Should contrarianism be considered a positive attribute?

somersaultsam · October 2016

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

H0urg1ass · October 2016

I work with a guy like this and, honestly, I hate being around him for more than a few minutes. No matter what point you bring up, or what topic you want to discuss he will play devils advocate. He will even take extreme positions that no considerate human being would ever take just for the sake of argument.

Disagree if you have a valid point, or it's a matter of taste, then you can disagree on personal likes or dislikes freely. You can't help what you like or don't like when it comes to art or entertainment, and you don't really have to have a reason to back it up. However, disagreeing just to disagree is a mental illness and should be treated with therapy.

FlyByKnight · October 2016

We talking about MMORPG stats? Or MMORPG.com stats?

bartoni33 · October 2016

Their are at least 2 contrarians that are regular posters here I have noticed.

They rarely bring anything to a discussion. But they are usually called out for their stances and get appropriate responses.

Disagreeing just to disagree is not a way to have a civil discussion on anything.

waynejr2 · October 2016

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

bartoni33 · October 2016

waynejr2 said:

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

Way to miss the point there.

Yes this not a "Debate Club". But it is a forum. Giving reasons why you come to a certain conclusion is almost the literal definition of a forum. Just typing "yes" or "no" does not add to a discussion unless a very simple answer is asked for. If all you have to offer is "yes" or "no" then you probably have nothing meaningful to add to begin with.

Although... this conversation is not taking place in a Roman forum but still. That reminds me: Devil's Advocate is not the same as being a contrarian.

craftseeker · October 2016

bartoni33 said:

waynejr2 said:

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

Way to miss the point there.

Yes this not a "Debate Club". But it is a forum. Giving reasons why you come to a certain conclusion is almost the literal definition of a forum. Just typing "yes" or "no" does not add to a discussion unless a very simple answer is asked for. If all you have to offer is "yes" or "no" then you probably have nothing meaningful to add to begin with.

Although... this conversation is not taking place in a Roman forum but still. That reminds me: Devil's Advocate is not the same as being a contrarian.

waynejr2 said: "a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed"
You said: ""yes" or "no" does not add to a discussion unless a very simple answer is asked for."

It seems to me that you agreed with him.

On your other point, on occasion I read through the posts on a thread, my sole contribution being to use the buttons. Recently after hitting "agree" on a number of posts I was challenged by @MaxBacon to stop doing that and post something. When I did make a post I was criticized because I substantially repeated the previous posts I had "agreed" with. Sometimes simply hitting the "agree" button or posting "yes" is exactly what you wish to convey, nothing more is required.

Eldurian · October 2016

waynejr2 said:

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

If you want people to understand or care about your answers then you do need to elaborate on your reasons for them. Forums are a place to exchange ideas. If you want to give yes/no answers with no explanation then go take some online surveys.

Archlyte · October 2016

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I enjoy it when someone does this in the spirit of a good analysis of a topic. When they do it for personality reasons I find it about as endearing as pus on a plate. This malady is uncommon in my experience, but when you face it, the fact that it seems uncommon is no comfort.

Rasiem · October 2016

waynejr2 said:

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

Not to be rude but why then would you answer? Just not agreeing is an invalid response, I believe people do this out of negativity because it is easier to hate then like for most and many just have no reason to dislike. Even if you dislike say a game because there are to many shades of red which would be silly but that's still a valid reason. Also I think as humans having detailed responses is important for us to learn about ourselves and makes us re-evaluate things as we verbalize our answers for reasoning.

Mujona · October 2016

Overall I'd prefer if contrary behavior not be done if it's only for the sake of it.

Someone being contrary for the sake of being contrary or playing "devil's advocate" without having a substantive statement tends to just be annoying. The flip-side where someone asserts something that is of no value or poses a false argument in the first place is equally as annoying however.

Kinda hard to simply say such should or should not be done because to some people a perfectly reasonable argument makes no sense from their perspective (or vice-versa of something nonsensical being worded eloquently enough that it appears to be sensible until scrutinized). Opinions differ, experiences differ, and understanding of different subjects differ across person to person. Toss biases, language, and communication skills on top of that and it's going to be hard to judge what's just quirks of an individual and their beliefs versus what may just be someone arguing for the "lulz".

So this is a hard concept to police in the first place. More so it's a concern for the individual to take responsibility for themselves and try to keep a cognizant mind of whether or not what they write is up to the standard they expect others to deliver.

craftseeker · October 2016

Mujona said:

Overall I'd prefer if contrary behavior not be done if it's only for the sake of it.

Someone being contrary for the sake of being contrary or playing "devil's advocate" without having a substantive statement tends to just be annoying. The flip-side where someone asserts something that is of no value or poses a false argument in the first place is equally as annoying however.

