> Lots of people reject it just because it’s weird (#1) or because they don’t understand the argument (#3). > But they feel like they aren’t “supposed” to reje

> Lots of people reject it just because it’s weird (#1) or because they don’t understand the argument (#3). > But they feel like they aren’t “supposed” to reject it for those reasons, so they give a misleading impression that they reject the argument in detail. > This creates an illusion of a false consensus that everyone thinks the argument is wrong, screwing up the social process that’s supposed to eventually lead to truth. I feel this also describes how discourse usually plays out online for some reason. A lot of this is subconscious of course, we try to rationalise our instincts, but it's difficult to prevent instincts from becoming confirmation bias and undermine our reasoning. I've certainly felt this way when it becomes blatantly obvious that I'm wrong, yet I argued with such reason... probably embarrassingly so if I search through enough of my HN comments.