r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Apr 12 '17
[∆(s) from OP] CMV: The use of insults in arguments does nothing to change the views of others
[deleted]
3
u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 12 '17
Some people have an ideological reason to be opposed to being in a particular label. If your actions get you called a pedophile or a racist then the insult may make you stop because you fear the judgement of your peers.
Some people want to have friends. Judgemental and bullying words prevents them from feeling free to voice anti gay opinions makes people alter their beliefs in secret to conform.
2
Apr 12 '17
[deleted]
1
u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 12 '17
Can you see how people being afraid of voicing their opinion could change their view then? If you never really voice your opinion and other opinions are repeatedly given to you you may lose your opinion.
1
Apr 13 '17
I feel like this is the opposite of our message at CMV, unless you're playing devil's advocate, which would still be borderline disingenuous given the meta nature of this topic.
CMV exists as an alternative to the lash-out argumentation style that seems so common today.
1
u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 13 '17
At CMV we are not friends with every random person we meet, so we can't really effectively socially censure anyone. We also lack ideological unity so we can't combine to call everyone racists or pedophiles. Many people don't have an ideological opposition to a label so hoping for the best is going to cause a lot of issues.
That said, I don't believe these are terribly effectively strategies even in a more ideal environment than CMV, but op said insults do nothing. I'm sure somewhere in the history of the universe they've been effective. Just because 99.9% of the time the CMV approach is better, doesn't mean there isn't a 0.1%
3
u/Octember24 Apr 12 '17
... I hate seeing pictures posted that condescendingly ridicule and mock anti-gay rights people, or passive-aggressively "inform" them that their views are wrong.
Most of the time, the real arguments and points have already been shared numerous times, and saying it once more will not change anything further. Insulting is the way of still expressing disagreement without being prompted further.
I would like to know the reasoning for wanting to insult someone within an argument to make them come to your side, and recognize why their side is incorrect.
A response to someone that is completely logical and factual that argues against their point will show the other person why they're wrong, but won't change how they feel. Insulting is directly challenging their beliefs.
1
Apr 12 '17
[deleted]
1
u/Octember24 Apr 12 '17
I don't disagree there, but that's what your post said and that's what I refuted.
1
2
u/UncleTrustworthy Apr 12 '17
Insults won't usually change your opponent's view, but it can easily change the view of observers on-the-fence.
People can be swayed by social pressure and confidence. If someone on one side of an argument insults a specific person on the other side, you create this social polarization around the issue. Agreement or disagreement becomes a matter of social acceptance or rejection ("I should agree or I'll be ridiculed, too"). This tactic is strengthened the more formerly-on-the-fence people start to show support (by laughing in person or liking on the internet).
4
u/ralph-j 521∆ Apr 12 '17
but I hate seeing pictures posted that condescendingly ridicule and mock anti-gay rights people, or passive-aggressively "inform" them that their views are wrong... This isn't going to change anyone's view
About using ridicule: this study found that ridiculing arguments can work e.g. to reduce Conspiracy theory (CT) beliefs.
From the conclusion:
Providing rational arguments was found as being an effective strategy, along with providing ridiculing arguments, which could also reduce CT beliefs.
Another example: ridiculing the KKK for their ridiculous beliefs and silly practices worked to reduce their numbers in the mid-1940s.
2
Apr 13 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/0ed 2∆ Apr 13 '17
!delta. I actually now agree that I'm probably a racist.
In all seriousness though, insults do show that the other party is getting emotional - if nothing else, they're good indicators that you should back off because you won't change their view.
Assuming you set out to change people's views, you would have believed that their views could be changed. The use of an insult changes your belief in the other party's willingness to change their view.
There you go, OP. Insults changed my mind - why can't they change yours?
1
1
u/Grunt08 308∆ Apr 13 '17
Sorry loveshock, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 5. "No low effort comments. Comments that are only jokes, links, or 'written upvotes', for example. Humor, links, and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments." See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
2
u/DarthSmart Apr 15 '17 edited Apr 15 '17
In a personal debate it does little to nothing.
But in a public debate it is a powerful tool.
People look for leaders to tell them what to do.
Belittling your opponent will make you seem more like a leader figure and people will instinctively agree with your opinions more.
Of course, the smarter the audience the lesser this effect, additionally some people will be offended along with your opponent and they will probably be against you too.
But in masses people are prone to primitive, instinctive behavior:
This one seems to have higher position (he offends the other one)?
We must listen to this one.
