You gotta admit this post is a little ironic.
deleted by creator
Well I think it can definitely be a reflexive response by someone who just doesn’t like being contradicted, but it could also be a feeling of “you aren’t trying to understand what I’m saying, you’re just trying to think of a way to counter it”. So it could be worth taking a moment to back up and taking a deeper look at what the person is trying to say.
I have a really annoying way of understanding things. I piece shit together bit by bit and guess at the answer before I’m told. It comes off very interrogative. Even when I’m wrong my attempts to understand seem like I’m being antagonistic. I try to explain to some people how I’m trying to fix the underlying assumptions that led me wrong.
Some people won’t respond well and it’s really difficult for me to accept that there isn’t a way to mediate both of us being happy.
I’m the exact same way! I’ve come to assume it’s from being on the spectrum, but that’s me guessing at answers again lol
Same. I’ve had a coworker that was learning about autism to understand her nephew guess it as well.
Ask yourself why you feel the need to get the last word, or be right? Ask yourself how important a topic is and gauge your audience, do they really need to hear about what your going to say for the next few minutes? Many times something that is said was never said with the forethought that a response would even happen.
Often times people are having emotional conversations, not factual conversations, it can be hard to tell the difference.
You learn the most when your mouth is not moving.
I think what a lot of people mean by that is “you always have to make other people feel as if they’re wrong”
Pretty much, if you are like the “average redditor” guy’s videos, then people aren’t going to like you, even if you are technically correct.
There are also plenty of people who know a lot about adjacent subjects, think that they are correct all of the time, and are confidently wrong. Both kinds of people suck to be around.
If 1 person has said something in this vein to me, I would not think much of it, if 2 or more people said it, then I would really take a hard look at myself and how I can better empathize with people.
They’re implying you’re difficult.
Not every conversation has to be a competition.
Like in the Walking Dead games… Silence is a valid option.
“Yes, I know. And experientially it is horrifying to recognize how wrong all of you are all the time. It is a living nightmare.”
Sheldon?
If this is true for anyone, they need to change their circumstances.
The reminder of:
“If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you’re the asshole.” - Elmore Leonard
Take their concerns seriously, but not necessarily literally.
Maybe they’re accurately describing something you do. Maybe not.
Do you try to continue conversations when the other person is trying to disengage? That’s an actual thing that many people do; maybe that includes you. Try different approaches, like “Hmm, I still disagree, but I don’t need to continue talking about this either” — or just noticing whether it’s really important to you to press the subject, and whether the other person is receptive.
Pay attention to the other person’s discomfort there. Even if you’re right and even if it’s important, if someone is tired of hearing your opinion, they’re not going to change their mind.
Even if they’re not accurately describing you, they’re still describing what you seem like to them, at that moment. They may be insecure about their own understanding or judgment, and feel like you have more power than them in the situation, and that you’re using it poorly. (But the one thing not to do to an insecure person is to call them insecure.)
One thing they’re almost certainly not trying to do, is to escalate the argument to the meta-level of arguing about how good or bad you are at arguing.
If it’s a loved one, maybe they don’t want an argument; maybe they want a hug. (Ask.)
Yep, 90+% of any conversation is about how you’re making the other person feel, not about any actual content of the words being said.
And if anyone just read that and thought “bullshit, that’s stupid and illogical,” I have some bad news for you about how brains work. (Also: I used to think like that too.)
Our ancestors used their mouths to make emotional noises long before they used their mouths to express logical propositions.
We can never do just one thing with language. Every time we’re making a factual statement, we’re also saying something about our mood, and our relationship to our audience, and so on. That’s just part of what language does.
Take the Keane Reeves approach to having a relaxed life - don’t have any arguments, to paraphrase him “Two plus two equals five? OK great, have a nice day, see you around!”
Start with first principles - who is saying this, and are they correct?
deleted by creator
I don’t know you, or the people you’re talking to, but once you’re at the “you always have to be right about everything” point, the conversation is adversarial, and it’s mostly a moot point where it goes from here. The goal shouldn’t be “winning” the conversation at that point, the goal should be never getting there in the first place.
I do know people who act completely disinterested in any conversation that isn’t about them lecturing one or more people about something. If this is how you come across, that could be very irritating to people. They don’t want to feel inferior to their conversation partner, they want to have a discussion, not receive a lecture.
