Arguing

This wasn't brought on by a personal circumstance, but rather, something I was reading that happened to some other people, however, I've faced numerous similar situations, and I feel it's a good thing to talk about.


"Why do you always have to be right?"

A question for the frustrated who don't really stop to think about what they're asking.

When you start an argument- a friendly debate- or an uncivil disagreement with someone, you are "right." That is your main stance. That is part of your thesis.
You're trying to make the argument that you are correct, or at the very least, that your opponent is either not correct, not approaching the issue properly, or missing some key points in the conclusion.

You don't argue with someone with the premise that you're not correct right off the bat (unless you're playing devil's advocate for a position you disagree with). If you end a disagreement with this line, you're openly announcing your hypocrisy and your inability to handle being wrong.

Here's something a lot of people who don't argue much don't often empathize with relating to seasoned argument-lovers:

We don't often stick our necks out into a debate that we don't have a pretty firm grasp on. If you say something contentious that we aren't knee-deep in, we usually don't respond in an argumentative way (unless what you're saying is truly outlandish).
The reason it appears that argumentative people are so thoroughly stubborn and intellectually elitist is that we (I speak for those that follow this rule) argue what we're familiar with. Things that we have a decent collection of knowledge regarding.
We "have" to be right because we pick our battles to be ones that we actively judge to be "winnable."

What I notice (and this is purely my subjective experience, so take it with a helping of salt) of people who are not familiar with argumentation is that they are prone to repeating second-hand knowledge- something that they heard from another source- and taking it at face value.
Now let me stop here to say- humans like to impress each other. Physically, cognitively, emotionally- we just like surprising people or creating genuine reactions in them. There's something pleasant about the experience of invoking those types of emotions in others, and that's not bad at all.
However, if you plan on impressing someone with your vague knowledge of topic X, you'd better be sure that either:
A. You understand your knowledge is secondhand and unchecked at best
B. You could totally be wrong about this kernel of knowledge you just picked up
C. You've checked it out yourself and you know some background information to the knowledge.

Yeah, I know, it seems like homework tacked onto a normal human interaction meant to liven up that whole... living thing. But if you have unchecked information that you take to like a hawk, you're just going to make yourself feel foolish and you're going to get into a stubborn argument with someone who very well may be far more familiar with the topic than you.

For those arguments that are truly about subjective material, the previous rules only barely apply if at all. If someone's being stubborn about their totally subjective opinion, chances are you're also being stubborn about it, but you're not realizing it. Try to remember that people will never fully share opinions.

However, if the topic is in a murky-ish territory, like those that involve religion as a basis for an opinion, make sure to use available evidence at your disposal, and if nothing else, the best way to end an argument is to simply prove that your opponent's philosophy is inconsistent. Is what they're saying contrary to a similar opinion? Is it contrary to their actions? Is it contrary to actual known religious dogma? Is it contrary to religious script? If any were answered "yes," then they have no stance to argue from, and you're free to nudge them while they fall to the ground, arms flailing wildly.

Debate what you know, not what you think you know.
(We're all guilty of breaking these from time to time. Just try to catch yourself before you fall into any of these traps)
(For instance, I often pick battles that are not necessarily in my favor just because I like debating. This, however, I safely do with my close friends)




Side note: I use the word "win" even though I do not believe that the true reason for debate or argumentation is winning or a matter of pride or anything as superficial as that. Argumentation:
A. Is fun exercise for the brain
B. Helps you to figure out just how much you understand about a topic
C. Trains you to debate better in the future
D. Imparts knowledge and promotes understanding on a topic


"We don't like people making baseless, asinine arguments or accusations, YET, when we demonstrate (in detail) to people how they're wrong (usually in situations that more/less warrant a rebuttal) we are attacked with ad hominem, emotional knee-jerk bullshit, and further accusations (usually completely hypocritical)."
-Some guy on Reddit

-
Waddles
(This post was written on Saturday)
 
Now quick, everyone call me a pretentious douche!
I've already gone out of my way to ruin my life in 48 hours.