Kinda hard to simply say such should or should not be done because to some people a perfectly reasonable argument makes no sense from their perspective (or vice-versa of something nonsensical being worded eloquently enough that it appears to be sensible until scrutinized). Opinions differ, experiences differ, and understanding of different subjects differ across person to person. Toss biases, language, and communication skills on top of that and it's going to be hard to judge what's just quirks of an individual and their beliefs versus what may just be someone arguing for the "lulz".

So this is a hard concept to police in the first place. More so it's a concern for the individual to take responsibility for themselves and try to keep a cognizant mind of whether or not what they write is up to the standard they expect others to deliver.

You left out cultural differences. U.S. folk have a lot of things that they regard as inherently and obviously true that people from Europe and Australia regard as highly suspect. Language and word usage differences also cause meanings to be lost or changed radically.

waynejr2 · October 2016

Eldurian said:

waynejr2 said:

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

If you want people to understand or care about your answers then you do need to elaborate on your reasons for them. Forums are a place to exchange ideas. If you want to give yes/no answers with no explanation then go take some online surveys.

SPELLING IT OUT FOR YOU. I DON"T CARE IF YOU UNDERSTAND.

I feel like we have talked to death topics. Then we have the forum posters who seem to start threads for their own need to have people interact with them. If having meaningful discussions is your point, then the subjects should be new.

You seem to start a lot of threads. Are you looking for people to validate you by agreeing with you or by you convincing them over to your point? Discuss.

Eldurian · October 2016

Two threads on these boards. One of which actually asserted a point and the other of which was just an open ended question. In what world does that count as "a lot"?

You seem to approach forums with a solo mentality. If you do not care if people care about or understand what message you are trying to convey, why say anything at all? If you don't think a subject is new or interesting why respond to it?

You go to every single thread and basically say "Your point is stupid, I don't care what you have to say." We all feel about the same way about you as you do about us. Why not just go play a game if you aren't here to engage in meaningful discussions about them?

sunandshadow · October 2016

People in general can become tyrannical and repressive of dissent if they aren't reminded regularly that different people have different tastes and preferences, and no, disagreeing about what's fun or attractive or whatever isn't crazy. Quiet wheels get no grease, and people who don't speak up get taken for granted and trod on. So I think that disagreement can be important as a kind of social maintenance. But, sometimes disagreement is irrelevant enough or hostile enough to get in the way of productive communication.

Wizardry · October 2016

Op seems to purposely be omitting the fact that it works the other way as well.
Example false advertising,endorsing products with bias for monetary gains both of which are ILLEGAL and carries a more DECEITFUL intent than simply disagreeing to disagree.
Which then leads me to wonder WHY the OP chose this path and not just one of deceit or wrong doing or bad morals,why narrow it down to just one side of the coin?I am not saying you are not allowed,just wondering why?

I should also point out that to FORCE a judgement of said opinion would need to make claim that it is NOT an opinion but just a deceitful reply or post.Who here is godlike to form that opinion?

Then what makes it laughable is when it is ok to form one's own judgment of someone else's opinion or to make claim it is not even an opinion but a deceitful reply but it is apparently not ok to form that same judgement in return.
Bottom line is too many people have a deceitful agenda,either to flame others or discredit others without a lot of merit.I can easily point at myself,but i am also no dummy,i use over 30 years of internet interaction and millions of personalities/people as well seeing a VERY obvious TREND or trends to form my opinions BEFORE forming an opinion.
geesh i could literally write a 300 page novel on the massive amount of rhetoric i have seen on the internet,don't do this or that but it is ok if we do that or this,hmmm yeah nice.I was brought up with what might be called old fashion morals,i use two VERY simple ideals to form opinions and that is RIGHT or WRONG,i know the difference and if i see right ,i do not feel the need to always give out high fives but i sometimes will,but if i see wrong it really bothers me.

vonryan123 · October 2016

It's kinda funny I just had a bout with a clan member on teamspeak like this just the other day. Long long story short he just like's to make huge generalization's about people and then just rant for hours....His foundation of "facts" is basically "My opinion is right yours are wrong". The funny part is he claims to be mister wise and educated at the same time passes predetermination's of people. He likes to argue just to argue basically, is it helpful? no. Does it add to the conversation? no. Is it deceitful? certainly.

MaxBacon · October 2016

craftseeker said:
Recently after hitting "agree" on a number of posts I was challenged by @MaxBacon to stop doing that and post something. When I did make a post I was criticized because I substantially repeated the previous posts I had "agreed" with. Sometimes simply hitting the "agree" button or posting "yes" is exactly what you wish to convey, nothing more is required.

