for the advancement of knowledge and philosophy.
It's true, most people will say on the net will say "you're wrong" to a professional with years of experience on the topic ; but I never get into an argument about something I didn't think about for a long time while mercilessly questioning myself and my motives.
That said, it does feel great to say "you're wrong" and proceed to prove it, to someone who said "I dare you".
