I just want to be right all the time.

[tongodeon]

I was arguing with a friend once, and in frustration he said "Your problem is that you argue just because you just want to be right all the time." And he is correct. I just want to be right all the time. As often as possible, I'd like to have as clear an idea as possible about what's really going on, even if that means revising my opinion

Comments

[hermetic]

Yes, this.

[hwrnmnbsol]

Could you possibly be wrong about always wanting to be right?

[tongodeon]

I have it on pretty good authority that I really do want to be right all the time, but perhaps you know something that I should know.

[hwrnmnbsol]

I do, but I'm not going to share it. I, too, want to be right all the time. If I know more than you about something, then I am more right, and I am therefore winning.

[flwyd]

Sometimes being wrong can be helpful. For instance, it may be better for everyone involved (parents and kids) if one partner incorrectly believes the other is being faithful. We're also usually better off thinking "This door is solid" than spending the mental energy to think about the fact that atoms and molecules are almost entirely empty space.

Also, it's important to distinguish between "objective reality" and descriptions thereof. There's only one universe, but there are several good ways to describe it. As George Box put it, all models are wrong but some are useful. If an idea is close enough to most observations, it's often worth believing.

[tongodeon]

Sometimes being wrong can be helpful. For instance, it may be better for everyone involved (parents and kids) if one partner incorrectly believes the other is being faithful.

Sure, but now we're talking about something else. There's a difference between asking "Is my wife being unfaithful?" and saying "If my wife is unfaithful I don't want to know." We can have an argument about the former, but if I'm feeling the latter I'm just not going to argue the point. I don't want to be right; I don't want to know, period.

We're also usually better off thinking "This door is solid" than spending the mental energy to think about the fact that atoms and molecules are almost entirely empty space.

This seems like a semantic argument about what "solid" means. I like my words to be useful, so I tend to use the word "solid" to describe things commonly understood to be solid even if at unconventional scales or velocities they don't behave that way.

Also, it's important to distinguish between "objective reality" and descriptions thereof. There's

[usernameguy]

did I say that? sounds like something I might say.

whoever it was was right. you're exhausting to argue with. you're like the energizer bunny of arguing.

also I mostly agree with you, but I throw in a little relativism once in a while. objective realities are shit when dealing with people's emotions.

[tongodeon]

I don't recall you ever telling me this. The comment I was thinking of came from lockalsh about two years ago, in a semantic argument about whether science was a religion or not. I've cooled down a bit since then, and these days I would probably not consider that point worth arguing unless someone was genuinely unclear on what the distinction was between supernatural faith-based belief systems and natural evidence-based knowledge systems.

And yeah, all people including me aren't rational. It's been fairly liberating to be able to just say "That's not a rational decision." Why did I decide that a croissant would be the best thing for me to eat this morning? I didn't decide. I just felt like eating one, so I ate it. It wasn't a rational decision.

[epileptikitty]

I still mean to read Popper. But I mean to do a lot of things that sound more fun in my very short time in this bod.

[jorm]

I kind of lump "I always want to be right" with "I am always doing the right thing".

I have (a perhaps naive) belief that, in general, people always act in the manner that they think is "right" *given the information they have available*. That, while *I* may disagree with their motives or position, from *their point of view*, they are operating within correct parameters.

Everyone wants to be right; I sincerely doubt that anyone will *choose* to be wrong. This is the root of 90% of my arguments with my family and friends about, well, anything: I have a different information set than they do. I may very well be wrong.

But I want to be right.

[tongodeon]

As the world gets more complex and more information is available on everything, i think that many just give up in the face of the waves of data and stop trying.

Or they use that as an excuse to cop out. I can't count the number of times I've hunted down and laid out some really solid, unambiguous evidence only to have the person wander away saying "yeah, well, the world's really complex and maybe there's some other info out there that disproves this". Nnngh.