Not "stop doing so" lol, the moment what you were doing is marking <positive toned posts> as "LOL" and marking <negative toned posts> as "Agree"; as no reply is necessary yet noticed that specific behavior. When I called you out was because you Agreed with one quite extremist view and the person I quoted asking why didn't reply (as you also marked my posts of "LOL"; so I was wondering for real what was the argument behind agreeing such stand over "Oh it's something that fits my narrative".

bartoni33 · October 2016

craftseeker said:

bartoni33 said:

waynejr2 said:

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

Way to miss the point there.

Yes this not a "Debate Club". But it is a forum. Giving reasons why you come to a certain conclusion is almost the literal definition of a forum. Just typing "yes" or "no" does not add to a discussion unless a very simple answer is asked for. If all you have to offer is "yes" or "no" then you probably have nothing meaningful to add to begin with.

Although... this conversation is not taking place in a Roman forum but still. That reminds me: Devil's Advocate is not the same as being a contrarian.

waynejr2 said: "a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed"
You said: ""yes" or "no" does not add to a discussion unless a very simple answer is asked for."

It seems to me that you agreed with him.

On your other point, on occasion I read through the posts on a thread, my sole contribution being to use the buttons. Recently after hitting "agree" on a number of posts I was challenged by @MaxBacon to stop doing that and post something. When I did make a post I was criticized because I substantially repeated the previous posts I had "agreed" with. Sometimes simply hitting the "agree" button or posting "yes" is exactly what you wish to convey, nothing more is required.

Yes I agreed that when asked for a simple answer a simple one should be given. That is not a discussion, that is asking a question. "Do you want some ice cream waynejr?" "No" is appropriate. Going into a 5 minute discussion on why he can't because of a family history of Lactose Intolerance is not.

I will grant you the use of "buttons" here. I do that all the time, including in this thread. I even "misuse" them like you do by "LOL" trolling, contrarian or otherwise stupid posts, like I have in this thread. Again, that is not contributing to a discussion. That is stating an opinion on a discussion. In your defense @MaxBacon should not have confronted you for your opinions on post in a thread. Although guessing what game forum you were both in I can see how it got to that situation.

To me and others in this thread it seems strange that @waynejr2 is apparently posting here just to be posting and has zero interest in having a discussion. He just wants to share his opinion and move on. Sounds like Facebook is more his speed.

EDIT: @Wizardry I KNEW you would show up here! Shine on you crazy diamond!

MaxBacon · October 2016

bartoni33 said:
I will grant you the use of "buttons" here. I do that all the time, including in this thread. I even "misuse" them like you do by "LOL" trolling, contrarian or otherwise stupid posts, like I have in this thread. Again, that is not contributing to a discussion.

The "LOL" reaction is quite being used with malice around the forum; pretty much a "point and laugh".

All we need to do is imagine the discussion in real life where you have one person discussing with you, while when you say something one or a group just laughs at you, while the person you discuss with is morally supported and agreed upon to see how that behavior feels like a circle-jerk that attempts to take you down by moral or humiliation; on that case the points or arguments you might use are rather irrelevant.

(and with that I just described a lot of discussions surrounding politics and why people get so angry so fast to a point everybody is just accusing and insulting each other)

kjempff · October 2016

H0urg1ass said:

I work with a guy like this and, honestly, I hate being around him for more than a few minutes. No matter what point you bring up, or what topic you want to discuss he will play devils advocate. He will even take extreme positions that no considerate human being would ever take just for the sake of argument.

Disagree if you have a valid point, or it's a matter of taste, then you can disagree on personal likes or dislikes freely. You can't help what you like or don't like when it comes to art or entertainment, and you don't really have to have a reason to back it up. However, disagreeing just to disagree is a mental illness and should be treated with therapy.

Yeah I worked with someone like that too. In the beginning I appreciated that someone turned every subject upside down, because it sometimes forces you to think in new ways and better solutions can come from it. But when every little trivial thing become a discussion and often about something that never should be challenged in the first place, it starts to wear me down - Add a little time pressure to that and it becomes annoying fast.

I am not sure what psochological mechanism are in place here, but it seem like they take on this role of questioning things (which is an important role to have in a team), but it then takes off and they can't judge what is constructive to argue about and just bring everything on the table. Then he has started to think he is actually right about every opposing standpoint, which makes it even harder to deal with.
It came down to silly things such as questioning that warm air rises upwards, or which direction counter clockwise is because he once saw a watch the went the opposite way.

bartoni33 · October 2016

MaxBacon said:

bartoni33 said:
I will grant you the use of "buttons" here. I do that all the time, including in this thread. I even "misuse" them like you do by "LOL" trolling, contrarian or otherwise stupid posts, like I have in this thread. Again, that is not contributing to a discussion.

