I believe I feel this way. I think many, if not the vast majority of us do. Now for a little test. When was the last time you lost a debate on a topic you felt strongly about? And not a debate that further reaffirmed your own biases (I used to believe X was bad, but wow I was wrong - it's WAY worse than bad) but actually a meaningful swap from (X is bad) to (X is not bad).
In my case, the answer is never. Now I'd like to imagine this is obviously because I'm the most intelligent, objective, and insightful individual to have ever lived. Of course I suspect the actual reason is because anything worth debating will always have reasonable arguments for both sides. And so long as your arguments are reasonably factually based, it's never really possible to lose a debate, unless you choose to. You can learn new things, expand your worldview, but losing will only happen if you want it to. Hence the reason I added that qualifier about swapping worldviews as opposed to enhancing a prior held one.
Of course this doesn't preclude major worldview shifting change from happening, but it happens over long periods of times for reasons that I don't think any of us can really pin down. It's going to be a butterfly effect of a million little factors.
I've probably never changed a deeply held belief after a single conversation, but my beliefs have changed over time and those changes have been aided by discussions I've had along the way. I think it takes me a long time to form a strong view on something and, once formed, it also takes a long time to change or abandon that view. Even if I participate in a conversation where relevant new information is imparted to me or my reasoning is shown to be flawed, I'm likely to take that away and chew it over (and do my own research) before changing my position.
> but actually a meaningful swap from (X is bad) to (X is not bad). In my case, the answer is never.
I think you did, otherwise you would never change your opinions, which I doubt.
But I think it works more subtly. I've noticed that when I lose a debate, my immediate emotional response is rejection - the person is wrong, my opinion is right, even though I couldn't effectively justify it.
But once the emotional hurt of loss wears off, it will sometimes (not always) move my position, sometimes a little bit, sometimes completely. It can take days, months, sometimes years.
> But once the emotional hurt of loss wears off, it will sometimes (not always) move my position, sometimes a little bit, sometimes completely. It can take days, months, sometimes years.
That's exactly it; I'm convinced people's opinions can and will change over time, but they take time.
This is used in subtle ways too with modern-day internet and social media (and before that, newspaper headlines); people will scan the internet's headlines and depending on what they see, form an opinion. If all you see is headlines about police brutality, you will be convinced that the police is corrupt and violent and shit. If all you see is headlines about a demographic being involved in crime, you'll form prejudices about them.
I tend to see this as down to how heated the debates are. For combative debates, I tend to be far more likely to move my position if I'm audience than participating. For less heated discussions, I may well move my position during the discussion itself. Keeping the temperature down matters if you want to convince the other person(s); letting the temperature rise sometimes works if your goal is to convince an audience.
I've definitely had debates where I became a lot less sure of things I was reasonably informed on. A discussion that ends with "I'll have to go away and think about that" is a good one.
At a younger and more formative age, I’d engage in online discussions with people who had completely opposite views from mine. And I’ve had my mind changed plenty of times.
It’s happening less in the past decade or so, because I’ve already had many of the same discussions, and I’m sure partly because I’m becoming more rigid as I age.
But many online forums also reduce visibility of unpopular comments, and it’s harder to engage in some of those discussions. This is the reason I never downvote, even the most awful takes.
> When was the last time you lost a debate on a topic you felt strongly about?
Why would you talk about something you feel strongly about in the first place? If you are sure you have got it all figured out, there is nothing left to talk about. Discussion is only useful when you recognize gaps in your understanding and are able to learn more about it.
> it's never really possible to lose a debate
It is. If you cannot compel the other party to offer you information that you can successfully learn from, you've lost. A debate is only won if you've learned something from it. Which, again, is why it would be rather illogical to debate something you feel strongly about. What can you learn if you already have it figured out? If you truly know it all you are guaranteed to lose every time, and at that point why waste your time?
> And so long as your arguments are reasonably factually based, it's never really possible to lose a debate, unless you choose to
That's the trouble with the expression "losing a debate". There is the notion that you've been defeated. So what actually happened is not a debate, but a fight. A debate is something you can learn from, a gain.
In my case, the answer is never. Now I'd like to imagine this is obviously because I'm the most intelligent, objective, and insightful individual to have ever lived. Of course I suspect the actual reason is because anything worth debating will always have reasonable arguments for both sides. And so long as your arguments are reasonably factually based, it's never really possible to lose a debate, unless you choose to. You can learn new things, expand your worldview, but losing will only happen if you want it to. Hence the reason I added that qualifier about swapping worldviews as opposed to enhancing a prior held one.
Of course this doesn't preclude major worldview shifting change from happening, but it happens over long periods of times for reasons that I don't think any of us can really pin down. It's going to be a butterfly effect of a million little factors.