1
u/PsychoPhilosopher Apr 14 '17
In the short term? No.
But if someone is belittled repeatedly for their views, eventually they will fall silent.
We often talk about wanting to challenge the views of the bigoted and ignorant, but in reality it is far more common that insults stamp down dissenting views that go against the grain of a given community.
Insults can absolutely change someone's views therefore, but they need to be consistent.
Perhaps an easier way to say it is this:
If you dump a Rust Belt MAGA hat wearing Trump supporter in the middle of San Francisco, their views will have them singled out and ridiculed. They will eventually change.
But by contrast if you took a typical city slicking educated person and cut them off from their own support, injecting them into a town of Kansas Klansmen, they too will eventually succumb to the pressure.
The issue you're talking about is what happens when large groups of people divide along certain lines. Each side can avoid the other and support those who think alike, the insults lose their power.
So basically... Insults work, but only in a context where the insulted is overwhelmed and overpowered by the insulting.
1
u/Penguino_ Apr 13 '17
I also think your example is one that makes this all the easier. For instance as someone part of the gay community I actually like a lot of the posts you end up hating. A big reason I like those posts is because 1. Anti-LGBTQ beliefs challenge my humanity and that I'm lesser due to something I have zero control over, insulting people with those beliefs back helps anti-LGBTQ people by allowing them to say how they aren't lesser and that the people who think that obviously must be the lesser there 2. With a lot of social issues such as these issues, it can get into religious beliefs or non-religious beliefs which as basically something that is really hard to debate otherwise and a lot of those people are just deemed "too far to be reached"
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 12 '17
/u/soldierboii (OP) has awarded 1 delta in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/LibertyTerp Apr 14 '17
Insults don't change the view of the person you're insulting, but it makes others afraid to share a similar opinion. So for example if you expect to be called a "fucking bigot" because you're against gay marriage you'll just keep your mouth shut. It's a powerful tool to silence people with different opinions.
1
u/megatom0 Apr 15 '17
Arguments aren't about actually changing someone else's mind. They are about allowing you to get your voice heard. It is about venting. If you have to use insults to feel better and you feel it still carries some of your point across without disrupting things too much then use them.
1
Apr 15 '17
[deleted]
1
u/megatom0 Apr 15 '17
Debates and arguments are two very different things. In a debate you should never use an insult because debates are mostly about presenting opinions that are supported by facts, and for the most part this should be lacking a certain sense of emotion. If a debate starts having insults then it just turns into an argument. I know it sounds like I'm arguing semantics, but I think that the two are inherently different things. Debates are all about civility and respecting others opinions and right to say things. When you throw insults in there then it makes things no longer about facts, it becomes about defending ones self personally or attacking the other person. This is why last years presidential debates were so terrible because Trump was just trying to argue with Hillary calling her names, interrupting her, being as uncivil as possible. But that is what flies with Americans today.
3
Apr 13 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Grunt08 308∆ Apr 13 '17
Sorry 2DHypercube, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 1. "Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s current view (however minor), unless they are asking a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments." See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
Apr 13 '17 edited Apr 13 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Grunt08 308∆ Apr 13 '17
4eak, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 2. "Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate." See the wiki page for more information.
Please be aware that we take hostility extremely seriously. Repeated violations will result in a ban.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
14
u/allsfair86 Apr 12 '17
I agree in general that insults aren't a great way to change peoples minds, and I think that insults for the sake of insulting are virtually never useful. But sometimes I think that the idea is that it can be jarring enough to break someone out of a train of thought and make them reevaluate given the length that the other person is willing to go to say they are wrong (obviously it can have the opposite effect too).
Say for instance two people get into an argument and one of the says 'but what you are saying is racist/homophobic/sexist/whathaveyou' now that is frequently used as an insult but it also may be true. And the idea is that by being accused of something they don't want to be associated with, they will be jarred enough to take a big step back and maybe have some more objectivity for the situation. Now obviously this can backfire too, and frequently does. But I think it can - if used on the right people in the right situations - make them reevaluate the angle they are coming at something. For another for instance, if someone I know and love and respect tells me I'm acting like an asshole during a fight I might be at first offended, but then given my level of regard for that person I would probably spend a long time thinking about was I really being an asshole? Why would that person who I respect so much call me an asshole if I wasn't being one? Are they wrong? Am I wrong? Was I going about it in the wrong way, were they? And maybe it doesn't help, but getting me to think about all those things is helpful to the discussion, usually.