Discussing politics and other contentious sunjects online feels to me like it’s counterproductive these days and even though I try not to get suckered in, I often can’t help myself. Usually though I just end up feeling frustrated and sometimes angry at the other person either missing my points or refusing to accept them.
Thinking back to conversations I’ve had here and previously on Reddit, not only can I not remember an example of me “winning” the discussion and the other person changing their mind or conceding the point, I also cannot think of a time where my mind was changed either.
So have you ever begun a discussion online with someone with a different view point to yours and either you, or they, changed the others mind?
You’ve got to figure out your audience. You can’t change people unwilling to change. Since most people online prefer an echo chamber to reasonable discussion, you’ll overwhelmingly encounter those that won’t change their mind.
That said, I still find it mostly worthwhile to have SOME back and forth with those people because others will read it. I feed some trolls a few scraps in hopes that lurkers will be able to discern the better argument from it. Don’t go in too deep, and once the ad hominems come nonstop from them, or you can’t keep your next reply from containing them, stop.
I’ve had my mind changed plenty of times, but I’m also open to the idea I can be wrong. If you are talking with people that can’t manage that much, you won’t feel like you’ve “won” any arguments because it’s coming down to two people saying the other is wrong without allowing themselves to be the one in the wrong.
All that said, I’ve had way better discussion here than reddit.
I’ve both had my mind changed and had others change their mind when talking online, but I don’t think it’s the norm if I’m being honest. Most people don’t seem to enjoy having their views challenged and someone feeling defensive will very rarely approach discussion with an open mind. I say this as someone who gets defensive and struggles at times with this very thing. We’re all flawed. 🙃
Don’t know about changing my opinion while actively arguing with someone, but I have had opinions that formed for the first time when I read through comments of other people arguing. So, there’s still some value in arguing your own points for a third person observer. :)
Yes, it happens from time to time on lemmy. People convinced me to their point of view couple of times as well. As long as someone actually wants to talk and not just silence you it’s possible. I was way less likely on Reddit.
I’ve certainly had my mind changed.
One of my earliest memories of the internet was when I was like 12 and I went to nuklearpower.com (home of the 8-bit Theater webcomic), and I saw a thread in the forums debating religion. I knew atheists existed, but had never met one and never really considered why I believed the things I did, or why they believed something different. I posted a comment defending what I’d been taught but then started really thinking about it. It wound up reshaping my entire belief system. I realized that if everyone just believed what we were taught, then there’d be no way for us to really know which of us is right, and even if I was right it would be through pure luck and there are countless people following the same approach to wrong conclusions. This led me towards science, and towards grounding my beliefs in reason and evidence.
That was the first time I had my mind changed, and yes I was very young but it wasn’t the only time. Some years ago, I not only had my mind changed but changed a big part of my lifestyle, in a large part because talking about it with people on the internet convinced me to go vegan. I don’t believe I’d met another vegan irl (unless they didn’t tell me, ang what are the odds of that?) and if I did I certainly didn’t debate the nitty gritty with them.
There are countless smaller examples I could point to. But in virtually all of those cases, the conversation didn’t end with, “Huh, I guess you’re right.” It ended with me arguing my position as best as I could, but being dissatisfied with the things I was saying and thinking it over over the course of days, months, even years. Changing your perspective or worldview usually doesn’t happen over the course of a single conversation, but it can cause a seed to be planted.
On individual points, yes, but I hardly engage these days. This was also back in the days of forums and fark more than on modern SNS
Yeah, several time on lemmy. Maybe like once ever for 7 years of reddit lol.
Most of the time it doesn’t escalate into a contentious debate, sure. Lots of discussions where the things I read change my view on things, and I’m sure my own comments change others’ view on things too.
But by the time it starts to take on the style of an actual debate, there’s less room to convince someone who feels strongly enough to engage in the debate. Still, it’s worth doing sometimes because in these public forums, the debate might be read by thousands of lurkers, some of whom didn’t feel strongly enough to have a view, but walk away convinced that one of the two sides is more correct.
I know I’ve been convinced of a side while watching two others debate.
You could never know. A lot of people are not self confident enough To admit they were wrong. Even of they do, they may not tell you.
