Why does no one ever admit to being wrong?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Been reading a lot of threads on humanities\religious boards & other places recently since getting the laptop, one thing I've noticed is posters just can't sway from their initial points.

I mean how often do you see someone saying "Actually yeah, I overlooked that" or "Now that I look at it from that point of view it is a bit different"

Usually I find posters who have evidence thrown at them from every angle will either change the topic slightly or just not reply. I think it's a bit immature myself, I don't see any shame in being wrong & accepting it.

Take a look at the prostitution threads on humanities, people just can't accept the facts & consistantly refer to extremes or ridiculous examples when other posters offer logical reasons for legalisation. And they don't seem like complete morons either.

Would you admit to being wrong about something or just stay off the board for a few days?

Anyone else noticed it?

nesf

Since I'm never wrong, it's never come up actually.

Vorsprung

I've only been wrong once. That's when I thought I was wrong, but it turned out I was right.

astrofool

On the internet most people argue for the sake of arguing (like debating), without actually believing what they say, its just a way of one-upping people. Fact is, that nearly everything that can be argued has no one right answer, which leaves people to believe fervently in their own idea's, no matter how ludicrous.

It's also arrogance on the user's that they know better than other people, but then when you spot these people, you can sit smugly knowing they are imbeciles . I'd always try and clarify things with AFAIK rather than stating something matter of factly, though don't always.

Karl Hungus

Because they're jerks.

LadyJ

astrofool wrote:

I'd always try and clarify things with AFAIK rather than stating something matter of factly

Coward!

fade2black

If I'm wrong I'll admit to being wrong. If I'm right I'll wait for someone else to admit that.

astrofool

LadyJ wrote:

Coward!

Arrogance in action

Why should anyone accept they are wrong online? It's not like arguing with a friend where social niceties come in to it. I suspect people take more entrenched views online becuase it doesn't REALLY matter, noone logs in to these sites to broaden their mind surely.

ChityWest

I have seen that happen once on an 'israel/palestine' thread in soc.politics. Well not exactly but somone did say something like

'Actually I hadnt thought about it that way - good point'.

That was in response to something somone else had said. I was in shock for at least a day afterwards. Seriously imo it gave that guys argument more weight from that point onwards he didnt seem as entrenched.

ChityWest

ChityWest wrote:

I have seen that happen once on an 'israel/palestine' thread in soc.politics. Well not exactly but somone did say something like

'Actually I hadnt thought about it that way - good point'.

That was in response to something somone else had said. I was in shock for at least a day afterwards. Seriously imo it gave that guys argument more weight from that point onwards he didnt seem as entrenched.

Actually, that was me!!

Can't think what the exact point was but it was something I hadn't thought of, or a different way of looking at whatever it was we were arguing over. It was a good point well put so I held up my hand and acknowledged it.

ChityWest

Deleted User wrote:

Actually, that was me!!

Can't think what the exact point was but it was something I hadn't thought of, or a different way of looking at whatever it was we were arguing over. It was a good point well put so I held up my hand and acknowledged it.

Yep ! Think that was yours ! Wierd how I remembered that out of that whole thread.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Deleted User wrote:

Why should anyone accept they are wrong online? It's not like arguing with a friend where social niceties come in to it. I suspect people take more entrenched views online becuase it doesn't REALLY matter, noone logs in to these sites to broaden their mind surely.

I didn't mean you should admit to being wrong if you think you're right. I meant people who have evidence stacked against em but won't admit they were in the wrong for whatever reasons

ChityWest

ChityWest wrote:

Yep ! Think that was yours ! Wierd how I remembered that out of that whole thread.

But I should point out that I was still right...;)

I find myself getting quite 'dug in' on the politics site. Think these boards have a way of polarising opinion, everyone is either very pro-Israel or pro-Palestine and few will accept that there are glaring rights and wrongs on both sides.

Hermione*

Actually somebody said it to me recently on the humanities forum - not that I was right, but iirc he said 'I hadn't thought of it that way, that's an interesting point'. I was happy.

As somebody said above, I like debating so that would come into, but I usually argue based on personal opinions, and I try to qualify my arguments also ...afaik, etc.

arbeitsscheuer

Everyone has an opinion and everyone is completely unbending on their opinion.

That's my view on the subject and I'm damn well sticking to it, come hell or high water!

Hermione*

SebtheBum wrote:

Everyone has an opinion and everyone is completely unbending on their opinion.

That's my view on the subject and I'm damn well sticking to it, come hell or high water!

LOL, brilliant!

Pigman II

It's because every time you pwn someone it makes you feel like a big man that could take on the world. After such a victory you power levels are sky high and the rush might even make go outside, push around some ten-year old kid on the street and rob his pocket-money if you're feeling particularily brave just to round off the day.

Conversely being beaten in argument is like the worst humiliation that can happen to you in your entire life. The apology/acknowledgment is just the final bitchslap to your pussy-ass before your cyber-peers turn their back on you and you get kicked out of the 'cool kids' fold.

