Why do logical/rational arguments fail with some people?

[SpyderEdgeForever]

At one point in life, I believed that all it took to convince someone of something, whether it was to go from low-cost, low quality knives, to good quality knives, or other things, was to show them the basic raw data, logic, evidence, etc, and that would be that. But then in actual discussions and comparisons and attempts to convince some people of some things, that and others, I discovered that people do not always go by logic,evidence, and clear comparisons. Why is that?

Three examples are in order:

1 I was chatting with a person who is convinced or seemed to be convinced that when it came to knives, the 5 or 10 dollar discount store special was no different than a quality Spyderco, Benchmade, or Cold Steel knife. I tried to show the person evidence, from the world of knives, websites, books, personal testimonials, etc. And it was not an issue of lack of funds. The said individual could easilly afford a decent Spyderco Endura or Benchmade folder, or any number of quality knives made in Europe, Japan, USA, or even Taiwan. But in their eyes, "What is the point if all I need to do is cut something or open a package?" They preferred to spend their money elsewhere, I guess, In particular this was a woman who is very much into the latest fashions and "lookin good baby", lol. Finally I shrugged my shoulders and said "That's your choice, that's fine," and everything was polite between us, ofcourse. She has a right to her opinion and vice versa for me.

2 I was talking with someone who is convinced airplane travel is more dangerous than train travel. However, I showed them the evident statistics that there are less fatalities with airplanes than with trains:

"According to that same study, the number of deaths per billion passenger-miles caused by airplanes is a measly 0.07. And this statistic is just one of many that illustrate just how safe air travel is."

The above is an example.

Here is another example:

" Arnold Barnett, a professor of statistics at M.I.T., for this statistic: between 2008 and 2012, the odds of dying in a plane crash for passengers in the U.S. were one in 45 million flights. The Times further emphasized the point by revealing that with those odds, a passenger could fly every single day for an average of 123,000 years before dying in a plane accident."


This person, though, fell back on this line of reasoning: IF you are in an airplane or other air vehicle and there is a disaster or problem, you will crash, you will go down. However, if you are in a train and there is a problem or a wreck, you are already on the ground, regardless of the shock and inertia and potential for fire and all of that. Their attitude is that at least in a train or bus wreck you can somehow possibly make it out alive easier and more likely than an airline crash.


3 The last example is a very sad one. There was a woman who told me that ever since she was a child she was horribly abused and mistreated by her parents and then other people such as in her peer group. At the time this woman was in her mid thirties. I tried to make her feel better by telling her she is a very special person and there is someone out there who she can meet and love and get into a relationship with who will treat her with the love and respect and honor she deserves. She told me that she would go from one abusive relationship to another, men mistreating her, striking her, using her, and even stealing from her. What shocked me was this: I found out that there was a man who she claimed was "head over heels in love with her" and she considered him to be a "nice and sweet guy" and she told me that he even let her know he loved her and wanted to marry her. And yet.......................instead she said she was attracted to "tough jerks" even if those men mistreated her. I tried to convince her with utmost evidence that the best thing for her to do would be to marry this man who apparently was a decent guy and who would treat her right. But the last I heard she told him to "buzz off" and went back into another abusive relationship, and that was many years ago.

Wouldn't you think the logic and facts and evidence should have convinced her to go with the man who loved her and would treat her well?

[Naperville]

"Why do logical/rational arguments fail with some people?"

I've seen so much B.S. in the media and on social media over the last 3 years....

Figure that out, come up with the solution to it, and you receive the title of, "Honorary Vulcan."

[SpyderEdgeForever]

Good point. Then in some ways, people are so overwhelmed by nonsense and emotionalism and falsehoods, they don't know what to believe is true or not.

[Sober_Survival]

1. I can almost promise you that said person never served in a theatre of combat where a high quality, dependable knife is an absolute must. A Gerber Prodigy literally saved me in Afghanistan.

[The Deacon]

1. If a $5 knife does everything a person expects a knife to do, and that person is not looking to impress anyone with their knife, why would they want to spend 15 to 20 times more for one?

2. Risk per mile may be lower on a plane, but chances of surviving a train wreck are greater than those of surviving an airplane crash.

3. Low self esteem. She does not see herself as "worthy" of the nice guy. Probably never will.

[Ankerson]

1st one is easy, they are too cheap to buy a decent knife, when it comes to money a lot of people are completely blind, deaf and braindead.

The 2nd one, well it depends on were the info comes from, and how the data is calculated. The person isn't wrong depending on how you look at it.

Going by miles alone isn't exactly the best way to look at it, not really. If an airliner goes down everyone dies normally, or just about everyone. If a train has a problem or derails it's highly unlikely everyone will die or even a large majority of them.

You can't jump out of an airliner and expect to live, if you can even get out of it at all.

