• bigboismith@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Can relate to the devils advocate, though I tend to try to argue on points that I actually agree with so the other party actually has to reflect on their opinions

    • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      It’s not that I argue for points I don’t believe in - that wouldn’t make much sense to me. If I don’t think an argument holds up, I see no reason to bring it up. Rather, even when I clearly lean one way on an issue, there are often strong counterarguments to consider. Even if they don’t change my mind, they might still be points I don’t have a solid response to, and I find it valuable to engage with them. I think the ability to argue honestly against one’s own beliefs is a strong indicator that a person truly understands what they’re talking about, rather than simply echoing talking points to signal allegiance.

      • CarbonBasedNPU@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Would probably be helpful to give examples because most people I have seen that say that they play devils advocate ( including myself in the past) are actually just being argumentative for the sake of it.

        • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          I am being argumentative for the sake of it. What’s there to discuss if everyone is in complete agreement? I enjoy a challenge more than a circlejerk. I’m challenging your ideas with the expectation of the same being done to mine. I want people to try and poke holes into my ideas.