I have had my mind changed, or at the very least been introduced to new ideas that I then went on to explore, which led to me changing my mind.
Online arguments are for the audience, anyway. This is more obvious if you watch some old debate videos from the mid 2010s, especially involving right wing “intellectuals” like JP. He is clearly uninterested in convincing his opponent. Most of the time, his aim is to (a) confuse and (b) enrage his opponent, and then adjust his suit and tie, lean back, and smugly tell them to calm down.
It’s not debating to convince your opponent (or even the audience) of your ideas, hence his tendency for useless tangents and unnecessarily esoteric language. It’s debating to look like the smart and collected guy, while making your opponent look unhinged in comparison. It’s not about the substance, it’s about the show.
He is clearly uninterested in convincing his opponent.
Having watched his debates with Sam Harris, I’ll at least give him credit for being able to steelman the views he’s arguing against.
Whether one is able to get others to change their deeply held beliefs is another thing but simply being able to demonstrate that you’ve actually understood the point you’re arguing against is a rare skill in of itself.
That’s only because he mostly agrees with sam harris. Who also does something similar, just not as well.
There’s a reason those guys always debate college students, and then when they run into college students that happen to be on the debate team and call them on their bullshit, those videos never make it to YouTube.
Peterson mostly agrees with Harris? The guys who spend an hour trying to define the word “truth” and failing to do so? I could not disagree more.
Correct. Their disagreements are largely performative. There is a reason they get platformed by the same people and are both considered “deep thinkers” by those people. Same with Ben shabongo and the fourth guy.
Note they all use the same tactic of decorum in their “debates”.
I’ve definitely had people reconsider their stance by bringing in more data or an alternative perspective but I’m not sure if anyone has ever admitted to having their view change about something. Then again, I don’t always announce it either despite the fact that it does happen so I guess it’s safe to assume I’ve then made it happen too.
In all honesty though, most online arguments are people talking past each other and disagreeing on minute details. Often the conclusion is “we’re broadly in agreement but we disagree about this one thing.”
That’s why it’s so ridiculous that people treat disagreement as if the person must then hold the exact opposite view. That is almost never the case.
Yes, there were a few times I have managed to convince someone on here, even on “political” topics. Not so much on Reddit.
Plenty of times I’ve been convinced that I was wrong about important things as well, which I always try to own.
I wouldn’t say there’s definitive “winning” or “losing” an online argument. This is a public forum, your arguments are there for everyone to see, even if the person you’re talking to still disagrees by the end it may help someone else form a more informed opinion.
Yes but I don’t remember what
Debating is not how you change someone’s mind. You can change the mind of an undecided audience perhaps, but not who you’re debating.
Debates aren’t always about changing the mind of the person you’re debating, they are about presenting your ideas to an audience.
Follow up question: Have you ever read a thread where a bunch of people are arguing and changed your opinion because of it?
Personally, I’ve never changed my mind because of an online post. I’ve changed my mind from articles, papers, documentaries, video essays, discussions with friends and family, but never from a comment section.
I have. But, they did have facts to back it up and sources. That helped a lot.
Personally, no.
But I think that I’ve become more knowledgeable because of arguments I’ve read.
I did. Not from a single thread, but many-many accumulating over the years, combined with other sources.
It is especially true with new topics which I don’t have a pre-existing knowledge.
Bingo.
You don’t even need cover the debate subject to win, if you can convince the audience your opponent is an idiot.
In highschool (which is a very long time ago), I was woefully underprepared for a debate. My opponent not so much. He made some very good arguments. Unfortunately, he made a fatal mistake with his opening, “Good morning”. It was the first period after lunch.
That allowed me to eviscerate him. If you don’t even know what time of day it is, how can you possibly know anything about the subject of the debate.
I won the debate handily. I barely touched on the actual debate subject.
Who/what decided you won the debate (handily)?
A show of hands. A couple of my opponent’s friends voted against me, but the rest of the class voted for me.
One of the friends complained that I hadn’t stuck to the topic, but the teacher sided with me. It helped that I’d been on the debating team in lower school and had seen other debaters treat mistakes in a similar manner. Having a drama teacher that loved theatre sports (which was relatively new at the time - at least where I lived) also probably helped my improv skills.