The "LOL" reaction is quite being used with malice around the forum; pretty much a "point and laugh".

All we need to do is imagine the discussion in real life where you have one person discussing with you, while when you say something one or a group just laughs at you, while the person you discuss with is morally supported and agreed upon to see how that behavior feels like a circle-jerk that attempts to take you down by moral or humiliation; on that case the points or arguments you might use are rather irrelevant.

(and with that I just described a lot of discussions surrounding politics and why people get so angry so fast to a point everybody is just accusing and insulting each other)

It sure is. The lack of a "disagree" button is manifesting itself in "LOL" posting. I have zero issues with doing that.

But again, using the buttons is an OPINION on the post, not adding to the post. I hit "insightful" to your post because I felt it was. That is my opinion. My replying to you now is my contribution to your discussion. I "LOL" waynejr2 post because they are making him look like he is in the wrong social media area and should just post his opinions on Facebook or whatever echo chamber site exists. That is my opinion. I will not reply to him again because he obviously doesn't care so I will not waste my time with him.

To your second paragraph all I have to say is that knowing both you and @craftseeker I cannot fell sorry for either of you. All I will say is that many times blind fanboys and ignorant trolls share the same Venn Diagram area. An honest discussion is not possible between the two.

Kyleran · October 2016

Rasiem said:

waynejr2 said:

somersaultsam said:

By contrarianism, I mean the predisposition to disagree for the sake of disagreeing in the absence of facts to back up your position, in it's most benign form. In it's more malign form it is purposefully deceitful.

Please share your thoughts...

I don't have to give you a reason for my answers. Not a debate club and a simple yes/no is good enough for some of the questions posed.

Not to be rude but why then would you answer? Just not agreeing is an invalid response, I believe people do this out of negativity because it is easier to hate then like for most and many just have no reason to dislike. Even if you dislike say a game because there are to many shades of red which would be silly but that's still a valid reason. Also I think as humans having detailed responses is important for us to learn about ourselves and makes us re-evaluate things as we verbalize our answers for reasoning.

Just so you know, any time someone says "not to be rude" they usually are being rude so might as well skip typing it.

My grandfather loved to argue with people. He used to drive my father crazy because as the OP stated, he would often take positions you knew he didn't really support. (I'm told I am just like him)

I once asked him why he did this. He said it was because many people often speak their opinions without really understanding why they supported or believed in something.

So he would challenge their beliefs, to see if they were founded on something of substance, or if it was mostly based on faith or ignorance.

He also said sometimes people shared information that actually helped change his opinions on a subject, rare perhaps but he actually was a flexible thinker and could adapt as the world changed around him.

He may have pissed off some folks, but he certainly wasn't "mentally ill" just enjoyed a good verbal fight.

Seriously the real issue with some people is they lack the courage of their convictions and shy away if someone strongly challenges them or feel they should win the debate in one round.

So that said, I have no real issue with those who are contrarians, sometimes its fun to debate them, and other times I just walk away.

TLDR: Man up, boy-o.

craftseeker · October 2016

@bartoni33 I guess I am your ignorant troll and @maxbacon is your fanboy.
Speaking for myself, I do not seek your sympathy. As I have said before I do not use the 'lol' button as a sign of disagreement I use it when a post makes me laugh, either for its intentional humour or because of its inherent silliness. If there was a disagree button I would use that too, but not on the same posts.

As for Max, it is entirely possible for me to have a discussion with him, just not on the game which he so highly regards. On other topics I agree with him rather more than I disagree.

I have also seen more than a couple of trollish posts from you, but hey perceptions can vary.

Jermzy · October 2016

I was going to hit the "lol" button, but now i am confused as to what it really means.

holdenhamlet · October 2016

I'd honestly rather someone be contrary then just constantly regurgitate the most mundane things and everyone go around agreeing with him or her. At least the former has the chance to spark a discussion.

I think the only people that have a real problem with people disagreeing with them are people that believe they know everything and are always right.

I always like to engage in debates on forums and in real life whenever possible. They offer me a chance to test my own beliefs and learn something. Sometimes I get a little hot-headed, but I think that goes hand-in-hand with really defending your beliefs completely. There just needs to be a point somewhere where you take a step back and decide whether your beliefs stood up to the test.

Usually for me that's sometime after I was banned from a forum or pissed someone off in real life. If there's one thing I'd like to work on it's the transition to that review stage. Ideally it would happen while the conversation was still going on.

But yes I think a tendency to question things is a positive trait. Obviously there are good and bad ways to go about doing that.

Howdy, Stranger!

Should contrarianism be considered a positive attribute?

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Should contrarianism be considered a positive attribute?

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV