Jinn

"You're just trying to be RIGHT!"

I've heard this phrase all-too-often throughout my life, and I've usually dismissed it as an ignorant fool who would rather feel vindicated that they are still "right" than someone who is willing to learn. In most cases, this is true. However, I've been hearing it lately from my SO (a very intelligent person herself) and I've begun to wonder if it is true.

TFP being the open-minded "agree-to-disagree" forum that is, this is certainly the best place to ask for help with this problem. It seems especially fitting considering the thread in Politics asking the Forum to be more open-minded. Perhaps others will learn from my situation.

I recently had a discussion with a good friend of mine and it helped me quickly decide what I believe the problem is.

I believe anyone with a valuable insight into a conversation deserves consideration, which is why this Forum appeals to me. However, I believe intelligence comes with its own unique burden. In my own eyes, it would be a travesty to let someone remain ignorant to a fact that I could easily convey to them. In my conversation, I presented an example:

I am at a party with a bunch of friends, and someone says "No, man.. shrooms are bad for you." Having done extensive research on Psilocybin mushrooms, I know that they have no known long-term side effects. Indeed, they are safer for our bodies than this alcohol that we’re drinking. At this point, I am faced with a simple decision.

I could not share the knowledge I possess, and let this person disseminate incorrect information. This may be a bad example, but allowing someone to disseminate incorrect information has many ramifications. In this example, the negative ramification is that the people he’s telling in turn spread the bad information. This information could prevent someone from trying something they might enjoy. Discussion of drug-use aside, I think the point is clear.

The other option I am presented with is that I share my valuable insight. I chose this example because in many cases my friends would agree with me. This fact is however fairly unknown, so I may be the only person who previously believes this to be true. As such, I have a more critical audience. The “solution” I’ve been given to avoid the “YOU”RE JUST TRYING TO BE RIGHT!” situation is to “agree, and then disagree.” By this, they’d have me say “Well that’s true, but I believe X to be more correct.” How can a rational person agree with a false fact in order to present a true one? Does that not erode the basis of your very argument? If I deigned that he might be right that shrooms are bad, my argument that they are not bad has become very weak. Even still, it does not completely avoid the situation. A plausible conversation could go thus:

PersonA: "No, man.. shrooms are bad for you."
Me: “Well, that might be true, but I think shrooms are not bad.”
Me: “They have no known-long term side-effects, and they don’t even show positively on urine drug tests after a week.”
PersonA: “Whatever man, you’re just trying to be right.”

The situation still arose, even using what I consider to be weak “agree then disagree” argumentation. How do I avoid this situation, then? Even with “agree then disagree” phrasing, the person can still feel put-off that I am correcting him. His credibility has just been insulted, and this is enough to make most people angry. Further still, he could continue to insist his point was correct in an effort to retain this credibility. What then?

Many people have told me that anyone who would say “You’re just trying to be right!” is themselves stubborn, and I should avoid arguing with them. However, this is not an alternative I am willing to accept in the case of my SO.

Even more selfishly, I consider intelligence to carry its own burden. I feel I was gifted (whether through genetics, nurture, or my own response to my environment) with a great deal of intelligence. I feel that if I know something that can be used to further educate another individual I should provide that information to them. Not doing so seems like a travesty – spreading ignorance. On subjective matters, I still think it is my “duty” to offer my insight.

So.. does anyone else have this problem? More importantly, how do I avoid this situation in the future?

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel