I’ve been thinking lately about why, in debates (usually) about highly emotional topics, so many people seem unable to acknowledge even minor wrongdoings or mistakes from “their” side, even when doing so wouldn’t necessarily undermine their broader position.

I’m not here to rehash any particular political event or take sides - I’m more interested in the psychological mechanisms behind this behavior.

For example, it feels like many people bind their identity to a cause so tightly that admitting any fault feels like a betrayal of the whole. I’ve also noticed that criticism toward one side is often immediately interpreted as support for the “other” side, leading to tribal reactions rather than nuanced thinking.

I’d love to hear thoughts on the psychological underpinnings of this. Why do you think it’s so hard for people to “give an inch” even when it wouldn’t really cost them anything in principle?

  • snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago

    In general the small points are not actually related to the overall point or are the rare exception to larger trends and are either meant to derail the discussion or show that the other person is going for gotcha points.