So back to the start. The goal should be figuring out how to stop the conversation from getting to that point in the first place, and since you have no control over how other people act, you’ll need to start paying closer attention to what you are saying, how you are saying it, and how to start engaging with people in topics that they are more knowledgeable about.
As they say, if you’re the smartest person in the room, then you’re in the wrong room.
deleted by creator
Dude, what stakes are there in this conversation? If someone says red M&Ms tastes better, do you argue with them? Ideally not.
Not every statement has to be a debate.
If you’re finding people don’t want to hang out with you… This is why.
I don’t think it’s correct to say that I “have” to be right, I’m open to being wrong, in this case I’m usually not
Having the last word is the most nonsensical one to me, since it’s often unclear when anyone’s word would end up being the last word or not depending on if another word is spoken afterward
There is a very apt series of shorts for your behaviour (just that we can see in the post and comments of course):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdyHX8K1yfY& https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxSa-C92Wno&
It is ok to know someone isn’t 100% correct and not call them out for it. It is a huge social skill not to be right all of the time, but to validate other peoples’ feelings and pursuit of learning new things. In short, just be quiet and don’t say anything like 75% of the time if you know someone is wrong.
Lol that’s hilarious, thanks for this. Very funny skits that capture a particular kind of Redditor (maybe the average as the name implies?). I don’t feel like this really accurately represents my situation though, since this guy is just douchey and pretentious/arrogant about everything, and nitpicks and corrects people over every small and trivial detail.
At least from my point of view, I’m not the one that starts arguments or argues over things unless it’s particularly important, and even then I try to let it go unless I’m being actively confronted by it.
It probably makes a difference to know that only one person has ever said these things to me. I’ve just looked into the phenomenon happening with other people as well (on Reddit 😆), and often it is just a single person in their life who does it. So it seems like either this one person is unreasonable, or the problem manifests only with them somehow.
I guess working from the position that I have reason to believe I’m in the right (not in the sense of “trying” to be right all the time, but about being genuinely stuck in a position where no matter what I do, I’ll be accused of these things anyway), it stumps me and makes me feel that even the most rational reply I could give would be met with “I have an answer for everything”… if they don’t like the fact that I’m answering them, what answer could possibly suffice? I don’t see what I’m supposed to do there.
If conversations with this one person are frequently reaching the point where things like that are being said, it seems pretty clear cut: you should honestly just avoid any of the topics that have resulted in debates with this person.
It doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t talk to them about other things or that you can’t be friends (although it might).
Not every relationship has to allow for talking about all topics.
Sometimes being right isn’t actually important and can actually be counterproductive with certain people/topics.
On the chance that you’re a fellow neurodivergent, I’m going to share something I discovered after moving back in with my mom. We neurodivergents think of information like one might think of rock collecting. We collect information, compare its shininess and smoothness to other pieces of information, roll it over in our hands. We’re eager to show information to people, and eager when someone shows us a new piece of information. Anyone enlightening us has our full attention and enthusiasm. And when we get corrected? That is the smoothest, shiniest stone. We collect that voraciously.
But 1) not everyone shares our information-collecting obsession. And 2) everyone has a weakness to their own special kind of rock – their own, private kryptonite. And we neurodivergents tend to ignore the pain when we pick up our own kryptonite because we figure “information is always good (even if it hurts).”
But it’s not good to expose a person to the information that is their kryptonite. Even our fellow neurodivergents, who will be begging us, “please, bring it closer! Knowledge is power! I must grow!”
As a neurodivergent, you must learn which rocks are kryptonite to which people. You must learn to withhold extremely relevant information in the exact conversations when it’s most pertinent – and do so precisely because its pertinence is why it’s kryptonite to the person. And you must learn to do so even with fellow neurodivergents.
Acceptable:
- ✅ - the social behavior of bonobos
- ✅ - the Flynn Effect
- ✅ - the origin of the name of various open source software projects
- ✅ - the economic argument against slavery (that’s Roman history)
- ✅ - the fact that the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit was actually justified, and the whole story was twisted by corporate propaganda
Unacceptable:
- 🚫 - “Tucker Carlson has been caught lying” >> [this logic here] >> “Tucker Carlson is probably not trustworthy, going forward.” (people hate hearing about that logical bridge!)
