“Only an idiot believes that.”

“I believe it.”

“Then read the evidence.”

“Why? You’ve already told me what I am.”

The exchange ends with each participant certain the other has proved their point. The factual correction may be perfect. The persuasion is dead.

Public argument offers a second audience: people who already agree and enjoy watching the other side receive a kicking. For them, the insult is excellent entertainment. Likes arrive. Friends repeat the sharpest line. The author mistakes applause for conversion because applause is conveniently countable.

A furious reply is counted as reach. A quiet reader changing their view leaves no metric at all. The incentives favour the performance even when the stated objective is persuasion.

Bluntness has legitimate uses. Dangerous rubbish deserves a clear contradiction. A public record may matter more than changing the speaker’s mind. But “I am correcting the audience” is often an alibi invented after somebody enjoyed being cruel.

Later, the same claim appears in a private conversation.

“What would change your mind?”

“Probably nothing.”

“Nothing?”

“Well, if that figure came from the regulator, maybe.”

It did. The link is sent without the idiot line. No conversion follows that evening. Two days later the recipient asks whether the figure covers the whole country or only one region.

The original public post has 1,800 likes. The private message has a question mark.

Behavioural principles

Behavioural ideas at play in this post

Short, plain-English explanations of the principles behind this post, with links to related books and examples in the archive.