Alicia Loc: NYC

I found this rather deep and very true. I'd like to learn your opinions. What effect did this presentation have on you?

http://www.ted.com/talks/kathryn_schulz_on_being_wrong#t-135935

Anonymous Loc: Hamtucket jersey city

Interesting read. :thumbup: if you get rid of the s in https it'll make it a direct link.

Alicia Loc: NYC

****************
Thanks. Why do you think the "s" is ever included?

Anonymous Loc: Hamtucket jersey city

Idk? :hunf: good question, maybe to show ownership? Like that's jennys'

JW

A lot of what she says is correct but her primary assumption is wrong. She says the reason we assume we are right is to feel good about ourselves and she implies that somehow things would all be better if we only regarded ourselves as infinitely fallible, that feeling that you are right is wrong.

If we were to do anything even approaching that we could not even function.

Imagine that you need to buy a car; how are you going to do that without being certain that you can? How are you going to do anything without confidence in your decision making ability.

There is nothing improper about self confidence and that rests entirely on ' knowing you are right'. Where we err is not in feeling we are right. We go wrong only when we close our minds to other possibilities. We need to be willing to reconsider our conclusions from time to time.

JW

The 's' indicates that the t***smission will be encrypted, a 'S'ecurity feature.

Bruce Kennedy Loc: Kansas

If you take the "s" out of "https" the link will be accessible from your post.

Alicia Loc: NYC

*******************
It's interesting how we each interpreted her talk differently. I chuckled when I realized that she was describing exactly what goes on in this forum. The three steps: Understanding of the fallibility of the other party, no change - think of them as i***ts for not seeing the situation as you and, lastly, envision evil within them.

Regarding fallibility, I must agree with her understanding that we are all fallible and "should" leave that as an option - "Well, I may be wrong." Many will never accept that option and that's why all the name calling on OPP. As a matter of fact, many times each of us makes choices all the time. Now if it were in the purchase of an item, we may doubt whether that choice was the best one. But in an argument, we do think exactly along the lines she stated. Look through any extended argument on OPP and see if her process doesn't hold true - doubt of the accuracy of the other party; expectation that they are just dumb; accuse them of evil; go away with a feeling of righteousness. That's why many look at this forum as a contest - because we "wouldn't feel good" if we "lost." The chance that we might be incorrectly thinking disallows any changes in one's initial premise. Unless one is open minded, one becomes locked into one's original premise and refuses to consider another point of view because that would be "giving in."

That's one of the big differences between Liberals and others. Most of the time, Liberals do keep that question in their own minds that they might be wrong and it's time to re-think the situation. It is not that they waiver from their original premise but they believe that they might be fallible. So, what comes next is to review the facts and question oneself. It takes quite an effort.

Personally I do not arrive at a conclusion without ever being open to another possibility. This is why I read articles professing "the other side" with the expectation of possibly changing my mind. I do attempt to leave my mind open to a new idea. Initially that doesn't make me happy - the thought that I might have been wrong or misunderstood something.

Arguments (disagreements) are there for the purpose of exposing one to another's ideas which should be taken into consideration. When it gets to the name-calling stage, continuation of the discussion is senseless. If taken to the third stage, war sets in and everyone's mind closes. That defeats the entire purpose of such a forum.

Alicia Loc: NYC

*****************
Thank you for the information. It is appreciated.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

I really quite enjoyed her talk. The two most prevalent thoughts I took from it are conveyed by a quote from Mark Twain, " I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did. I said I didn't know," and a paraphrase from John Lennon, "Life is what happens after you've made your plans." Of course, there are also Robert Burn's words to the effect, "The best laid plans of mice and men often go astray." I suspect we all wish we knew half of what we think we know. I know I do. :oops:

I especially liked the three assumptions made by most of us with regard to others that she highlighted. :thumbup:

Bruce Kennedy Loc: Kansas

I have always said you can think your way out of "sanity". I have debated this issue, with myself, for years. Humans must believe in something, otherwise the mind has no basis with which to make judgments and decisions, on the world around us. For mental health's sake we need ideals and principles that we rely on, to be true without even thinking about them. I believe if the sun rose in the West and set in the East, tomorrow, mass confusion and chaos would ensue. We must have our own paradigm with which to operate from. On a practical level, humans, for the most part, must accept the principles of physics, as fact with no room for debate. On an spiritual level humans must be grounded in some sort of belief system, even if it means the absence of a belief system. Without writing "War and Peace", the short version is once a human makes a decision on what to believe and what is "True", in their mind, they can no longer accept other belief systems. If you truly "believe" something to be true, then all other views are false. Hence, we as humans, can not accept opposing beliefs that we feel conflict with our own beliefs. How do we cope with this preceived dichotomy? Simple, through a mechanism known as "Tolerance". "Tolerance" allows us to accept the fallibility of others and merely accept the fact that they are wrong, and wander through this life in a haze of ignorance, never knowing the real t***h, that we and only we possess.

maryla

S means "Secure site"

JW

I think of beliefs as islands in the ocean of life. Without them we are condemned to swim forever without rest and nothing on which to build an intellectual home.

PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.

http://www.ted.com/talks/kathryn_schulz_on_being_wrong#

I dropped the 's' in the 'http'. It can now be viewed more easily.

She does make some salient points.

Anonymous Loc: Hamtucket jersey city

Very well put. Unfortunately I have let people's arrogance towards me bring out my own personal arrogance. I'm willing to accept it if I'm wrong, well in most cases, but something about one of them insulting me right off the bat makes me unwilling to admit there's even a chance I'm wrong. Alot of the times in my topics I even say ahead of time "but I could be wrong." But then in the posts someone calls me a libratard or a Muslim and all that goes out the window and I start arguing like there's no chance in heck I'm wrong. Sometimes (rarely) but sometimes they even manage to get me to stoop to that level and i start insulting back. Which in the end doesn't help anything.