# Does anyone ever admit their position is wrong in Great Debates? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 6, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718 "2018-12-06T22:52:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/21 "2018-12-07T17:19:09Z")
> [@Gatopescado](#): > > I’m sorry, but ketchup on a Hot Dog **is** wrong, has _always_ been wrong, and _will always_ be wrong. I will never vary on this stance. > > Cite: Clint Eastwood I like mostly mustard, but with a little bit of ketchup mixed in. Every time I put the ketchup on, I say to myself… [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5JIpT4GkyM&t=50s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5JIpT4GkyM&t=50s) Literally. As for me, I used to post in GD a lot more, years ago. Not so much now. But whenever I make an unsupported statement and this is pointed out to me, I’m usually embarrassed enough to immediately post a retraction. However, I don’t get involved in a debate unless I am firm on my position, so I can’t say I’ve ever changed my position either in a lengthy discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Kron](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kron/32/12444_2.png) [@Kron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kron)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/22 "2018-12-07T18:06:36Z")
I changed my position on gender-identity issues based on what I read on the SD… not that I was a fervent arguer on my previous position, but I definitely was awakened to not only that I was wrong, but why it was so. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/23 "2018-12-07T20:58:07Z")
I’ve changed on gun control. Back in the day I was one of the strongest advocates for the second amendment, and I put a lot of energy into arguing that position. Now, I’m changing, although it’s not a complete flip. I still own a gun, I still think shooting is fun. But something needs to be done about the modern epidemic of mass shootings, and what we’ve been doing (nothing) isn’t working. I’m less concerned now about “fundamental right” and more about “it’s gotta stop.” If that means we have to change the amendment, so be it. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/24 "2018-12-07T21:44:23Z")
I started a thread on Trump’s suitability for a DC liquor license, and it basically ran like this: 1. I laid out my case. 2. A bunch of idiots posted contentless “No ur wrong!” sort of arguments. 3. Eventually one poster come up with a very thorough and cited argument on why I was wrong. 4. I admitted error. 5. The idiots who put no effort into the “No ur wrong!” arguments then crowed about how bigly they won the thread. Screw them. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/25 "2018-12-07T21:47:30Z")
I have always felt that a more honest name for the forum would be “The Argument Sketch From Monty Python.” ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/26 "2018-12-08T02:46:43Z")
Just because I’ve been convinced doesn’t mean I’m necessarily going to “admit error.” That’s just not always appropriate. Often my mind changes well after the fact, and the thread had already moved on or become silent. Also often the change is not that drastic, anyways. It’s a small change where making a big deal out of it would seem weird. In that case, you’ll just see a change in how I argue. Also, there are plenty of times where my mind changes as I’m reading the thread for the first time, so, by the time I get to the bottom, there is no error to admit. I may have even had a reply all typed up but not sent, just to delete it. Just recently, my opinion on Neil Degrasse Tyson changed as I read the thread. I was initially going to say that, while I believed the women, I think he made a good case that they misinterpreted his acts. But then someone pointed out how his story differed from one of his accusers’ story, and I changed my mind again. * * * Oh. and **pkbites** arguments are dumb, as they are all _tu quoque_ arguments. What frustrates me is that more posters don’t just shut that shit down. When you argue with the position, you tacitly give it legitimacy. That is, after all, the entire point of such arguments. The second you allow _tu quoque_, then everything you or your side has ever done is up for scrutiny and will need to be defended. This allows them to deflect from whether or not the original issue is valid. It’s also likely how **pkbites** resolves his cognitive dissonance of wanting to support his side while believing what they did is wrong. He has to tell himself that it’s okay because the Democrats did this other thing. And the fact that he knows it is wrong paradoxically makes him less likely to change his mind, since he’d have to admit he has supported something he knows is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/27 "2018-12-08T04:53:18Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Just because I’ve been convinced doesn’t mean I’m necessarily going to “admit error.” That’s just not always appropriate. Often my mind changes well after the fact, and the thread had already moved on or become silent. Also often the change is not that drastic, anyways. It’s a small change where making a big deal out of it would seem weird. In that case, you’ll just see a change in how I argue. > > Also, there are plenty of times where my mind changes as I’m reading the thread for the first time, so, by the time I get to the bottom, there is no error to admit. I may have even had a reply all typed up but not sent, just to delete it. > > Just recently, my opinion on Neil Degrasse Tyson changed as I read the thread. I was initially going to say that, while I believed the women, I think he made a good case that they misinterpreted his acts. But then someone pointed out how his story differed from one of his accusers’ story, and I changed my mind again. > > * * * > > Oh. and **pkbites** arguments are dumb, as they are all _tu quoque_ arguments. What frustrates me is that more posters don’t just shut that shit down. When you argue with the position, you tacitly give it legitimacy. > > That is, after all, the entire point of such arguments. The second you allow _tu quoque_, then everything you or your side has ever done is up for scrutiny and will need to be defended. This allows them to deflect from whether or not the original issue is valid. > > It’s also likely how **pkbites** resolves his cognitive dissonance of wanting to support his side while believing what they did is wrong. He has to tell himself that it’s okay because the Democrats did this other thing. And the fact that he knows it is wrong paradoxically makes him less likely to change his mind, since he’d have to admit he has supported something he knows is wrong. Pssst. You realize Democrat supporting posters do that tu quoque thing all the time? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/28 "2018-12-08T06:13:42Z")
