What are you wrong about?

[aero]

In an argument, both sides believe they are right. What if they're both wrong, and you bring up a third position? What if that's wrong as well? What if every position you hold and defend is completely wrong? If they are, is debate ultimately meaningless when trying to make objective arguments about a subject? When I ask myself the question "What if I'm wrong," I usually research whatever it is I'm thinking about to myself. I feel as though this helps remove the chance of being fooled into believing one thing over another. I also feel like it helps form genuine thought. I say "genuine" to separate from thinking about what others say and using talking points you hear from an authority figure (media hosts, politicians, parents) on an issue while arguing. Also, I think it encourages originality and new ways to solve problems. It's weird to think about, but perhaps you don't have your own thoughts. Setting aside the philosophical implications about that claim, it seems true to me since you're likely to just think like someone else; hence the term "like-minded."

It's hard to come up with what you're wrong with, and it really shows just how much you believe in what you believe.

What do you guys think about this way of thinking? I mean, I could be wrong.

[Palisade]

I believe that third-wave feminism has a lot of wrong in it.. I think it brings up some very valid points at times but the "men hating feminazi" types shadow over the good that comes from it.

Me saying that makes me a misogynist in some eyes. Makes me think if I'm right and these people are delusional, or that I'm a no good Privileged-White Male.

[Danny]

[Chip Potato]

I like how you coincidentally made this thread after you got your virtual ass kicked in a thread. Trying to save face?

[aero]

I like how you coincidentally made this thread after you got your virtual ass kicked in a thread. Trying to save face?

That thread was going nowhere. Stay on topic.

[Zeldamaster12]

So, in your eyes, people disagreeing with you equals the discussion going nowhere?

Anyways, on topic, some debates, there isn't a right or wrong answer, but it's based around your beliefs.

As for proving your point to be right, it takes a lot of research.

[aero]

So, in your eyes, people disagreeing with you equals the discussion going nowhere?

No.

Anyways, on topic, some debates, there isn't a right or wrong answer, but it's based around your beliefs.

As for proving your point to be right, it takes a lot of research.

How do you know there isn't a right or wrong answer for some debates? Also, are these "some debates" not what you know the "right" answer to?

[JupiHornet]

Wait, what are you trying to ask of us, here? The wording in the OP blew my mind >_<

[aero]

Wait, what are you trying to ask of us, here? The wording in the OP blew my mind >_<

It's simple, just share what you think you're wrong about.

[Arale]

lol this is pretentious as hell

as you pointed out yourself, everyone thinks they're right, yes? therefore, if somebody thought they were wrong about something, then by necessity they cannot think that thing any longer, meaning they aren't actually wrong anymore. this is a very paradoxical question. although maybe that's the point?

but yeah, if you see something as wrong, then its not what you think is right. therefore its not yours.

this is, of course, referring to holding views, not relatively-provable information or actions. since those wouldn't really fit this context.

I believe that third-wave feminism has a lot of wrong in it.. I think it brings up some very valid points at times but the "men hating feminazi" types shadow over the good that comes from it.

Me saying that makes me a misogynist in some eyes. Makes me think if I'm right and these people are delusional, or that I'm a no good Privileged-White Male.

i can gurantee you 100 percent the people that made you think this way are other males and not the "spooky feminists" youre referring to, i absolutely gurantee you

[aero]

as you pointed out yourself, everyone thinks they're right, yes? therefore, if somebody thought they were wrong about something, then by necessity they cannot think that thing any longer, meaning they aren't actually wrong anymore. this is a very paradoxical question. although maybe that's the point?

I wouldn't say that they "aren't actually wrong anymore" because it is a paradox. Can you name one thing that you believe, and is wrong and then not think that any longer as you described? If you are able to, then you would be drawn towards the truth. The problem is, is that this recursive thinking would bring you back to where you started in thinking you're right about whatever new position or idea you hold to be right. I don't see this as pointless and I see it more as a tool to generate genuine thought as I described in the original post, since by trying to come up with something you are wrong about you realize how much you think you're right about and are better able to understand your own beliefs and challenge yourself to come up with better and original ones.

It's not uncommon for people to say "what if I'm wrong," about certain and specific matters. Any honest person should at least think they could be completely wrong about something, and when they reflect they better solidify their stance or change their mind altogether and thus truly be open minded. What I'm not sure of though, is if this can be applied generally to all thoughts and if I'm correct to say that it's beneficial rather than redundant.

I believe that third-wave feminism has a lot of wrong in it.. I think it brings up some very valid points at times but the "men hating feminazi" types shadow over the good that comes from it.

Me saying that makes me a misogynist in some eyes. Makes me think if I'm right and these people are delusional, or that I'm a no good Privileged-White Male.

i can gurantee you 100 percent the people that made you think this way are other males and not the "spooky feminists" youre referring to, i absolutely gurantee you

Males can be feminists too, I don't understand why you would distinguish them from other "spooky" feminists. That said, I'm not touching the Privilege/White Male/Feminism/sexism debate because one it's not on topic for this thread, and two I've come to realize these issues can't be argued and the best you can do is provide the other side with something that will make them reconsider. The second is just my opinion though, but the first isn't and I'd prefer the topic stay toward the way we think instead of identity politics. .-.

