Arguing with People

I like arguing with people.  Sometimes I'll act dumb and use the Socratic method of asking seemingly innocuous questions that tease apart the person's position.  Sometimes I'll be aggressive in pointing out the inconsistency of their position and condescendingly laugh at them as I do it.  Either way can be entertaining and fun; and more to the point of this post - it is usually extremely easy.

99.9% of the opinions of 99.9% of the people are arrived at through instinct not logic.  The person then mentally commits to that opinion and looks for arguments to justify their position.  I have encountered very few well thought out, consistent, opinions.

I cannot emphasise enough the truth of this observation; it seems to simply be how the human mind works.  It takes self knowledge and a willingness to re-evaluate every opinion you hold dear to not fall into the same trap.

So if you want to stop talking out your ass, bring a little logic to your thoughts.  Think about it and then arrive at a conclusion, don't have an opinion and then think about it.

False Modesty

I'm a good actor.  All the world's a stage and it is necessary to be a good actor to fit into social situations when you don't have a normal emotional response.  I have learned how to be superficially charming, and to adapt my personality to elicit the desired response from the target audience.  I usually have no trouble acting as the exuberant, sensitive, interested, geeky, arrogant, caring, or considerate guy, as the situation demands.  I do however have some trouble with the roles of being modest or stupid.

I used to justify never using these two masks by telling myself that they weren't necessary; another mask would do just as well to achieve the same, or equally desirable, ends.  But I realised several years ago that I was just telling myself what I wanted to hear, and since then have worked on them.

I've worked on modesty quite a lot, and even though it was extremely difficult at times, there was a period when it even became one of my favourite go-to masks - people (in the UK anyway) like self depreciation and do not like someone who has let on that they have achieved something impressive.  To pretend to an imbecile that I am not superior to them certainly did not come naturally, but I just had to remember that it is just a game which has an objective; it is just an act, and achieving the end by the most efficient route has its own satisfaction.

Acting stupid... I'm still working on that.  I've practiced looking stupid: relaxed and defocused eyes, combined with a slackening of the jaw muscles works extremely well.  Normally I consciously decide to intonate my voice, use facial expressions, and gesticulate, so it is easy to just use my natural monotone, speak a little slower, and not be as expressive to complete the main construction of the mask.
I still struggle to not say something intelligent, but I've found that coming across as initially stupid (non-threatening) but actually intelligent is one of the most disarming and useful personas to wear in some situations.  It comes across as wise rather than intelligent.

Arrogance

Within 24 hours of the challenger space shuttle disaster a psychologist asked over 100 students where they were and what they were doing when they heard what had happened. About 2½ years later he asked them the same questions. Only 10% gave the same answers.

People will readily accept the possibility of someone else's memory being false, and at the same time have absolute faith in their own memory (and beliefs). Arrogance.

So basically my position is that I am capable of questioning my own beliefs (and regularly do!). The opinions and conclusions I come to are therefore better thought out and more likely to be correct than the vast majority of other people's opinions. This is a logical position to take. The arrogant ones are the religious people and the people who don't admit the possibility of their brain playing tricks on them.

I'm often accused of being arrogant in my dismissal of religious beliefs.

I'm sure you will agree that it would be possible to gather together a group (large – over a hundred, anyway) of people, of equal intelligence and education, who all have (equally strong) religious beliefs that are incompatible with the religious beliefs of everyone else in the room.

In this group of equals, religion makes each and every one of them stand up and try to shout over the top of everyone else, “I am right, and everyone else is wrong”.

So, I ask you, who is really the arrogant one – I, who understand that my brain can play tricks, and dispassionately analyse the evidence before coming to my opinion, or the person with religious beliefs?

Or maybe I'm just NPD ;)