Some times I’ll start a discussion of some topic because I find debate to be a useful means to clarify my own thoughts on the subject. There are plenty of examples you could find on this board in which you’d see the ideas I was expressing at the beginning of a thread are different than the ideas I express later on. This is a sign that my position is evolving through the course of the debate. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/29 "2018-12-08T12:15:21Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Pssst. You realize Democrat supporting posters do that tu quoque thing all the time? Way to fight the tu quoque with… tu quoque. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/30 "2018-12-08T12:32:15Z")
And the same issues with tu quoque still apply in this case. So what if Democrats do? Does that change that **pkbites** ’ argument is a bad one? Further response, while tempting, would only be treating your argument as valid. ---
**Author:** ![Biotop](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biotop/32/321_2.png) [@Biotop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biotop)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/31 "2018-12-08T13:57:05Z")
> [@don\_t\_ask](#): > > I have always felt that a more honest name for the forum would be “The Argument Sketch From Monty Python.” No it wouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/32 "2018-12-08T14:04:40Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > Even if they don’t, it’s still worth making well-reasoned logical arguments because all the lurkers silently reading along, who haven’t yet nailed their colours to the mast, will be influenced by them. A fond hope, to be realized virtually never. I don’t care what anecdotes you tell me, my mind’s made up. :mad: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/33 "2018-12-08T14:53:13Z")
I’d admit being wrong if it ever happened. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/34 "2018-12-08T17:58:28Z")
Oddly, there was an article in Scientific American recently about how people can be convinced to change their political beliefs. In essence, the article says that people can’t be convinced with any kind of logical arguments. Rather, they have to be tricked into changing their opinions. They have to be made to feel like their new opinions is what they always thought, deep down. Here is an example they give in a less wrought situation. A woman is deciding what pants to wear. She wants to wear red. Her husband wants her to wear blue. They argue. The more they argue, the more determined she is to wear red and defy her husband. Instead, the husband could secretly remove the red dress and say absolutely nothing. The wife would be annoyed for a bit but could decide that the blue pants is better than nothing, and actually is pretty good, so ends up wearing it and being pleased with it. According to the article, tricking people like this actually works to change people’s political beliefs. > **[How Political Opinions Change](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-political-opinions-change/)** > > A clever experiment shows it's surprisingly easy to change someone’s political views, revealing how flexible we are ---
**Author:** ![UnwittingAmericans](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d9b06d/32.png) [@UnwittingAmericans](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwittingAmericans)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2018, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/35 "2018-12-08T21:39:04Z")
This place is mostly people arguing their way into ever-smaller paper bags. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2018, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/36 "2018-12-09T04:30:30Z")
There are a few instances of a Doper changing his mind. **Bricker** is an example — at first staunchly opposed to federal funding for arts he revised this position at least somewhat in a GD(?) thread. > [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > In [this](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=866532&page=2) thread, I was going to post the following: > > **pkbites:** Skimming that thread a little, I’d guess that **pkbites** has bought into right-wing Stupidism and is delighted when the fraudsters and haters he idolizes play hard-ball. If he can find an example of the D’s doing something similar then he feels the GOP is justified even if the R’s mischief is a hundred times more egregious. Examples of people, either on the extreme left or America’s corrupted right, holding to political positions despite all fact and reason are plentiful. I’m more concerned with refusal to acknowledge non-political fact, or arguing against a post one doesn’t even bother to read! Here’s a specific example that irritated me. You needn’t be an historical linguist to understand the distinction between nodes A and B in the following clading diagram. The distinction was _essential_ to the thread content. ```php time ------------------------------> ----------A--------------------- rest of I-E | ------------B---------- Italic | ----------- Celtic ``` Dr. Drake got himself confused by the distinction, despite that he considers himself an expert on this topic. 😛 Tell me if this should have been cleared up by [my post #19](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21196524&postcount=19): > [@](#): > > **septimus** : The split of Italo-Celtic from the rest of PIE can be dated with confidence to about 3500 BC. > **Dr. Drake** : I disagree with your date for the Italo-Celtic split. It seems about 1500 years too early to me. Already in 700 BC, with the earliest Italic and Celtic inscriptions, they are extremely close. > **septimus** : How is the “split of (the earliest) Italo-Celtic from the rest of PIE” dated by evidence regarding the split of Italic and Celtic from late Italo-Celtic? The above quote is from #19 in that thread. I was already surprised that Drake had confused nodes A and B. Yet _even after this_ he repeated the same blunder in #24 and #26. His #26 explicitly made clar he was referring to node B. In hindsight I should have typed a little Ascii diagram for him as above, but I thought my careful English prose should be enough. He _never_ acknowledged his blunder, and never acknowledged the useful points I made in the thread. Instead he blathered on ignorantly, waited for me to get angry, and then possibly whined to the Mods. Oafs like **pkbites** are just following in the footsteps of their leader, Donald J. Trump and are a dime-a-dozen in today’s America. It’s pretentious dunces, like **Dr. Drake** , on scientific topics that annoy me. ---
