3 ms·

That's an enlightening comment. How can I stop being a "faker", as you call it? I, and probably some other HNers, are often pretty critical or take things peop

by ehsanul 16y ago

That's an enlightening comment. How can I stop being a "faker", as you call it? I, and probably some other HNers, are often pretty critical or take things people say more literally than they meant often, rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt with a more liberal interpretation. I realize this is usually not conducive to "profound and productive interactions", but it is almost second nature for me, something of a gut reaction and I'm not entirely sure how to go about fixing this problem. Behavior change is difficult, just seeking advice.

telemachos 16y ago
I think many of us here are the same way (or were at some point or sometimes still are). I love to argue. Often that comes from a good place, but often it comes from just that desire to win or to be difficult or whatever. I still have to push myself to really listen to the other view. Then my first step (when I'm in a better place) is to literally ask myself something like these questions, in roughly this order: + What does this person believe? + Why does this person believe those things? + What would I need to believe (first) in order to convince me of those things? Try to short-circuit evaluation: don't judge the thoughts at all. Don't ask if you agree. Just figure out what they believe and why they might hold those beliefs. What other beliefs seem to be required? What other beliefs would make someone think that way? This already gets you fairly far into their mindset.
- ehsanul 16y ago
  Great set of questions! Also like your last bit of advice - think about the person's point of view before evaluating what they've said. And by doing this, I see how one could also get to the root of a disagreement, rather than just the surface, and address that instead. Everything becomes philosophical from there I'm guessing.
stcredzero 16y ago
How can I stop being a "faker", as you call it? I, and probably some other HNers, are often pretty critical or take things people say more literally than they meant often, rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt with a more liberal interpretation. 1) Find something fundamental to be secure in. 2) Just stop being a faker. 3) Get busy doing the real thing. The first is the most important. One of the professors I admired greatly would always give your idea his best effort, because he knew that the mathematics would eventually cause it to blow up if it wasn't correct. Find first principles that you can take as iron clad, then always build off of those with honesty and humility. There was never a reason for him to grasp at straws to fabricate a straw man. He knew there were solid theories he could work from and test as hard as he could. He also never had a reason to pretend something was more solid than he actually knew it to be. That's all well and fine for hard sciences, I guess, but the same goes for most of the softer disciplines as well. History is often your friend. Find the historical precedents and examine them honestly. EDIT: Another thing you can do, if you haven't already, is read this: http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5782108/1/Harry_Potter_and_the_Methods_of_Rationality http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5782108/1/Harry_Potter_and_the_M...
- ehsanul 16y ago
  I've read that book already and even have alerts on it for new chapters, but thanks for mentioning it. It's thoroughly entertaining! Well, in my case, it's not that I make fallacious counter-arguments. My arguments are generally quite sound, and simple logic/rationality serves my need for something fundamental. My issue is that, when something looks illogical on the face of it, rather than giving it the benefit of the doubt and try to imagine how it might work, I just shoot it down. And I shoot it down quite harshly usually, though almost always with a well-reasoned argument. I have to be arrogant here and say that most of these arguments/ideas/statements I shoot down seem to really deserve it, which I know because I do sometimes restrain myself and just shut up and listen. However, sometimes my response is really undeserved, and I'd do better if I tried to understand where others may be coming from. Even if it's deserved, I could be much less harsh and argumentative, so as to better foster a good discussion.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    It's not even about preserving the feelings of others. I often find people interrupting me and shooting down a completely different idea than the one I actually had. Other times, I find that my seemingly ironclad argument doesn't apply in the intended context, or is fine theoretically but overlooks an important detail in a practical context.
Mz 16y ago
How can I stop being a "faker", as you call it? I, and probably some other HNers, are often pretty critical or take things people say more literally than they meant often, rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt with a more liberal interpretation. I think it helps to realize it is endemic to the culture and to understand why. My original introduction to online communities was with parenting/homeschooling forums for folks with "gifted" kids. The members were generally bright and many of them well educated. The initial environment was pretty ugly, in spite of the intent that these were supposed to be "support" groups. I eventually concluded that most of the members were used to being the smartest person in the room and had the routine experience that if someone didn't agree with them, it was because they didn't understand it. I felt it was the first time most of these people were exposed to a culture of intellectual equals where other people who disagreed with them had valid reasons for seeing it differently. I felt that we had no choice but to break new ground in order to get past the tendency for people to be obnoxious and arrogant. Hacker News appears to have a similar situation. It is somewhat compounded by the fact that it is the most international forum I have participated in. This means people from very different cultures and very different life experience are interacting. This inevitably leads to inaccurate interpretations. I come from a multi-cultural background, so I tend to overlook foreign accents and grammatical errors to a greater degree than most bright, well-educated individuals. I operate on the rule of thumb that "They are speaking English way better than I would be able to speak their native language". I know a smattering of German and French, a smidgen of Spanish, and a few words of Russian. I'm not fluent in any of them. So I start with giving foreigners a pass on grammatical errors or oddities of wording. I don't see it as any indication of lack of intelligence. Grammar and spelling are often nit-picked here and I occasionally do it myself. I try hard to not come across as obnoxious. I sometimes genuinely was not sure what they were saying because of a misspelled word (that seems to trip me up more than grammar, which is mentally easier for me to account for, presumably because I grew up in a bilingual home). In some ways, I like the fact that people here will nit-pick grammar and spelling and such but I really hate it when it is done in a very obnoxious manner. I have seen instances where someone was railing about something of that sort and it just made me feel like "Oh, grammar and spelling are things you think are critically important to public appearances but manners are not??" This dynamic -- of everyone in the room being confident they are Right, by god! -- was a problem within my own family (with my marriage and my kids). After about 16 1/2 years of marriage, my then husband bought me a t-shirt that said "I'm always RIGHT (except when I'm wrong)". It was something I said a lot at home and I think it was something of an admission on his part that perhaps he shouldn't argue with me so much, perhaps he should try harder to talk to me instead. (The constant arguing was one of the things that contributed to the demise of the marriage.) I try really hard to talk with people online rather than argue, even if I don't agree with them.

