Editor's Note: You're Wrong

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

You're Wrong

Russ Pitts tells us all why we're wrong to say, "You're wrong."

Read Full Article

You're right.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"You're wrong" is an intrinsic part of discussion...

There seems to be a undercurrent of hurt feelings behind this bit. As if one actually takes offense to having to refine viewpoints to accommodate new information. The fact people are spouting "schadenfreude" just reinforces this.

The idea that all opinions are valid comes up pretty frequently 'round these parts. A problem is an opinion can be based on a faulty premise, which renders it invalid. The bigger problem is the word "opinion" unto itself doesn't mean anything. Its a generic descriptor for a string of statements. The commonly used "counter" of "well. thats just, like. your! opinion! man!" is basically saying, "you have written a sentence."

I get that public education teaches you that being wrong is bad, but if you were never wrong, then you never learned anything... Or, "learnin' somethin' jes means tha otha' guy wuz rite."

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".

Because if you were right I wouldn't have anything to say to you.

You're wrong.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Even if directed at me.

You're right Mr. Pitts. Probably should have used the Superman Lex Luthor "WRONG" picture.

Still working on admitting my faults.

You're wrong! Socrates said almost that not Aristotle. Yeah that feels pretty nice I admit :D

Russ Pitts:
Wherever you go, whatever you do...

Honestly, when you said this, I was half-expecting you to start singing:

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!

runnernda:
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.

Same here, my friend. Same here.

whew. That was a mindfuck. Doublethink, right here.

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

Sabrestar:
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".

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.

The "easier to tear down than build up" bit I dig. Entropy is natural.

Russ Pitts:
Editor's Note: You're Wrong

Russ Pitts tells us all why we're wrong to say, "You're wrong."

Read Full Article

Hey I wonder if what I got going on there was what inspired you...
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".

1+1=2. Any takers?

Johnlives:
1+1=2. Any takers?

In binary, 1+1=10.

Yup this cite is full of people hiding under bridges waiting for the write moment to say "you're wrong"

Nuke_em_05:

Johnlives:
1+1=2. Any takers?

In binary, 1+1=10.

1+1=Fun on a bun.

Irridium:

Nuke_em_05:

Johnlives:
1+1=2. Any takers?

In binary, 1+1=10.

1+1=Fun on a bun.

... how?

... how could I have been... so foolish?

/tear

You are correct, people all over the internet love to say "your wrong". But there is more to the story than just overly competitive or argumentative people. Any article worth writing is going to contain something new, and scare people, or something controversial. An article "The sky is blue" won't get people saying "Your wrong", but are you going to waste your time writing an article sighting 3 sources for proof the sky is blue? Will any publisher actually print such a story, even online? It's just plain boring.

On the other hand an article "Video games cause dogs to commit suicide" is both controversial and will instigate a fear reaction. It will have lots of "your wrong" comments.

The problem is... -and yes please feel free to tell me I'm wrong- we are aware of the limits of our own intelligence for the most part, very few of us have the sort of I.Q that renders us immune to insecurity and because info constructed by more intelligent ppl is freely available these days, we delight in using it as a weapon to defend our own ego and bash someone who is probably far more gifted as a writer and formulator of opinion than we are, without saying anything we actually thought of ourselves. Hell every thread here is a response to the article. So no matter how strong your rebuttal is, you will always be playing second fiddle to the person who used what really matters... imagination.

It takes a life time to truly grasp how to admit our own failings, and misunderstandings, as well as growing in the gracious ways of letting others know their own.

your signature sort of looks likes Piss Pitts. That should have been my user Name
you're right sort of anyways

i think that's what Tolstoy meant by "it's all vanity"
not much use telling people they're wrong

incal11:

Russ Pitts:
Editor's Note: You're Wrong

Russ Pitts tells us all why we're wrong to say, "You're wrong."

Read Full Article

Hey I wonder if what I got going on there was what inspired you...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.223840-Former-Teacher-Acquitted-of-Videogame-Massacre-Threat?page=6#7622948

You are absolutely unbelievable.

First of all, they probably picked the theme of the issue long before our "discussion".

Second, this would be a much better example for you to use:

incal11:
I can't help appearing condescending to you since I'm right and you are hopelessly wrong.

But seriously, holy crap.

I'm done here.

I look forward to starting every commentary I make on this issue with, 'You're wrong.' Will I get a special Letters to the Editor issue dedicated to me on the next?

The first person you should always say 'You're wrong' is yourself. Tell yourself why you're wrong and then try to convince yourself that you're not. If you can't, change. It'll have an amazing effect: when other people tell you you're wrong, you'll be more open to their views (since you already emulated them) but also less likely to change your point of view over unimportant details (since you already brought them up yourself, so if someone brings up something you didn't think of it's a legitimately new viewpoint). Everyone do that, being right all the time is overrated.

Nuke_em_05:
First of all, they probably picked the theme of the issue long before our "discussion".

How many days did our argument last ? Anyway I did say maybe, and I was mocking ourselves.

Second, this would be a much better example for you to use:

incal11:
I can't help appearing condescending to you since I'm right and you are hopelessly wrong.

I know it's hard being wrong, I feel for you.
Farewell then.

The Random One:
The first person you should always say 'You're wrong' is yourself. Tell yourself why you're wrong and then try to convince yourself that you're not. If you can't, change. It'll have an amazing effect: when other people tell you you're wrong, you'll be more open to their views (since you already emulated them) but also less likely to change your point of view over unimportant details (since you already brought them up yourself

Exactly, and that's what I did about the issue discussed in that other thread.
Doing that I often find that I'm wrong, but not in this case.
Also that's what "Dialectics" are for, getting new perspectives and insights ; not just bickering, like the Anglo-saxons tend to believe.

One possible, cynical reason is that people like feeling they are better than other people, and feel the need to prove it by correcting them. Even when they themselves are wrong.

Personally, I just have a pathological need to correct most things. If someone thinks they know something, and they're wrong, I see it almost as a duty to correct them of the misconception.

I rather agree, I swear most people's responses to me start with the word "No" regardless of what we're talking about or if it's even relevant. It's annoying as all hell.

I also fully know that I often disagree with people, thus being the "No-Man" but at the same time instead of just saying it because I don't think about it and just say no for no reason I try to be reasonable >_>

When it comes to right and wrong, what matters most is evidence and supportive variables, theories, ideas, etc. If someone posts an article that is flat out wrong, because the evidence doesn't indicate that they are correct. Then I think that such articles are worthy of being attributed with the "wrong" status. The worst articles are ones that are not based on facts, rather opinions. And in that arena there can only be controversy. Especially when such opinions tend to distort the facts. That is wrong, in my opinion. If I'm wrong, then I don't want to be right.

If someone tells you a piece of information, using your own internal error-checking, you can decide that they speak truth, they speak lies, they speak truth but think they are lying, they speak lies but think they are telling the truth. Or you can be unable to make a conclusion.

On the internet trolling has become such a common occurrence that many people have become good at reading intent as well as content.

Fact A - true/false/unknown?

With enough perspectives and enough information you're bound to see the answer, weather in the "Fact A" post, in the responses, or through a combination of a progressive *discussion*.

Each post/comment in a discussion should be additive, taking in the previous posts and putting the individual "take" on the topic. It could be thought of like a work of art with many, many paint brushes, each adding on and adding on. (or maybe hundreds of finger-painters on one big wall?)

Trolls are people that draw big smiley faces over everyone's else work. Sometimes it's nice to see. INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUISNESS, trolls are here to keep the balance (they may not know it).

With any wrong there must be some right, you just gotta see it from the right angle.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here