Thread: why are we so obsessed with proving other people wrong and making ourselves look good?

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

homophobes usually hate "femininity" or "weakness" in men, and that happens when they can't accept their fragile, sweet and submissive nature so they lock it in, and when some feminine guy is in front of them it makes them remember so they have to make the feminine guy disappear or treat him like shit so that their femininity seems less important to them.

To have a belated piggyback, some studies says raging homophobes be denying their desire for penis. Also, Ted Haggard.
Sorry, off-topic, I agree with the ego suggestion of saltyseedog as well and I feel dumb for not thinking of that in my first post.

SEXY EDIT:

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

You didn't disprove anything. You just said it was ignorance. Well, how do you know that?

Concerning my comments: Homosexuality is involves, in some capacity, sexual acts that involve two from the same sex. People find these actions "disgusting" whether its sodomy, fellatio, or cunnilingus. By saying that these actions are "disgusting" they are making an aesthetic judgment, a judgment concerning beauty, upon the act of homosexuality.

I personally think that women of African descent are not attractive (can't wait for a ststorm of idiocy with regards to this opinion. For clarification it's the general features of Africans that I simply don't think are attractive. It's like saying I don't think blondes are cute or that someone's chin is too defined for my liking. If you can't understand this without a kneejerk "RAAAAACISTTTTT!!!!111" reaction, you're a fking idiot). Just my opinion. Does this make me a racist?
I don't feel good in my pants when I see spunky gay man sex. Does this make me a homophobe?
Your argument is weak. Homophobia is deeply rooted as a psychological defense mechanism or as the result of cultural prejudices.
Not all disgusting things have to do with aesthetics. Disgusting can also carry other connotations, such as moral, ethical, etc., as well. For example, Sarah Palin is disgusting because she is a Tea Party Republican (WOAAAAHHHH now everyone knows how I feel about them!). Mrs. Palin may be quite cute (I don't think so personally, but pretend that she's as lovely as Tina Fey makes her out to be), but she's still disgusting because she is a Tea Party Republican.
The moral disgust sort of thing is what most religious homophobes cite as their reason why being gay is bad.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

You didn't disprove anything. You just said it was ignorance. Well, how do you know that?

Concerning my comments: Homosexuality is involves, in some capacity, sexual acts that involve two from the same sex. People find these actions "disgusting" whether its sodomy, fellatio, or cunnilingus. By saying that these actions are "disgusting" they are making an aesthetic judgment, a judgment concerning beauty, upon the act of homosexuality.

BOW BOW! Wrong.
I already showed you were wrong.
And your first sentence just proved you do not read posts. Just blabber whatever you believe without even thinking about other people's views.

If you do not find something pleasing aesthetically, you don't have anything to do with it. You don't have to sit there and watch two people of the same sex engage in sexual acts.

BTW phobia means "fear of". Not "disgust of".

I wish Phil were still here to see that clever use of language to win an argument.

Originally Posted by kookyinc

I personally think that women of African descent are not attractive (can't wait for a ststorm of idiocy with regards to this opinion. For clarification it's the general features of Africans that I simply don't think are attractive. It's like saying I don't think blondes are cute or that someone's chin is too defined for my liking. If you can't understand this without a kneejerk "RAAAAACISTTTTT!!!!111" reaction, you're a fking idiot). Just my opinion. Does this make me a racist?

If you are being serious then no it doesn't make you a racist. You just have a set of certain aesthetics.

Originally Posted by kookyinc

I don't feel good in my pants when I see spunky gay man sex. Does this make me a homophobe?

Again, if you are being serious, no.

Originally Posted by kookyinc

Your argument is weak. Homophobia is deeply rooted as a psychological defense mechanism or as the result of cultural prejudices.

What is it defending us from? How did it develop as a cultural prejudice? What caused it?

Originally Posted by kookyinc

Not all disgusting things have to do with aesthetics. Disgusting can also carry other connotations, such as moral, ethical, etc., as well.

No it's just people improperly utilizing the definition of morality that call it disgusting. Morality is about what is good and bad. Connotating good with beautiful is a false leap. What is beautiful and what is disgusting rests solely in the world of aesthetics

Originally Posted by kookyinc

For example, Sarah Palin is disgusting because she is a Tea Party Republican (WOAAAAHHHH now everyone knows how I feel about them!). Mrs. Palin may be quite cute (I don't think so personally, but pretend that she's as lovely as Tina Fey makes her out to be), but she's still disgusting because she is a Tea Party Republican.
The moral disgust sort of thing is what most religious homophobes cite as their reason why being gay is bad.