[Arale]

male feminists arent part of the spooky feminist caricature that doesn't exist that he's referring to, though. that's what i meant by that.

the only things that i ever begin to think i could be extremely wrong about tend to be irrational doubt that im fairly sure could possibly be related to some form of mental illness, maybe. or a similar situation to that.

[Palisade]

I believe that third-wave feminism has a lot of wrong in it.. I think it brings up some very valid points at times but the "men hating feminazi" types shadow over the good that comes from it.

Me saying that makes me a misogynist in some eyes. Makes me think if I'm right and these people are delusional, or that I'm a no good Privileged-White Male.

i can gurantee you 100 percent the people that made you think this way are other males and not the "spooky feminists" youre referring to, i absolutely gurantee you

The only male who could possibly have made me think that was TJ (amazing atheist), but even then I disagree with some of what he has to say.

I started questioning feminism after someone I know started claiming Elliot Rodgers was an MRA, and that he had killed 4 men and 2 women. I corrected her by saying that there was no proof at the time he was an MRA, and that it was 3 men/3 women he killed. She wasn't having it.

I've spoken to a lot of other girls about feminism, too. A lot of what they have said to me doesn't add up and they often contradict themselves.

[IcarusBen]

Time to throw my two cents in. On every topic, save religion, I follow very basic logic. To prove to me that a positive claim is true (roses are red, for example) I need evidence that roses are red. To prove to me a negative claim is true (roses are not made from unicorn farts and leprechaun blood) I need to see the absence of evidence. It's a bit of a problem for religion, though, since atheists are proving a negative claim, theists are proving a positive claim. Since there isn't exactly a whole lot of evidence supporting the existence of God, then atheists are already one step ahead. That's the only instance I go against logic, because I am Christian, believe in God, blah blah Jesus is awesome blah blah yadda yadda.

I'm not a very good Christian, but that's beside the point.

tl;dr Because of my ERKSTURME LURGIC SKEELZ, I'm only ever wrong for a few seconds at a time, save for religion.

[Palisade]

Time to throw my two cents in. On every topic, save religion, I follow very basic logic. To prove to me that a positive claim is true (roses are red, for example) I need evidence that roses are red. To prove to me a negative claim is true (roses are not made from unicorn farts and leprechaun blood) I need to see the absence of evidence. It's a bit of a problem for religion, though, since atheists are proving a negative claim, theists are proving a positive claim. Since there isn't exactly a whole lot of evidence supporting the existence of God, then atheists are already one step ahead. That's the only instance I go against logic, because I am Christian, believe in God, blah blah Jesus is awesome blah blah yadda yadda.

I'm not a very good Christian, but that's beside the point.

tl;dr Because of my ERKSTURME LURGIC SKEELZ, I'm only ever wrong for a few seconds at a time, save for religion.

[IcarusBen]

Time to throw my two cents in. On every topic, save religion, I follow very basic logic. To prove to me that a positive claim is true (roses are red, for example) I need evidence that roses are red. To prove to me a negative claim is true (roses are not made from unicorn farts and leprechaun blood) I need to see the absence of evidence. It's a bit of a problem for religion, though, since atheists are proving a negative claim, theists are proving a positive claim. Since there isn't exactly a whole lot of evidence supporting the existence of God, then atheists are already one step ahead. That's the only instance I go against logic, because I am Christian, believe in God, blah blah Jesus is awesome blah blah yadda yadda.

I'm not a very good Christian, but that's beside the point.

tl;dr Because of my ERKSTURME LURGIC SKEELZ, I'm only ever wrong for a few seconds at a time, save for religion.

A get-a-load-of-this-guy cam? I'm soooooo insulted.

All kidding aside, what might be provoking you to do the whole get-a-load-of-this-guy thing?

[Palisade]

You claim to follow very basic knowledge and yet you're a firm believer in a Christianity. The irony is too much.

[IcarusBen]

More like a Christian-in-name-only. I believe in evolution (God just left the Earth on autopilot after creating it), I think the whole "world in seven days, just add light" was metaphorical, I certainly disagree with Leviticus and Deuteronomy and I don't agree with all that "no contraception, no abortion" BS the church tries to pull.

Also, just for that, I'm gonna pray your milk goes bad and your cat eats all your sandwich bread.



Okay, is your milk moldy yet?

[Palisade]

That's dark.

[JupiHornet]

More like a Christian-in-name-only. I believe in evolution (God just left the Earth on autopilot after creating it), I think the whole "world in seven days, just add light" was metaphorical, I certainly disagree with Leviticus and Deuteronomy and I don't agree with all that "no contraception, no abortion" BS the church tries to pull.

I agree, I really think it's unfair how Christians judge homosexuals just because they're Christians. And I, too, believe in evolution. Coming from another fellow Christian.