You can get off a train if you really need to, except for a bullet train.

I personally would rather take a train than fly these days, that or drive myself.

[JD Spydo]

Some people are just plain arrogant, stubborn and refuse to look at hard facts. For instance I've been in arguments with some friends of mine recently about the "Van Allen radiation belts" that surround the earth. And I've had people get horribly angry at me just for wanting to discuss it :confused: >>

Some people just can't think outside the box and some people believe 100% of what the phony mainstream news media tells them. Even though the media has been caught lying time after time. Some people have the government as their god and can't even look at any hard evidence that suggests otherwise.

And it's getting worse too as time goes by. I've tried to get people to take a hard look at the negative aspects of this upcoming 5G network that is about to go on line. Too many knowledgeable scientific heads are screaming at us and trying to warn us of the bad effects that technology is going to cause.

There are reasons that the disease we know as cancer is literally off the charts compared to what it was in the 60s and 70s but they still stubbornly keep doing what kills them :confused: . Bottom Line: some people are just so jaded in what they believe that they don't want to be bothered with hard facts. They would rather stay on a sinking ship and be happy while they are going down I don't get it either Brother

[JD Spydo]

1st one is easy, they are too cheap to buy a decent knife, when it comes to money a lot of people are completely blind, deaf and braindead.

The 2nd one, well it depends on were the info comes from, and how the data is calculated. The person isn't wrong depending on how you look at it.

Going by miles alone isn't exactly the best way to look at it, not really. If an airliner goes down everyone dies normally, or just about everyone. If a train has a problem or derails it's highly unlikely everyone will die or even a large majority of them.

You can't jump out of an airliner and expect to live, if you can even get out of it at all.

You can get off a train if you really need to, except for a bullet train.

I personally would rather take a train than fly these days, that or drive myself.

Those are all excellent points you make there "Ankerson" >> I've shown many friends and people I work with some of my Spyders and they are in many cases immediately impressed with them. Especially when I let someone use one of them. But when I tell them how much that particular blade costs they immediately come back and tell me that they can get the same exact knife with the same quality at Rip-Mart or some flea market :confused:

The reason cheap, low quality stuff sells so well is that they don't know real, true quality merchandise. They don't compare or study anything at all. No wonder bargain basement empires like Rip-Mart makes billions selling garbage quality stuff. Because they sell that same unit over and over and over again and they still don't have anything. Comparatively you can buy a Spyderco and your great grandkids will be handing it down. Case Closed

[Bloke]

Couldn't say for sure SEF, but I'm tipping the fact that half the population is female likely has a bearing.

[James Y]

1. People value different things. Some people, for example, like Steve Harvey (and his considerable fanbase), place premium importance on a man always wearing a suit, expensive dress shoes, and having a certain 'look'. That's a big part of his value system. I don't subscribe to it. I own a nice suit, but only wear it for certain special, necessary occasions. I don't go around everywhere in a suit to show off my status and impress other people I don't even know. Any loser or con man can clean himself up and look like a million dollars in a suit if he really wants to.

Someone with that value system would not understand why I value good knives, and always having one (actually, three) on me. They would ask, 'Why are there people who care more about some pocketknife than always looking 'fly'? How can they stand not trying to look GQ? What is this stuff you think you have to cut? People??"

2. This has already been answered better than I could by others.

3. Also already answered, but basically, she feels comfortable being devalued and miserable. Her preference for "bad boys" and the vibe she puts out screams "victim," and as stated in an earlier post, deep down she doesn't feel worthy of a good man. In fact, a "good man" would bore her to death. She finds bad boys and the attention they give her exciting. Deep down, she craves the abuse and the drama, regardless of how much she might complain about it. She's addicted to the complaining. There are most likely other deep-seated issues as well. She's where she's at because she chooses to be. As long as this woman (and others like her) prefer to stay in that negative cycle, she actually doesn't deserve a "good man," as she would only bring him misery in the long run. This may sound harsh, but in reality, sometimes the truth hurts. The same would be true if the genders were reversed.

Jim

[JD Spydo]

Jim I couldn't hardly agree with you more on the subject of personal vanity. I'm like yourself I own two nice suits but only wear them to funerals, weddings and other celebratory events. I don't even wear a suit or fancy clothes to the church I attend. And my pastor is really cool about casual dress in church as long as it's modest, clean and decent.

I wear my better work clothes most of the time which is why I ran that thread on work clothes here recently. Because I really like stuff based on function rather than vanity.

I think SEF is trying to bring out some points on this thread that people have their priorities really screwed up. When I had my financial trainwreck back in 2009-2010 I really gained a completely new set of values. And vanity has taken a back seat all the way. Oh don't get me wrong I try to wear good quality clothes and footwear but the days of keeping up with the Smith & Jones family are over forever with me.

