Have you ever had the realization mid-argument, that you were very wrong?
What was it about? Did you admit you were wrong or adamantly insist on your point? How did your interlocutor react? How would you like someone to react if you concede errors?
Oh definitely. Halfway through an argument at work with a new engineer (I'm a designer) about how revision clouding is always shortened to "rev" and how to spell that abbreviation correctly in the past tense.
Revved or reved or rec'd
I did admit when I realized I was wrong
Yeah, I think everyone has. Unless they are astoundingly arrogant.
If people were never extraordinarily wrong about things, we'd have nothing to argue about on the Internet. What a blessing!
I guess the question is how often do you realize that you're actually on the wrong side of that argument, it definitely happens. And then what do you do next? Dig your heels in, double down and keep arguing? Or acknowledge the realization, make a concession or even apology?
Evidently, it can be hard to be a decent person (hard for all of us), when anonymity means there are no personal consequences to being a dick.
Yes.
I used to be very anti-gay because I was raised religious. One day, someone explained to me that gay people feel exactly the same feelings as straight people, it's just they're directed differently. Somehow, that made it all click and it just made sense.
I'm glad that age has given me the comfort to tell people when I just don't know, and therefore, don't have an opinion on some things.
I'm glad that age has given me the comfort to tell people when I just don't know, and therefore, don't have an opinion on some things.
Yeah it certainly seems to me that as people get older they tend to have fewer shits to give in general. What's funny about it, is that while that sounds like a bad thing, it's often a pretty good thing. It means people are more confident, confident enough to show humility, and to say what they actually think.
That's very interesting, thanks for sharing. If you don't mind me asking, was there an argument you had with this person or was it rather an explain situation? Did you know each other well?
We came to be good friends but were just Internet friends at the time. They were just a very patient person.
I used to be very wrong about trans people until I talked to a trans person for about 3 minutes
When I realized it had nothing to do with sexualization and all about identity I stopped, apologized and asked a bunch of questions
My interlocutor kind of didn't know how to handle it and it took a moment for them to defuse, as I'm sure they were expecting shouting or worse. After that we had a real meaningful conversation that gave me a lot to think about.
That's exactly the outcome we need in the world. Thank you for sharing this.
What really sucks is how many times this conversation has started, only for the trans person to (very logically and understandably) react internally with “Ohhh boy, here we go, another one of these backwards bigots. I’m just going to yell to make myself feel better.”
Then the ignorant individual feels attacked, gets defensive, and feels satisfied in their belief that trans people are hysterical or something.
I don’t even blame anyone so much for that. Being patient with every single transphobe just in case they’re a reasonable person takes far more energy than I have.
I think many social "issues" can be resolved with empathy after speaking to an individual on a human level instead of grappling with an abstract "issue".
The first is good but it is a bandaid, the second is an attempt to keep others from needing bandaids too
At this point in my life, I’m extremely comfortable admitting when I’m wrong. It earns credibility.
The ability to point out my own mistakes has maybe done the best for my career, long-term.
Yes, it's a superpower.
I almost always immediately admit that I am wrong, if I notice it. I do it often.
"You are right, I didn't consider x".
Why the hell would I insist on being right? It serves no purpose. It also just makes me seem like an unlikable idiot.
People always react positively, and it makes constructive discussions possible. They now know that I am a reasonable rational person. They also know that I have good intentions. This makes it possible for me to convince them in the future as well. Everybody benefits.
Sure, it happens all the time. Someone shows me a piece of evidence that I trust, or points out that I missed something in what they had originally said, or whatever. What else is there to do in that situation other then go 'Oh. You're right, my bad.'?
But I'm kinda weird, I enjoy having my beliefs and ideas challenged and I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong and updating my worldview to reflect the most accurate information I have access to.
Yes, I'd like to think I'm open to having my mind changed about things. I try to follow both left wing and right wing media (New Statesman and The Spectator respectively in the UK) to try to get both points of view on current affairs.
