3 ms·

I think I may have the opposite problem. I have contrarian tendencies. I have a strong natural desire to argue against group consensus. When I see too many peop

I think I may have the opposite problem. I have contrarian tendencies. I have a strong natural desire to argue against group consensus. When I see too many people agreeing about something to the point that they're not really thinking anymore, I have to take the opposite side. I also generally dislike the kinds of people who always jump on the latest social bandwagon and support the current thing. I can't stand people who can't think for themselves and yet are aggressive when it comes to spreading whatever ideas authority figures have managed to implant into their minds. It makes no sense to me why someone would spend so much energy and invest so much of their ego into an idea which not only they didn't come up with but which they haven't even bothered to analyze from first principles. It disturbs me that people can be at once so malleable to the will of authority figures and yet so rigid and stubbornly resistant to basic reasoning.

mattsahr 4y ago
Mimesis is one side of a coin, it seems like contrarian tendency is the other. They both involve you making a little theory-of-mind for each of your friends/enemies/associates. To the point, it disturbs you that people are malleable and/or unreasonable, but why do you care at all? I just wondered. Because you are a rando on the internet, and I constructed a model of your mind, and I don't quite understand it.
- jongjong 4y ago
  I care because, as a rational agent (or at least someone who aims to be), group-think affects me negatively when the group develops a dominant ideology which risks to infringe on my personal rights or take away opportunities from me sooner or later. I also believe that these dominant ideologies are harmful to the group and most of its honest/rational members. It's important that members of the group keep an open mind so that the group doesn't become dogmatic. That's why I try to make contrarian arguments.
leplen 4y ago
Blind copying is highly adaptive behavior and is the engine of human culture. Inventing things and reasoning correctly is really difficult, and copying widely adopted behaviors is usually much safer and more efficient. Reading 'Not by Genes alone' really changed my perspective on this and helped me understand the blind copying as a very successful heuristic that sometimes gets things wrong.

mattsahr 4y ago

Mimesis is one side of a coin, it seems like contrarian tendency is the other. They both involve you making a little theory-of-mind for each of your friends/enemies/associates. To the point, it disturbs you that people are malleable and/or unreasonable, but why do you care at all? I just wondered. Because you are a rando on the internet, and I constructed a model of your mind, and I don't quite understand it.

jongjong 4y ago
I care because, as a rational agent (or at least someone who aims to be), group-think affects me negatively when the group develops a dominant ideology which risks to infringe on my personal rights or take away opportunities from me sooner or later. I also believe that these dominant ideologies are harmful to the group and most of its honest/rational members. It's important that members of the group keep an open mind so that the group doesn't become dogmatic. That's why I try to make contrarian arguments.

leplen 4y ago

Blind copying is highly adaptive behavior and is the engine of human culture. Inventing things and reasoning correctly is really difficult, and copying widely adopted behaviors is usually much safer and more efficient. Reading 'Not by Genes alone' really changed my perspective on this and helped me understand the blind copying as a very successful heuristic that sometimes gets things wrong.