And it's so pathetic what people want to argue about. Most of the stuff that make people mad is either pathetic or pointless in the long haul. A very wise man I got to know at church said to me recently>>don't sweat the small and meaningless stuff because for all practical purposes most of us are going to be dead in a hundred years from now. So focus on what is truly important and what makes your life meaningful. And don't waste your precious time arguing with people that are not focused nor have their priorities right. Focus on what's important and forget or ignore the rest.

[The Mastiff]

Also already answered, but basically, she feels comfortable being devalued and miserable.

I had a relationship with a woman who grew up in a chaotic and abusive environment. Whenever things got stressful she defaulted to that kind of argument as that is what she knew. In a strange way it was comfortable to her. Some can see their way to changing things and some can't. Some kids that were abused grow up to be abusers, some grow up to be the best people you will ever meet. There are all types of people but most of us find comfort in environments we are familiar with. Think of that when you are around and involved with raising children whether yours or others.

[Bloke]

Why argue with anyone? :confused:

Life's way too short to argue ... you're best off just having a laugh.

[Naperville]

Why argue with anyone? :confused:

Life's way too short to argue ... you're best off just having a laugh.

I agree 100%! Don't argue with them. Laugh at them. :D

[SpyderEdgeForever]

Bloke, Mastiff, Naperville, and others: I have a question regarding using laughter. If one of us is somewhere and a person is trying to rile us up or harass us or whatever else, and we decide to use laughter, and joking at them, to mentally disarm them, instead of yelling or projecting anger, what is the most likely response from them that we should expect?

Someone once told me that people with a bully mentality or other arrogant demeanor hate being mocked, laughed at, and ridiculed more than anything else.

[Naperville]

Bloke, Mastiff, Naperville, and others: I have a question regarding using laughter. If one of us is somewhere and a person is trying to rile us up or harass us or whatever else, and we decide to use laughter, and joking at them, to mentally disarm them, instead of yelling or projecting anger, what is the most likely response from them that we should expect?

Someone once told me that people with a bully mentality or other arrogant demeanor hate being mocked, laughed at, and ridiculed more than anything else.

I avoid people. I hang out with family and martial arts instructors, online and in real life. For example, I just started working with a well known martial artist to assist in the development of an online curriculum for his art. I leave people alone and will walk away from everything unless you lay your hands on me or a family member of mine. That is the way it should be. People should be very polite, as if everyone is armed.

Nonetheless, if you persist, I'm going to take you apart.

[James Y]

SEF,
If you're seriously interested in that, I strongly suggest you look into a couple of books:

Conflict Communication: A New Paradigm in Conscious Communication, by Rory Miller.

Scaling Force: Dynamic Decision-Making Under Threat of Violence, by Rory Miller and Lawrence A. Kane.

Pretty much anything by Rory Miller is good. Also anything by Marc MacYoung. There is lots of good stuff out there, but the above two books are an excellent start.

Jim

[SpyderEdgeForever]

Thank you.

[Bloke]

Bloke, Mastiff, Naperville, and others: I have a question regarding using laughter.

I don’t know for sure SEF, but if someone is annoying me I’m likely to start laughing, say something like ‘Yeah, good on yah fella.’, spin on my heel and walk off.

If someone does something to annoy me on the road and we happen to catch up at lights and we make eye contact, I’ll laugh and say something like ‘Nice bit of driving there champion’ and give them a thumbs up. Or I’ll laugh and ask them ‘’ay mate, ever thought about catching a bus?’ Ah, hahaha! :)

[James Y]

Jim I couldn't hardly agree with you more on the subject of personal vanity. I'm like yourself I own two nice suits but only wear them to funerals, weddings and other celebratory events. I don't even wear a suit or fancy clothes to the church I attend. And my pastor is really cool about casual dress in church as long as it's modest, clean and decent.

I wear my better work clothes most of the time which is why I ran that thread on work clothes here recently. Because I really like stuff based on function rather than vanity.

I think SEF is trying to bring out some points on this thread that people have their priorities really screwed up. When I had my financial trainwreck back in 2009-2010 I really gained a completely new set of values. And vanity has taken a back seat all the way. Oh don't get me wrong I try to wear good quality clothes and footwear but the days of keeping up with the Smith & Jones family are over forever with me.

And it's so pathetic what people want to argue about. Most of the stuff that make people mad is either pathetic or pointless in the long haul. A very wise man I got to know at church said to me recently>>don't sweat the small and meaningless stuff because for all practical purposes most of us are going to be dead in a hundred years from now. So focus on what is truly important and what makes your life meaningful. And don't waste your precious time arguing with people that are not focused nor have their priorities right. Focus on what's important and forget or ignore the rest.

Joe, I couldn't agree more.

Jim