I don't actively seek out media from both sides of political issues because in the US we don't really have 'left wing' and 'right wing' media, we have media all owned by billionaires that mostly stay center-right on most subjects, and let the occasional center-left viewpoint slip through so they can seem to be unbiased. Unless I'm reading Jacobin or other actually-leftist (read:socialist) papers/magazines, all I get is right-wing perspectives.
Oh yeah. Happens to me not infrequently, though less as I get older and choose my battles more wisely.
On my best days, I apologize and bow out of the discussion. On my worst days, I just ghost the entire thread.
Choosing your battles wisely seems to be good advice. I think it's a good quality, if people can concede if they were wrong. I hsbe the impression that being wrong is too often sanctioned or frowned upon, whereas a more accepting, forgiving stance might make it easier for people to admit their errors.
I think there are definitely a lot of compounding issues that all combine to make admitting you're wrong something that's really hard to do. Some of them related to brain chemistry, some of them entirely societal, like you mentioned. But I do think that it's on the person who was wrong to be the one who does the growing; it shouldn't be society that has to pick up the slack for an arrogant and incorrect person.
Yeah. If I think the person isn’t being a dick I apologise.
One where I realized I was wrong three times. My wife and I had visited a modern art museum. One of the installations was a pile of candy in the corner. We got home, I said it's ridiculous to call that art, and ridiculous to fund artists to create lazy, self-indulgent nonsense. She convinced me that I am in no position to arbitrate what is or isn't art (she is right, of course). Then I realized she wasn't arguing about art, she was upset about something that had happened at work (that was my second miss).
Twenty years later I found out what that candy is all about. It was a piece by Felix Gonzalez Torres called "Untitled (Portrait of Ross in LA) 1991" It is 175 lbs of candy that patrons are free to take. It represents his lover, Ross Laycock, who had wasted away from AIDS earlier that year (Gonzalez Torres would die from AIDS six years later). So long as there is funding for the arts, Ross is replenished endlessly. For the third miss, I was Oedipean-level wrong.
Oh fuck, "so long as there is funding for the arts," seems very precarious right now.
So long as there is funding for the arts, Ross is replenished endlessly.
Holy shit. What a direct and quantivative comparison to the power of memories to keep the spirit of our loved ones alive through giving (in my family's case, stories; did I enter tell you of the time when my uncle met Loretta Swit?) of ourselves and sharing them with others.
Huh. I'm no judge of art, being a low-born oaf, but in retrospect that is clearly art; and evocative as fuck.
Yes. My partner at the time had brought something up and I started to disagree.
Mid retort I realized I was speaking from my shitty upbringing again, paused to mull that over, and then rejected my own retort right there in front of her.
It's not often anymore, but I'm still surprised by the occasional stupid idea put into my head by religious indoctrination as a know nothing child that I have to deprogram from even decades later.
How did your interlocutor react?
She values my ability to self reflect on the spot like that, so she reacted with love.
How would you like someone to react if you concede errors?
Without malice.
No, this hasn't happened to me. And it's not because I can't admit that I'm wrong. I just don't get into arguments unless I am very well versed on the topic. If I'm not sufficiently versed, then I will do additional research before staking a position. I can confidently say that I have never had to reverse myself partway through because I always come from a position of thought and knowledge and don't wade in lightly.
Except, now that I think about it, there was one time where I was completely mistaken on a political topic. I won't go into details here, but I guess I really blew that. So just the one time.
Hmm, I'm remembering another incident upon reflecting on the first. I was in a rush and didn't think about my position very carefully before calling the other guy a Nazi crybaby. Turns out his dad died fighting the Nazis in North Africa, and he had been carrying the mantle ever since.
But other than that, no, I have never reversed myself mid argument because I always think carefully before typing something out, especially if it is going to be long.