- 🚫 - the damage that you see a person’s religion of choice doing to their psyche (people really hate that)
- 🚫 - most of the situations in which someone’s beliefs are incorrect
If you want to discuss the “unacceptable” topics with people, you must look up street epistemology. But keep in mind as you learn it: discussing these topics productively will actually be painful for you if you’re a neurodivergent. As you perform street epistemology, you will be asking questions, and the person answering you will be espousing an unbearable symphony of incorrect beliefs.
And you will have to hold back your urge to say, “well, actually” dozens of times a minute, maintaining an outwardly calm appearance and somehow focusing on your next question in the middle of their blizzard of wrongness.
Huh… Didn’t know that. But it explains so much.
As a neurodivergent, you must learn which rocks are kryptonite to which people. You must learn to withhold extremely relevant information in the exact conversations when it’s most pertinent
One of the hardest things I’ve ever had to do.
I know, right? It’s so uncomfortable!
Indeed. Almost every single day, I find myself stopping myself from blurting out a “shiny rock” to share. It’s disheartening sometimes.
I mean, the real answer is for us to get around people who are tolerant of neurodivergents. Then our shiny rocks would be allowed. But it’s hard for anyone to choose their social circles.
I hang out in a space full of neurodivergent people who are constantly sharing their shiny rocks. In the first few years it was pretty awesome, I was learning a lot. Lots of practical things relating to the scene.
Now it’s become this thing where I can see it happening almost before it starts. And it’s exhausting in part because I know the information now. But more so, it’s exhausting because it’s so clear how it’s shallow social interaction. It’s not the deeper discussion or human connection I’m after.
The nature of the space, the scene, means there will be lots of people like that all the time. Sharing their shiny rocks instead of themselves.
It’s not so bad one on one, at all, I can manage it and I can help encourage them. But when there is a gaggle of people exchanging all their shiny rocks I just don’t know what to do.
Like you said, it’s hard to pick your social circles. And my tolerance and understanding here seems to draw more rock collectors near. And their piles of rocks push others way from my circles.
“Ok”.
Don’t. Stop talking, turn and walk away, never say another work to them. Will piss them off to no end.
“You only seems to ask stupid questions.”
“I only happen to always be right when it involves you.”
“I grant you the last word.”
There are basically two main possibilities:
- They’re unreasonable.
- You’re unreasonable.
If it’s the first one, it doesn’t really matter how you respond. The best policy is to avoid dealing with people like that as much as possible.
If it’s the second one then you should work on trying to fix it. That’s the best way to respond.
deleted by creator
There’s nothing wrong with being right all the time, but relationships need more than just the exchange of facts. If all people know you for is the guy who is right all the time (or needs to be right all the time), then maybe you’re neglecting the other aspects of those relationships. There needs to be other things people remember you for.
Being right feels good no? Imagine being told your wrong all the time by the same person. Thats how they feel. Unless its a matter of life or limb, just let people be wrong sometimes.
Just because you are right, doesn’t mean you are relevant or the other person is wrong.
I know, thank you.
Take the criticism. I usually find that when people I deal with daily say something about me that it isnt out of nowhere.
Say nothing. You just beat their argument. Also, relax, let people be wrong. It’s kind of funny when people come up to you weeks or months later and admit you were right. If you’re right most of the time, but don’t argue about it, it kind of fucks with people after a while.
Questionable motives for choosing not to be an asshole, but they will likely benefit from being a more pleasant person to be around anyway.
I remember someone saying that and how much it hurt. Because I feel if I know the answer, I am compelled to share it. I see it as a need on their side that I should fulfill. I am a “how can I fix it” mentality. But some people are complaining or speaking just to be heard. They want commiseration, not answers.
If it’s someone close to you, then speak about it — “I’m sorry, I thought you wanted an answer or suggestion, I feel I should provide if I can. Is that not what you’re looking for?”
If it’s someone else, whose opinion is not necessary, you can make a mental note to let them have their delusions, just maybe not with you around.
my experience with being called a ‘know-it-all’ is entirely from calling shit talking liars on their shitty little lies they want to spread.
examples include ‘obama was a muslim’, ‘trump’s a great businessman’, ‘conservatives are for small government and freedom of speech’ etc.
present them with evidence that not only contradicts their thesis but refutes it completely and suddenly ‘you’re such a know it all!’
lolol