Well you're doing what you seem to be implying religious homophobes do which is equating the good, i.e. your theories of politics, with the beautiful, i.e. your anti-Tea-Party sentiments. You are confusing the two schools of philosophy probably because you have no background in them.

Originally Posted by tommo

BOW BOW! Wrong.
I already showed you were wrong.
And your first sentence just proved you do not read posts. Just blabber whatever you believe without even thinking about other people's views.

If you do not find something pleasing aesthetically, you don't have anything to do with it. You don't have to sit there and watch two people of the same sex engage in sexual acts.

BTW phobia means "fear of". Not "disgust of".

I wish Phil were still here to see that clever use of language to win an argument.

Ok just saying "I proved it" doesn't mean you actually proved it. You keep saying it's ignorance yet give no examples of why this is true. Stop being an ignoramus.

Having a fear, fear being defined as a negative emotion cause by a perceived threat, does not exclude aesthetic inclinations. Being fearful of homosexuals can include aesthetic ideals for people wish to see beauty over ugliness. If homosexual acts are "disgusting" in their beliefs of what is beauty, then obviously they perceive homosexuals, who oddly enough commit homosexual acts, as a perceived threat to the beauty of their world thereby causing the negative emotion labeled "fear."

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Ok just saying "I proved it" doesn't mean you actually proved it. You keep saying it's ignorance yet give no examples of why this is true. Stop being an ignoramus.

Having a fear, fear being defined as a negative emotion cause by a perceived threat, does not exclude aesthetic inclinations. Being fearful of homosexuals can include aesthetic ideals for people wish to see beauty over ugliness. If homosexual acts are "disgusting" in their beliefs of what is beauty, then obviously they perceive homosexuals, who oddly enough commit homosexual acts, as a perceived threat to the beauty of their world thereby causing the negative emotion labeled "fear."

Again, I can see you honestly believe that.
I really, really do not know how you can convince yourself that your reasoning is logical.

I don't like the look of mulloscs, which makes me fear them. Cool bro.

Even though I did prove my point....
Just think of how the first person would feel when they met someone with a different skin colour. Scared.
Because they would be different to them.

Likewise one would be scared of fire until one understands it. It is true of almost everything, if not everything.
I didn't think that needed much explaining.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

What is it defending us from? How did it develop as a cultural prejudice? What caused it?

If it's a psychological defense mechanism, it is, as I stated, protecting someone from knowing that he wants to engage in spunky man sex. The cultural prejudices come from nasty things like not understanding people who are different or from prejudiced works like the Bible.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

No it's just people improperly utilizing the definition of morality that call it disgusting. Morality is about what is good and bad. Connotating good with beautiful is a false leap. What is beautiful and what is disgusting rests solely in the world of aesthetics

But the word disgusting does not just relate to beauty. At most, it's other people misusing a word.

You guys are all proving other people wrong and making yourselves look good.

Originally Posted by tommo

Again, I can see you honestly believe that.
I really, really do not know how you can convince yourself that your reasoning is logical.

Because speaking illogically is an impossibility.

Originally Posted by tommo

I don't like the look of mulloscs, which makes me fear them. Cool bro.

Aesthetic values that are negative don't automatically lead to fear.

Originally Posted by tommo

Even though I did prove my point....

And where is that gem?

Originally Posted by tommo

Just think of how the first person would feel when they met someone with a different skin colour. Scared.

Why scared? They could be intrigued.

Originally Posted by tommo

Likewise one would be scared of fire until one understands it. It is true of almost everything, if not everything.
I didn't think that needed much explaining.

So you think that homophobic people don't know what homosexuals do?

Originally Posted by kookyinc

If it's a psychological defense mechanism, it is, as I stated, protecting someone from knowing that he wants to engage in spunky man sex.

So you think that homophobic people are really just homosexuals in denial?

Originally Posted by kookyinc

The cultural prejudices come from nasty things like not understanding people who are different or from prejudiced works like the Bible.

But why would they follow the bible? Why don't they make an effort to "understand people who are different?" The point of these questions is to get at the root of the issue which I think is based upon aesthetic reasons.

Originally Posted by kookyinc

But the word disgusting does not just relate to beauty. At most, it's other people misusing a word.