Somewhat regularly with my wife. Not in a "wife bad" way, more "wife smart". If it's heated she can struggle with cooling off. But usually it's fine
The only times I struggle to admit I'm wrong is if my interlocutor has an attitude I find grating. Sometimes in online debates I just don't reply and give people the last word instead of continuing a heated conversation if I think they have a point.
Otherwise happy to admit that I'm wrong if someone cites a study or whatever that says something counter to what I'm claiming.
If this hasn’t happened to you then you are probably full of hubris
I try to admit I am wrong generally but I do not always because I have some hubris because I am crappy sometimes. Sometimes the people on the other side are graceful in their “winning” and sometimes not
Several times! And not necessarily wrong, but missing a perspective that changes my opinion. That’s how we learn and grow. It’s also why you and more people should read books.
Have you ever written a proof, only to disproof your original statement in the end?
Yes.
I've had it happen before but I can't think of any specific examples.
My reaction to it however has evolved over time. When I was younger I'd be way more embarrassed over it and just stop debating, accepting defeat at the next opportunity, only to shrink away in shame.
Nowadays though, I'll still be embarrassed, but immediately admit fault, laugh at my stupidity and issue any necessary retraction. People are usually disarmed when you can admit you were wrong and they were right. Even more if you throw a little joke about being dumb or something in there.
Not surprisingly, people who couldn't admit when they were wrong didn't come into this thread and admit that they have been wrong.
Not like wrong wrong, most of my big realisations happen by myself. I consider recognising others points and being willing to modify my ideas when appropriate an invaluable cognitive skill. It's more difficult sometimes than others, but I'm not going to end up as a closed minded old man at least.
On several occasions, it has hit me like a truck and I’ve instantly reversed my thinking. For this reason, I am open to listening genuinely to other sides, so long as they are not intolerant. But I’m a petty bitch, so I still have strong opinions until they get flipped.
that's what they're supposed to be for
I've had a couple lemmy arguments where I missed a subtle point that the other person was making and mistook it for something else.
You just got to bite that bullet, I usually say: I'm sorry. I misread what you were saying. It's my bad.
And then I continue on with any other disagreements I may have, but if there's none then I usually end it with. Have a nice life.
The moment it is more about winning than it is about truth, the less interesting the conversation is to me.
I have never had this happen because I have never made a mistake once /s
Being wrong is a great way to learn. Everyone is wrong sometimes, so I don’t see it as a flaw to be ashamed of. I think the best way to handle being wrong is to acknowledge it and treat it as a learning opportunity.
When that realization moment happens, it’s like flipping a switch. Like losing steam, getting past the anger. I tend to get quiet and actually listen/empathize instead of trying to win the argument. I also quiet down due to feeling ashamed of being wrong. I have no problems saying “sorry” if that’s the case.
I have a tendency to mix things together, especially if the two things getting mixed in my mind are already pretty similar. Sometimes I realize this mid-way through a sentence.
The last time it has happened it probably was back when I was ~15 on reddit. I probably just stopped replying.
Nowadays I don't start anything unless about ~100% confident in my position. Even then 90% of the time I just let it slide.
Once it was demonstrated to me that I was wrong acknowledge that I was wrong and we moved forward.
Often. I just say something like "okay, you might be right/you're entirely right, my bad and thank you". I like to ask and answer all sorts of things, this happens somewhat often, lol.
When does one go from being wrong to very wrong?
When you learn what you thought was a yes or no question, is actually multiple choice. You didn't even understand the question but foolishly stood your ground to answer it.
Yes, it sucks, I feel stupid, and if the person that I was arguing with is angry then I'm fucked whether or not I apologise or try to learn more
Yeah. But more often I have made mistakes, then come back later to say it was a mistake. I issue corrections a lot. It's harder to make that connection when in a heated argument.
No....wait, yes.
I really can't think of a time where I have. But I also don't see myself making factual claims about anything without having sufficient first hand experience. If I get into any kind of online "argument", my contribution is basically only going to be logic, not facts. The other person brings the facts and we walk down the logic tree together.
All the time
This is an accurate description of most national governments
Prove it