by ehsanul 16y ago

telemachos 16y ago

I think many of us here are the same way (or were at some point or sometimes still are). I love to argue. Often that comes from a good place, but often it comes from just that desire to win or to be difficult or whatever. I still have to push myself to really listen to the other view. Then my first step (when I'm in a better place) is to literally ask myself something like these questions, in roughly this order: + What does this person believe? + Why does this person believe those things? + What would I need to believe (first) in order to convince me of those things? Try to short-circuit evaluation: don't judge the thoughts at all. Don't ask if you agree. Just figure out what they believe and why they might hold those beliefs. What other beliefs seem to be required? What other beliefs would make someone think that way? This already gets you fairly far into their mindset.

ehsanul 16y ago
Great set of questions! Also like your last bit of advice - think about the person's point of view before evaluating what they've said. And by doing this, I see how one could also get to the root of a disagreement, rather than just the surface, and address that instead. Everything becomes philosophical from there I'm guessing.

stcredzero 16y ago

ehsanul 16y ago
I've read that book already and even have alerts on it for new chapters, but thanks for mentioning it. It's thoroughly entertaining! Well, in my case, it's not that I make fallacious counter-arguments. My arguments are generally quite sound, and simple logic/rationality serves my need for something fundamental. My issue is that, when something looks illogical on the face of it, rather than giving it the benefit of the doubt and try to imagine how it might work, I just shoot it down. And I shoot it down quite harshly usually, though almost always with a well-reasoned argument. I have to be arrogant here and say that most of these arguments/ideas/statements I shoot down seem to really deserve it, which I know because I do sometimes restrain myself and just shut up and listen. However, sometimes my response is really undeserved, and I'd do better if I tried to understand where others may be coming from. Even if it's deserved, I could be much less harsh and argumentative, so as to better foster a good discussion.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  It's not even about preserving the feelings of others. I often find people interrupting me and shooting down a completely different idea than the one I actually had. Other times, I find that my seemingly ironclad argument doesn't apply in the intended context, or is fine theoretically but overlooks an important detail in a practical context.

Mz 16y ago

How can I stop being a "faker", as you call it? I, and probably some other HNers, are often pretty critical or take things people say more literally than they meant often, rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt with a more liberal interpretation. I think it helps to realize it is endemic to the culture and to understand why. My original introduction to online communities was with parenting/homeschooling forums for folks with "gifted" kids. The members were generally bright and many of them well educated. The initial environment was pretty ugly, in spite of the intent that these were supposed to be "support" groups. I eventually concluded that most of the members were used to being the smartest person in the room and had the routine experience that if someone didn't agree with them, it was because they didn't understand it. I felt it was the first time most of these people were exposed to a culture of intellectual equals where other people who disagreed with them had valid reasons for seeing it differently. I felt that we had no choice but to break new ground in order to get past the tendency for people to be obnoxious and arrogant. Hacker News appears to have a similar situation. It is somewhat compounded by the fact that it is the most international forum I have participated in. This means people from very different cultures and very different life experience are interacting. This inevitably leads to inaccurate interpretations. I come from a multi-cultural background, so I tend to overlook foreign accents and grammatical errors to a greater degree than most bright, well-educated individuals. I operate on the rule of thumb that "They are speaking English way better than I would be able to speak their native language". I know a smattering of German and French, a smidgen of Spanish, and a few words of Russian. I'm not fluent in any of them. So I start with giving foreigners a pass on grammatical errors or oddities of wording. I don't see it as any indication of lack of intelligence. Grammar and spelling are often nit-picked here and I occasionally do it myself. I try hard to not come across as obnoxious. I sometimes genuinely was not sure what they were saying because of a misspelled word (that seems to trip me up more than grammar, which is mentally easier for me to account for, presumably because I grew up in a bilingual home). In some ways, I like the fact that people here will nit-pick grammar and spelling and such but I really hate it when it is done in a very obnoxious manner. I have seen instances where someone was railing about something of that sort and it just made me feel like "Oh, grammar and spelling are things you think are critically important to public appearances but manners are not??" This dynamic -- of everyone in the room being confident they are Right, by god! -- was a problem within my own family (with my marriage and my kids). After about 16 1/2 years of marriage, my then husband bought me a t-shirt that said "I'm always RIGHT (except when I'm wrong)". It was something I said a lot at home and I think it was something of an admission on his part that perhaps he shouldn't argue with me so much, perhaps he should try harder to talk to me instead. (The constant arguing was one of the things that contributed to the demise of the marriage.) I try really hard to talk with people online rather than argue, even if I don't agree with them.