BTW, all those people who 'didn't apologies' and just 'disappeared' from threads have actually commited suicide.

arbeitsscheuer

Pigman II wrote:

BTW, all those people who 'didn't apologies' and just 'disappeared' from threads have actually commited suicide.

roffles... deadly, my ripostes affect lives!:D

Huggles

I'd say its human nature to not want to admit defeat. Especially if you have made an arse of yourself (lets face it some posters on here do that v well), you don't want to turn around and say yeah your right my entire arguement is wrong.

Sometimes peoples opinions are just that, their opinions and fact doesn't seem to sway that whatsoever.

There are a lot of keyboard warriors around too who will argue to rile people up. :rolleyes:

Binomate

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote:

Been reading a lot of threads on humanities\religious boards & other places recently since getting the laptop, one thing I've noticed is posters just can't sway from their initial points.

I mean how often do you see someone saying "Actually yeah, I overlooked that" or "Now that I look at it from that point of view it is a bit different"

Usually I find posters who have evidence thrown at them from every angle will either change the topic slightly or just not reply. I think it's a bit immature myself, I don't see any shame in being wrong & accepting it.

Take a look at the prostitution threads on humanities, people just can't accept the facts & consistantly refer to extremes or ridiculous examples when other posters offer logical reasons for legalisation. And they don't seem like complete morons either.

Would you admit to being wrong about something or just stay off the board for a few days?

Anyone else noticed it?

Most of those topics are very grey areas I'd imagine are topics where there are no right or wrong sides. At the end of the day it comes down to opinion, and an opinion can't ever be wrong. People can only disagree with it or agree with it. You can however be wrong about what you base an opinion on. Again we enter another grey area. Credibility of information and the ever changing establishments that we call facts etc. If someone misread something that they based an argument on, and that little thing undermined their whole argument and they still wouldn't admit they were wrong then yes, that person is a fool. Otherwise it's all relative.

Victor

Being wrong risks rejection.

Admitting being wrong risks ridicule.

The internet has different social norms to face-to-face conversation, including a greater ability to ignore people.

homah_7ft

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote:

posters just can't sway from their initial points.

You are wrong.

Merrick

The way I see it, people just don't want to look silly.

ChityWest

I think as well that if you admit to being wrong on one minor point then you risk having that misquoted and taken out of context and thrown back at you.

WhiteWashMan

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote:

Been reading a lot of threads on humanities\religious boards & other places recently since getting the laptop, one thing I've noticed is posters just can't sway from their initial points.

I mean how often do you see someone saying "Actually yeah, I overlooked that" or "Now that I look at it from that point of view it is a bit different"

Usually I find posters who have evidence thrown at them from every angle will either change the topic slightly or just not reply. I think it's a bit immature myself, I don't see any shame in being wrong & accepting it.

Take a look at the prostitution threads on humanities, people just can't accept the facts & consistantly refer to extremes or ridiculous examples when other posters offer logical reasons for legalisation. And they don't seem like complete morons either.

Would you admit to being wrong about something or just stay off the board for a few days?

Anyone else noticed it?

im happy to admit im wrong.

but im also equally happy to disagree with someone. sometimes its not just that people dont get your point, they just dont agree with you.

and thats ok.

homah_7ft

ChityWest wrote:

I think as well that if you admit to being wrong on one minor point then you risk having that misquoted and taken out of context and thrown back at you.

Paranoia. Risk it sometime

biko

I might not be right - but I'm not wrong

ChityWest

homah_7ft wrote:

Paranoia. Risk it sometime

I have done - and thats what happened

It does depend on the type of person you are arguing with though.

Crucifix

Heh, reminds me of one of my favourite Brunching pieces: link
I'm not very argumentative really, and I'll rarely claim to be right unless I'm talking about something based in facts and I'm very certain. And then if I'm wrong in those cases, there's no real wiggle room so I'll just hold my hand up.

ChityWest

Crucifix wrote:

Heh, reminds me of one of my favourite Brunching pieces: link
I'm not very argumentative really, and I'll rarely claim to be right unless I'm talking about something based in facts and I'm very certain. And then if I'm wrong in those cases, there's no real wiggle room so I'll just hold my hand up.

That link is pretty useful :

"Once you've reached a stalemate on an unanswerable subject (Existence of God, Death Star vs. Enterprise, &c.),"

course we all know the death star wins hands down

Thirdfox

I think (lol) that the problem is that people see these things as "arguments" when it should be "discussions" - like in real life, I find that once your "opponent" gets stuck in the mindset of winning v. losing then nothing productive will come from the ensuing dialogue.

But if people genuinely wanted to solve a problem then new views/approachs will be welcomed i.e. a scientist is just as excited when his theories are wrong as when they are right.

So perhaps we should have less arguments and more discussions, where ideas can be floated, if proven wrong then discarded without risk of seeming stupid/weak/etc. etc.