Am I a contrarian? And meditations on radicalism

[Tahuti]

Well, is it? Is it a thing? I notice a clash between my lines of thinking and that of others. In fact, I notice this happens a lot outside of CFC as well. It gets even better: I suspect that if I were to be surrounded by others who would think the same as am on record of doing now on CFC, my views would be more similar to that of the mainstream of CFC.

We probably all appear a bit more extreme on CFC than we do IRL. Even the most mainstream of views like supporting Hilary Clinton are still brought in the rethoric that is considered radical. An internet forum is perhaps the perfect platform to experiment with different kinds of ideological thought processes, where you might utter more radical statements than you would do otherwise, probably as a matter of self-expression.

So, what are your experiences on CFC regarding the matter?

 

[Borachio]

I'm not sure. Whenever I talk to anyone either in RL or on-line I nearly always find myself putting forward a different point of view from the person who speaks first, even if only slightly different.

Isn't this inevitable, though? Otherwise, conversations would consist of me going "Yes, yes, that's right. Absolutely." Might be a little on the dull side, don't you think?

The trick could be to agree AND add; for that totally non-confrontational conversation we've all been looking for. Easier said than done, imo.

 

[Tahuti]

What I do notice is that people tend to argue about minute details they wouldn't argue about otherwise.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I find the frankness of discussion highly refreshing. I find it boring to talk to people who all agree with me, I don't have to think about the validity of my position that way.

I suspect you're right though, in that most people tend to be more...mainstream in real life interactions. Either that, or if they disagree they tend to stay quiet as they would rather not suffer the consequences holding a divergent viewpoint can have. Especially in regards to political or religious.

Isn't this inevitable, though? Otherwise, conversations would consist of me going "Yes, yes, that's right. Absolutely." Might be a little on the dull side, don't you think?

Completely right.

 

[warpus]

We probably all appear a bit more extreme on CFC than we do IRL.

That's probably partially due to the fact that CFC is a place where controversial topics are often discussed.

We come here to discuss touchy subjects, and oftentimes subjects that we know others will have wildly opposite opinions on. That's just the nature of the place. Out in the real world, nobody runs up to me and asks me: "Tell me warpus, what do you think about abortion?".. My life revolves around other things, and my views on moral matters usually don't even come up. CFC is designed as a place where they often do. I mean, it's also a lot easier to express yourself if you're "anonymous" and all that too, but CFC sort of brings out people's opinions on touchy subjects by design.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I am now going to emigrate to Canada solely to creep on warpus.

"Say, warpus, what do you think about abortion?"
"Do you think that Poland should receive all of Germany and Ukraine?"
"What are your thoughts on predestination?"

Then, after the fourth or fifth question, I'll have a restraining order for about 5 km from warpus's house.

 

[Narz]

IRL I almost never argue with people, even if someone states something obviously false, why bother? Ideally I try not be alone with such people, like when I visited my friend in Delaware one of his rommate's was going on & on about how the Boston Marathon bombing was fake & the recent cop shootings were fake so people could riot & they could put everyone in FEMA camps (this FEMA camp thing is big amongst conspiracy theorists, I thought we'd all be in one by now).

Anyway, I just nodded & excused myself.

Online though, there's no uncomfortableness about arguing, no risk of getting in an actual fight, you don't have to see the person or deal with them day to day. Its the perfect place to vent.

However, part of the joy of life is just chilling out with people having a relaxed time & the nature of Internet forums makes that hard because you can't just be with people, by definition a discussion board needs discussion & drama filled discussion gets things moving faster.

I will sometimes have passionate debates/discussions IRL but only with those I know very well & I feel like can handle it, which is about 2 or 3 people.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Well, is it? Is it a thing? I notice a clash between my lines of thinking and that of others. In fact, I notice this happens a lot outside of CFC as well. It gets even better: I suspect that if I were to be surrounded by others who would think the same as am on record of doing now on CFC, my views would be more similar to that of the mainstream of CFC.

People tend to pick the socially most beneficial line of thinking. Social media is probably contributing to it as well.

 

[Tahuti]

People tend to pick the socially most beneficial line of thinking. Social media is probably contributing to it as well.

From a purely self-interested perspective, taking up and defending niche positions may be beneficial as it makes you stand out.

 

[Triewd]

RE:

Being radical.

My take on it is this:

You will annoy people, in fact the only way to not annoy people is to sit at home doing nothing, reading nothing controversial (in case someone sees) saying nothing conversational, and then someone will criticize you for doing nothing,

Radicalism is Life, SEIZE IT SEIZE IT.

Ok Ill calm down now.....

Look the thing is people don't like others that don't conform to THEIR standards this of course goes both ways because I don't like people that don't conform to mine.....

