It’s more so a terrible quote because it is unwise to have a significant emotional attitude towards finding out you’re wrong, because this will tend to reinforce irrational defense mechanisms
Yes, it is unwise to have such emotional attitudes, but you don’t get rid of them by saying that they are bad. Honestly acknowledging their existence, as in the original quote, is probably a better route to their elimination than an emotionless assertion that losing arguments is good. The quote, on its own, probably doesn’t do much good, and perhaps does some harm, but I think it is probably a better step to accomplishing loqi’s goal than his phrasing.
Honestly acknowledging their existence, as in the original quote, is probably a better route to their elimination than an emotionless assertion that losing arguments is good.
Possibly, but I certainly wasn’t advocating an emotionless response. Fight fire with fire! If you realize you’re feeling stupid for having been wrong instead of feeling excited to have learned something, go ahead and feel stupid for feeling stupid.
I think I understand the rationale behind the original quote: Being wrong feels awful, so you should try to be right as often as possible. But this emotional response also disincentivizes attempts to stick your neck out on behalf of your existing beliefs.
One might counter that a positive emotional response to being wrong provides an incentive for being wrong in the first place just so you can feel good about discarding your flawed beliefs in the future. This strikes me as a far less plausible mechanism than the above.
I think I understand the rationale behind the original quote: Being wrong feels awful, so you should try to be right as often as possible. But this emotional response also disincentivizes attempts to stick your neck out on behalf of your existing beliefs.
I agree that this is a dangerous use of the original quote, which I admitted can be put to both good and bad uses.
I probably shouldn’t have invoked you and definitely shouldn’t have used “emotionless.”
Yes, it is unwise to have such emotional attitudes, but you don’t get rid of them by saying that they are bad. Honestly acknowledging their existence, as in the original quote, is probably a better route to their elimination than an emotionless assertion that losing arguments is good. The quote, on its own, probably doesn’t do much good, and perhaps does some harm, but I think it is probably a better step to accomplishing loqi’s goal than his phrasing.
Possibly, but I certainly wasn’t advocating an emotionless response. Fight fire with fire! If you realize you’re feeling stupid for having been wrong instead of feeling excited to have learned something, go ahead and feel stupid for feeling stupid.
I think I understand the rationale behind the original quote: Being wrong feels awful, so you should try to be right as often as possible. But this emotional response also disincentivizes attempts to stick your neck out on behalf of your existing beliefs.
One might counter that a positive emotional response to being wrong provides an incentive for being wrong in the first place just so you can feel good about discarding your flawed beliefs in the future. This strikes me as a far less plausible mechanism than the above.
I agree that this is a dangerous use of the original quote, which I admitted can be put to both good and bad uses.
I probably shouldn’t have invoked you and definitely shouldn’t have used “emotionless.”