**Author:** ![survinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@survinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/survinga)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2018, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/37 "2018-12-09T13:35:38Z")
I’ve been involved in a few threads on GD, and I don’t see anyone changing their views due to the threads themselves. I’ve also previously been involved in other online communities which are more right-wing than this place, and in those communities, there’s also very little view changing. I think it’s human nature to dig in when arguing. I have actually changed my view on a few things in the last decade. I used to think that “Global warming” was a pile of BS. I also used to think that we were edging closer to a “government debt crisis” in the US. In both of these, my own views changed, as I read more evidence for the other side and I considered the sources on both sides and what I thought their motivations might be. But I wouldn’t say that online threads in these types of communities “changed my mind”. I think that instead of changing minds, the best thing you get from these threads is sources of information…some of which confirms what you already think…some of which challenges what you think. Then, you can go off on your own and consider your own views, which evolve over time. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2018, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/38 "2018-12-09T13:51:45Z")
I’ve had my beliefs changed _slightly_ in a thread but I didn’t hold those beliefs tightly anyway. The course of the argument actually _strengthened_ my previously beliefs that were strongly held. It was about Basic Universal Income, and there was a scientific study of it done, and it turns out that people do work less when they have a guaranteed income. That part is pretty obvious, but the study also “recaptured” the income when the subjects did work, which any rational scheme would do, and took back anywhere from 40% to 80% of what the subjects made. It turns out that people reduce their hours worked by the _same amount_ regardless of the clawback rate. That actually means that my idea for a 20% “taxation” rate might not be incentive enough to prevent inflation, not due to shoving money people’s way, but due to the difficulty of finding people wanting to work. However, it totally strengthened my previous belief that high taxes aren’t a disincentive to work that the Mammon-religious Right claims. In fact, it’s a pretty freakin great scientific study on what happens to the impulse to work at various tax rates! Sure, people work less when they don’t need to (DUH!), but how much of “their money” they keep is irrelevant after that! Resolved: high taxes don’t kill the economy. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2018, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/39 "2018-12-09T16:44:22Z")
> [@steatopygia](#): > > I don’t recall who it was, but someone on this board has said that they have changed their position based on reading here. > I like to believe that some people will be swayed by facts. Eventually. Maybe. When my opinion has changed, it tends to be from threads I read rather than participate in. The most obvious issue my views have strongly changed on are trans rights, due mainly to reading on here and other places, because I was pig-ignorant and prejudiced about the issue before. One of the main reasons I read this board is to have my views challenged. But to successfully challenge them requires far more than just “that’s wrong”, which last time I checked was all that had been offered in the thread linked in the OP. No one had shown that what the Republicans were doing was illegal, just kept claiming that they disagreed with it and so **pkbites** and others should also disagree with it, otherwise they are nasty racist poopy heads. ---
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2018, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718/40 "2018-12-11T14:47:42Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Well, do they? More specifically, does anyone have any example of a doper changing an opinion that they have been arguing for over the course of many posts and lengthy discussions, as opposed to someone who almost immediately recognizes they were wrong? > > To save anyone the trouble who might be tempted to go find an example of this happening, let me save _you_ that trouble. > > No. :rolleyes::mad::smack:☹ I endorse this. You cannot change hearts and minds on social media. It’s a waste of time. For example, just this morning, I thought long and hard about responding to [this post](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21371404&postcount=134) with cites and all but after about 10-second reflection, I decided against it. Why waste time? What would be the fucking point? It is my belief that people post on social media sites (like SDMB) not to _debate_\* ideas _but as a place to seek gratification and to get_ validation\* of _their ideas_. This need for extrinsic validation has the tendency to turn what would be “great debates” into psychotherapy sessions or a priest’s confessional. I think it all comes from a place of loneliness and/or helplessness. The former type of loneliness where one would rather engage with strangers than the people they don’t know. It’s sad. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-ever-admit-their-position-is-wrong-in-great-debates/825718.md?page=3)