3 Reasons People Argue Online? And Here's Why It's Useless!

The science and psychology behind online arguments and why you cannot win one.

Social Media arguments are toxic, time-consuming parasites. We usually end up in blood-boiling arguments with people on the internet who think they are always right, even when they are outright irrationals. So, let’s discuss why everyone is so out-of-control on the internet and whether we can turn the knob to change other’s opinions. Let’s start with the why.

1. Toxic Online Disinhibition Effect

Social Media gives us a bunch of undisputed advantages to be more toxic in online arguments. All those advantages were being summarized by a psychology professor, John Suler in 2004 when he coined the term Online Disinhibition Effect.

The Online Disinhibition Effect describes the loosening of social restrictions and inhibitions that are normally present in face-to-face interactions that takes place in interactions on the Internet.

Like everything else, the Online Disinhibition effect has a bright and a dark side. The bright side (i.e. the Benign Disinhibition) says that it is easy for people to open up on the internet, which promotes them to share their pain and problems.

The dark side (i.e. Toxic Disinhibition) says that it is easier for people to say rude and offensive things on the internet that they would never say in real life. This is the reason why trolls are so offensive.

The Internet makes us bullet-proof to many dreadful consequences that could arise if we were physically participating in the same online argument with equal toxicity. You will probably get punched for saying things on the face of your online opponent in real life that you say in an online argument.

2. Sensitive Ideological Identity

Another reason why people argue so much on the internet is that they have created an ideological identity on the internet, and an intellectual boundary for everyone else. And they are very sensitive about it. The Online Disinhibition Effect just makes them more offensive whenever someone violates those boundaries.

Naval Ravikant once tweeted

Be conservative in your behavior and liberal in your tolerance.

Do you also treat your social media account as a digital ID card of your ideological beliefs?

3. Online Superhero Effect

The last and most intriguing reason is our supreme pessimism toward the future of human civilization. It may not be a massive contributor but I was heavily influenced by this effect when I was a ‘keyboard warrior’.

We think that society is walking on a path to complete anarchy and disorder and the ideology we believe is the only way to prevent that from happening. And that induces a superhero complex in us, turning us into a digital Batman who feels entitled to prevent the (perceived) ideological destruction of the world.

Can You Change Their Mind?

In this section of the blog, everything I will write is based on psychological research evidence. No philosophy driven intellectual lecture, just hard science, and data.

What is the first thing you do when you think someone’s wrong about a sensitive topic? You tell them they are wrong, right? But does that actually helps? Unfortunately, it doesn’t. When you correct someone, they become defensive toward their beliefs and become more attached to their opinions.

Nine out of ten times an argument ends with each of the contestants more firmly convinced than ever that he is absolutely right.

-Dale Carnegie

What’s the next thing you’d do? Share facts and data that go against their statement? You might think with logic and legit data you can win an argument and make your opponent admit that he was wrong.

Nope, not happening. Why?

Because there's a ton of information available on the internet about the same thing. So, whenever you present data that contradicts your opponent’s beliefs a Cognitive Bias kicks in, called the confirmation bias.

Confirmation Bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way.

You and your opponent might conclude different things from a similar piece of data due to confirmation bias.

This has been proven by a study conducted in 2005 - 2006 which concluded that ideological subgroups failed to update their beliefs when presented with corrective information that runs counter to their predispositions.

Indeed, in several cases, they find that corrections actually strengthened misperceptions among the most strongly committed subjects.

Conclusion

From all this scientific evidence and researches it’s easy to conclude that most online arguments are a waste of time and it’s almost impossible to win one.

Rest, I expect my intelligent audience to pick their own lessons from this blog!

Share this blog with your friends, especially the ones who constantly argue on the internet. Let’s help them.