The "Hanging Out with a Contrarian Friend" TikTok that inspired this post is the opposite of the improv technique of "Yes, and..."

https://www.tiktok.com/@kelseyjunejensen/video/7525163617197...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes,_and...

I wonder what "friend" is doing in that expression. Maybe I am one of those "friends" then :-)

Well, luckily I don't have any such friends.

But I've notice that contrarianism has really picked the past 5 years or so. People that used to be written off conspiracy crackpots are now seen as some sort of healthy alternative voice to "MSM".

No they aren't.

What people are missing in this debate is that the need to be “contrarian” for some people stems from correction OCD. It’s not that your friend is “trying to be different” or “craves attention”—-it’s that they have a compulsive tic like biting their fingernails. Shaming them doesn’t fix their underlying disorder, it just makes you a bad friend to this person. Accept that they have this limitation (in your eyes) and learn to ignore it the same way you would with somebody living with Tourettes syndrome.

Clearly the solution is to abandon any kind of critical thought, and then line up in a circle and chant "ONE OF US, ONE OF US" until the offender repents from their nonconformist ways.

Don't forget about the friend who blames you for being contrarian because you don't embrace their delusions.

YMMV. A few years ago I found I was the contrarian friend in my group because I wasn't a sexist, racist anti-vaxxer. Found better friends.

Is this really some new "trend"? Didn't we define this pretty funnily and sarcastically with "AKSHUALLY" like 15 years ago?

My contrarian friend is my mother. Doesn't matter what I do, I should have done it the other way. Don't eat so much, eat more; work harder, relax guy!

cites tiktok as impetus for article but tiktok feed is entirely based on what u interact with

There is a reason why Agreeableness is one of the Big five personality traits.

As mentioned below, it is somewhat compulsive to avoid getting trapped in a chain of logic that starts with some nonsensical over-generization like "the sky is blue" or error like "the current tariffs on india will kill Apple" (and I am compelled to point out that the threatened tariffs for the complicity with Russia's invasion of Ukraine may affect Apple but we don't know yet).

Even if we have learned not to say those objections out loud, they still take up space in our brain during discussions.

I have been on both ends of this phenomenon. My career and hobbies see more improvement today through error correction than technique building or rigor.

"Don't code like that, do this instead!" "Oops, you're rushing the beat of the music, try again and don't rush."

It is a daily challenge to project positivity despite my brain being attuned to smooth rough edges.

I suspect many in the HN crowd are similarly wired. Technology fields reward those who avoid pitfalls.

This relates to programming. I had a coworker who's first answer was always "no" then "but maybe we can..." we worked for an expensive consulting company charging 2k+ euro per day per person. His attitude was unpopular with the clients until our manager got him to start answering "yes" first, and then come up with how it could be yes instead of no.

Same results in the end but the impression by the clients improved a lot.

> experts recommend using “I” statements to avoid sounding accusatory. For example, “I feel like I’m being corrected and that makes it harder for me to want to share things with you,” or “I know you probably don’t realize you’re doing this, but it seems like you contradict me whenever I open up.”

> And if after these kindhearted efforts they’re still not willing to hear you out (or worse, they deflect blame back onto you), it may be worth reevaluating keeping this person in your life.

Good advice for any unhealthy relationship.

Somehow this is simultaneously the most and least self-aware comment section I've seen on HN.

This may or may not be a real thing, but most or all the actual examples the article gives are terrible. Disagreeing over food quality, pointing out obvious PR stunts, and revealing to a friend that they were duped into overpaying for what they thought was “vintage” but actually wasn’t, is not being contrary just for the sake of being contrary.

I have no problem with the general idea of the article; I would not be surprised if there was a general common problem with some people being overly critical or trying to put down anything you say, but the actual examples they give are all terrible.