On: What you say about others says a lot about you

[euroclydon]

I think we could use a little more information. Many people here, me included, like to argue with others just to have a healthy debate in order to work through our our opinion on a matter. We like to play the devil's advocate. Is that behavior exempt from the study's conclusion or does being a hacker go hand-in-hand with neurosis and narcissism?

I will say that forcing myself to see the best in people and often times the worst in myself, makes it easier to form relationships and to be happy in general.

[chc → euroclydon]

The article is about how you judge other people. Debating the merits of one idea against another isn't judging anyone, so it's not relevant.

[euroclydon → chc]

I'm talking about the consequences of being prone to debate, social graces be damned.

[cabalamat → chc]

> Debating the merits of one idea against another isn't judging anyone

Yes it is. If you say an idea is wrong, you are judging the people who believe it as deluded.

[chc → cabalamat]

Not really. "Deluded" is not a personal characteristic, it's the receiving end of an action — a synonym of "deceived." If you concluded that the person is easily deluded or willfully wrong, that would be a personal judgment, but merely believing their ideas to be incorrect is not judging them.

[amanfredi → cabalamat]

I think the difference is more along the lines of:

- That person is wrong, they must be stupid.

- That person knows he's wrong and is just trying to further his own agenda.

- I think that person is wrong and they are either misinformed or know something I don't.