Its basically group theory in a way

http://oliveremberton.com/2014/if-y...-you-probably-arent-doing-anything-important/

Rule 2: Hate is a side effect of impact

People will hate you because of the impact you have on their feelings ideology thought process validity of their ideas you name it.

http://oliveremberton.com/2014/the-...e-is-unfair-its-your-broken-idea-of-fairness/

I don't know if I agree with the second link but it seems brilliant so I'm leaving it there.

You can't worry too much about what others think of you when taking up a contrarian position just say the damn truth.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Well, is it? Is it a thing? I notice a clash between my lines of thinking and that of others. In fact, I notice this happens a lot outside of CFC as well. It gets even better: I suspect that if I were to be surrounded by others who would think the same as am on record of doing now on CFC, my views would be more similar to that of the mainstream of CFC.

Is there a mainstream of CFC? Something I've noticed is that while there may be a majority opinion on some issues or in specific threads, that doesn't mean that this carries over to the forum as a whole.

What I do notice is that people tend to argue about minute details they wouldn't argue about otherwise.

Like whether it's "pop" or "soda", what's the best pizza topping, to tip or not to tip... these are some of the arguments I've been involved in over the years, on several different forums. It's amazing how nasty things can get over the subject of pop/soda or tipping.

Or on a Star Trek forum, people argue over minute technical details that the average viewer never even notices. For that matter, I've seen some spectacular arguments here about details of various versions of Civ that I never noticed before and which don't affect my enjoyment of the game one whit.

But then I can argue all day about Dune vs. nuDune... nope, come to think of it, that's something I argue about offline, as well.

IRL I almost never argue with people, even if someone states something obviously false, why bother?

If there's an opportunity to help someone understand something they clearly didn't understand before, why not bother?

Back in the late '80s, I asked a couple of SCA/Star Trek friends if they'd like to see Patrick Stewart in some non-Star Trek stuff, like I, Claudius. They agreed, but didn't have much background in the history of that period. So I explained about the various members of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and which of them became Emperors and a few important historical events during those years... and was flabbergasted when one of my friends said it didn't make any sense. She honestly couldn't fathom how the Crucifixion could have happened during the reign of Tiberius, because she believed that the entirety of Jesus' life occurred between 1 BC and 1 AD.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Well basically I am a conflicy-shy coward, in that I am afraid of the consequences of speaking my mind.
With strangers, and for that matter mostly foreigners, on the internet, that means much less. I don't really heve to "deal" with any of you ever. Although I have a nasty tendency to not speak my mind fully here as well.

But in my mind, I'm not "experimenting", but actually generally being more frank here.
(When I post of course, I've probably made less than a tenth of the posts most of the regulars here have)

But what's a contrarian, really?

 

[Tahuti]

Look the thing is people don't like others that don't conform to THEIR standards this of course goes both ways because I don't like people that don't conform to mine.....

Well, the problem is that arguments often end up becoming personal because people view their opinions as intimately linked to their character. The biggest flamers are usually the kind of people who view their opinions as equal to their person.

Myself, I have made a couple of ideological shifts. Usually, some intellectual baggage from previous ideological I supported last well after the shifts if these prove analytically useful. It often leads to analyses the give certain people kneejerk reactions despite coming from a premise of neutrality, which is also useful in filtering weak intellectual opponents who have preconceptions they try to justify by piling 'argument' (read: dirt on you).

But what's a contrarian, really?

Basically, an opinion-Hipster.

 

[Triewd]

Well, the problem is that arguments often end up becoming personal because people view their opinions as intimately linked to their character. The biggest flamers are usually the kind of people who view their opinions as equal to their person.

Myself, I have made a couple of ideological shifts. Usually, some intellectual baggage from previous ideological I supported last well after the shifts if these prove analytically useful. It often leads to analyses the give certain people kneejerk reactions despite coming from a premise of neutrality, which is also useful in filtering weak intellectual opponents who have preconceptions they try to justify by piling 'argument' (read: dirt on you).

Indeed its one of those things I can NEVER cleanse myself off, Ideology is after all how we view the world so its linked to our characters intimately.

Of course we counter this by having principles, but sometimes these principles clash with what we believe causing cognitive dissonance, and that can be verrry painful.

anyway:

But what's a contrarian, really?

"opposing or rejecting popular opinion or current practice"

Examples:

Believing that Global Warming is not caused by Manmade effects

Believing that abortion is wrong,

Actually dependent on where you are ether being a religious believer or an atheist could be contarian.

If you are in the bible belt being an atheist or expressing religious belief on internet forums.

Anti feminism

Expressing Nationalist sentiment (that can get you alot of hate let me tell you!!)

Just for examples

 

[Narz]

If there's an opportunity to help someone understand something they clearly didn't understand before, why not bother?

Depends. Many people don't want to know reality.

She honestly couldn't fathom how the Crucifixion could have happened during the reign of Tiberius, because she believed that the entirety of Jesus' life occurred between 1 BC and 1 AD.

How could she even think that? Hurts my brain to imagine how that could be possible.