Yes disgusting can actually mean physically sickening. It is possible for people to be physically sick concerning homosexuality, i.e. having their "stomach turn." If you would like to use a better word that pertains to aesthetic values then I won't mind using that one. Maybe grotesque?

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

So you think that homophobic people are really just homosexuals in denial?

Not all, just some, hence my use of the conjunction "or" or the qualifier, "if."

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

But why would they follow the bible? Why don't they make an effort to "understand people who are different?" The point of these questions is to get at the root of the issue which I think is based upon aesthetic reasons.

They may follow the Bible because they think it's the word of the perfect creator of the universe. They may have been indoctrinated at a young age. They may have been taught, unconsciously and subtly, that asking questions like, "Is homosexuality really bad?" or "Why do I believe this?" is a sin because, after all, who are any of us to question God himself?

It's not just the Bible, many cultures follow the whole masochistic "pleasure is bad" philosophy and the strange superstition that sex is magical. Since gay sex does not allow for procreation, and because it is a minority activity, it must be immoral because it's a misuse of one's special places. And because not many people are doing it (comparatively). People fear the unknown.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Yes disgusting can actually mean physically sickening. It is possible for people to be physically sick concerning homosexuality, i.e. having their "stomach turn." If you would like to use a better word that pertains to aesthetic values then I won't mind using that one. Maybe grotesque?

My argument is that people calling gay sex "disgusting" is not simply an aesthetic argument. Sure, you can use the word "grotesque," but it won't change my argument. I'll still posit that no matter what word you use, at the root of it all, it's not whether homosexuality is found to be attractive or not, it's about deeper problems and prejudices.

"A Man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."
— Benjamin Franklin

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

So women can't be homosexuals and people can't have homophobic beliefs about lesbians?

forgot to point out this is in mens case, though your question is silly.

This a very interesting discussion. As for the answer to the authors questions: I think people do this in order to prove themselves that they are "right" which somehow proves that they are worth it to themselves. Hoenestly its a pathetic attempt at trying to make themselves happy. In my experience, the best way to get someone to change their view on something is to make them THINK. How do you do this? There are many ways but one one the best ways is to ask a REALLY good question that makes them think.

The hardest people to deal with to me are
1. ones who think they can argue anything no matter how conviluted to be "right"
2. People who make an argument and assume that they have proved you wrong when all they have done is throw words around that dont even address the topic or question you made in the first place.
3. People who never answer your questions or always change topic because they know that if they answer it they will "lose face"

If a person you are arguing with exhibits all three of these then I suggest not wasting your time, you wont get anywhere. Discussion of those is a very good thing, there are multiple people in the univere for a reason afterall. I think that in this time however, It almost seems as if people are being encouraged NOT to think, or even worse- think a certain way. Keep thinking my friends, you will be all the better by doing so.

-Evan

Another interesting question is Why do we get worked up when people try to proove us wrong.

It's something that happens to me and if I'm not centered I feel insulted, specially when it's in an agressive way with shallow reasons, when they don't care if you don't understand what they're speaking about, something more direct would be like "You're wrong, just because, U MAD?" Some of these people know and they slip off irational things so they make you think that they're ignorant and that you have to help them so they can open their minds (it's a trap) they want people with good intentions to get worked up because of their morality ( or maybe they don't and I'm paranoic ), having the need to help people is ego fueled though.

When stuff like this happens I just think I don't know if they're being honest about their intentions, and if they are... well they can believe anything they want, I don't have to get worked up with this stuff where I end up loosing my time.

A lot of people take shit too personally. You've got to realize that everything that spews out of another person's mouth is simply their own expression. This also holds true for your perspective on any given matter. This is why it's ridiculous to defend a position and get all defensive about it rather than simply find the one that makes the most sense. As I've said before, I've realized this for quite some time and don't tie myself to any given perspective.

To answer the OP... in a very simple manner: The ego. The ego is the source of it. By being "right", we look smart. We win an argument, and we feel good because we are "better". Rather than supporting others first, we are inclined to support our ego first.

It comes down to the ego and how the ego influences what we say and do.

I don't know if anyone has said this because I didn't take time to read all the posts but....
All humans have a little bit of narcissism in themselves, and some even have NPD (Narcissistic personality disorder). Which is an over exaggerated sense of self worth, intelligence, beauty, or any other trait people tend to find appealing. So I agree with everyone says it's in human nature because it is it's how we are successful as a species.

I honestly don't see how narcissism is a bad thing.

Yes, you probably don't because you don't know what it actually is. A little bit is necessary for people to be successful in life, it helps them overcome people and different mental obstacles. Thinking you are better than everyone else and driving everyone else away is a bad thing, this is documented as NPD and is quite a bad mental disorder to have. People often say Hitler had NPD, you already know he took it to the extreme and said his whole race was better than everyone else's and look where that ended up. And you are right in saying that narcissism itself isn't a bad thing, but as you'll see A LOT online people take it to an extreme just because they can and they think they are right.

Wiki: The term "narcissism" was introduced by Havelock Ellis (later developed further by Freud in On Narcissism) after Narcissus who in Greek myth was a pathologically self-absorbed young man who fell in love with his own reflection in a pool.

The myth says Narcissus the Greek boy fell in love with his reflection in a pool of water, he stared at it in awe, at his own beauty for so long he fell so feeble and weak from no food he eventually fell in a drowned. Even the Greeks knew it was a bad thing if you had too much of it. Yes, I know it's a myth but it's a greatttt example. Hopefully you'll come up with more than a 1 liner argument next time

My post wasn't so much an argument as it was a statement...

However, I see where you're coming from. Anything taken to the absolute extreme can turn into a bad thing. But speaking from personal experience, thinking you're better than everyone else is a great thing. I haven't personally seen this have an effect of driving people away. Rather, it seems to give you a huge boost in confidence, and people actually seem to react as if you're actually better than them. (I mean, they don't take offense to it, they just take it as a given.) So that has some perks, also.

Now, I wouldn't say that narcissism is the absolute cause of people on the internet getting defensive of their arguments. I think the main problem is that people feel as though their opinions are somehow a 'part of them'. So if somebody attacks their opinion, they see it as a personal attack. Those people, in my opinion, aren't as mature as they could be. There are also some people who just think they're plain right, and this could stem from narcissism, but it doesn't necessarily have to. It just means they're convinced they're right.

Originally Posted by Reclypso

Yes, you probably don't because you don't know what it actually is. A little bit is necessary for people to be "successful" in life, it helps them overcome people and different mental obstacles. Thinking you are better than everyone else and driving everyone else away is a bad thing, this is documented as NPD and is quite a bad mental disorder to have. People often say Hitler had NPD, you already know he took it to the extreme and said his whole race was better than everyone else's and look where that ended up. And you are right in saying that narcissism itself isn't a bad thing, but as you'll see A LOT online people take it to an extreme just because they can and they think they are right.

Wiki: The term "narcissism" was introduced by Havelock Ellis (later developed further by Freud in On Narcissism) after Narcissus who in Greek myth was a pathologically self-absorbed young man who fell in love with his own reflection in a pool.

The myth says Narcissus the Greek boy fell in love with his reflection in a pool of water, he stared at it in awe, at his own beauty for so long he fell so feeble and weak from no food he eventually fell in a drowned. Even the Greeks knew it was a bad thing if you had too much of it. Yes, I know it's a myth but it's a greatttt example. Hopefully you'll come up with more than a 1 liner argument next time

Fixed.

Because other people are idiots, and therefor should accept my assertions as truth. Obviously.

^ Exactly, lol

I feel like being a jerk comes with being online, it's the only place some of us are comfortable doing it I'm comfy doing it in real life also in my case though

Originally Posted by MindGames

Now, I wouldn't say that narcissism is the absolute cause of people on the internet getting defensive of their arguments. I think the main problem is that people feel as though their opinions are somehow a 'part of them'. So if somebody attacks their opinion, they see it as a personal attack. Those people, in my opinion, aren't as mature as they could be. There are also some people who just think they're plain right, and this could stem from narcissism, but it doesn't necessarily have to. It just means they're convinced they're right.

I notice this as well. People do feel that an "attack" on their ideas is an attack on them. Take religion for example, their idea is pretty much who they are and determines how they live their life, so it is understandable that they would get defensive in that circumstance. I am pretty elusive when it comes to ideas, like you I don't necessarily strongly attach myself to any idea(nevermind I am vehemently attached to veganism) but really just try to entertain them so if some one contradicts me, it gives me a fresh perspective on the idea in question which I find to be very useful(one reason I post on DV). I don't remember who said it but someone talked about how being wrong on DV has helped them tremendously in being able to understand an idea better. I would say I subscribe to this view, I'm wrong quite a bit but DV has definitely polished my intellect and for that I thank everyone.