Contrarianism

(I can be guilty of it -- but not to the point where it would be a raison d'etre, because that would be horrible and a half. Sometimes I can feel like the only sane person in the asylum, but usually that's just my ego talking.)

i am guilty of this, especially with my dad, although his own pessimism, self-righteous religious orthodoxy, and general grating presence inspire contrarianism more than any internal motivation.

its also just plain fun to be this way sometimes.

"No I'm not."

"Yes you are."

"No I'm not."

"Yes you are."

"No I'm not."

"STOP IT! This is a stupid argument."

"No it isn't."

Etc.

i am speaking only for myself. others can be as contrarian as they like.

my sister: "you just want to be different."

And so I started calling out when I was exhibiting such behavior and he did too and now we can share stuff in a slightly less competitive, contrarian manner that I think suits us both better.

This is fascinating. Never would have occurred to me.

Why such a high value placed on being unique? Whence the assumption that agreeing with someone else on "everything" makes one not uniqie?

I have been known to argue both sides of an issue with the same person just because I get frustrated that they're not brining to the fore both sides' legitimate (to me) points. If i do this with my mother or brother this can be fun 'cause we're naturally garrulous though forgiving, but other people can understandably find this frustrating.

When my gf accuses me of being difficult, I loudly declaim in mock outrage, "I am NOT a contrarian!"

Last time I can recall is because I told my little brother I didn't like Bright Eyes. He told me I was just saying that to be different, to go against the grain.

It took quite a lot of protestation on my behalf to convince him that I really really just didn't like them.

Drives me up the wall when I confront it--on ILX, anywhere else--even though I've been greatly influenced by at least one writer who might be categorized as such:

Bill: Suppose you made up a team defense of the best fielder in baseball at each of the nine positions. Roughly, how many fewer runs per game would the opposition score compared to a team of average fielders?
Asked by: 110phil
Answered: 3/22/2015

Bill James: That's the $64,000 question. I don't believe there is a consensus answer to that question. And if there is, I'm certain that I don't agree with it.

I don't think that statement has to be seen as merely contrarian though. I think James could be saying that if some kind of consensus could be formed out of variable answers to a question with so many built-in variables and subjective assessments, that the consensus would then probably not be worth anything - might even be worse than any particular one of the answers.

Sometimes the average of a bunch of different opinions is the most wrong one of all?

Good point. In general, though, there is a contrarian streak in James. It's part of his method to question everything--it is his method--so I'll put him somewhere between congenital skepticism (good and necessary) and contrarianism (bad). When he railed on about Boyhood and Citizen Kane recently, I didn't find him especially convincing.

For sure, and he seems to deserve the brand of "contrarian" sometimes. For example, the true contrarian guy will contradict himself just to do it too, and I felt that was going on when comparing his extravagant remarks in the earlier Historical Baseball Abstract about the undying guilt of Shoeless Joe Jackson vs. his mendacious (I thought) excuses for Pete Rose in the next edition. And the Boston Red Sox management did him a real favor when they made him shut up about the Penn State coach a few years ago!