Yup, I know EXACTLY what you’re talking about. And the solution is simple:
Actually
be that overly confident guy.
It’s something that I noticed socially in my everyday life. The person who ‘wins’ in an argument isn’t the person who’s actually right, it’s the person who is more sure of himself. People will take that side even if he’s wrong simply because of the background thought “he can’t be this sure of himself unless he’s actually right”. It’s just how social dynamics work. Especially because most people don’t have that type of confidence.
I’m speaking as someone who
does have that confidence lol. But it’s true though, it works. And to an extent, having strong opinions do too, oftentimes because it mimics this effect.
If I’m being honest though, most of the time, those people don’t last. For one thing, it’s possible that your friend’s friend was just
acting like that because there were girls around. Plus he joined late too, meaning that he may have just been trying to be
that guy, if you know what I mean (like that ‘cool’ guy). And it goes without saying, alcohol also has that effect on people too oftentime. The truth is, most people are just like that in the moment, but in actuality aren’t really that confident deep down inside (maybe they’re just really really passionate about the topic at hand; it goes back to the strongly opinionated thing I said before). But even if he is genuinely like that, like I said, they don’t last. At some point in time, someone who REALLY knows his sh
it is gonna call him out (and I say “him” because let’s face it, when’s the last time you’ve ever met an overconfident girl before? It doesn’t happen, only guys are like this lol; gotta love that testosterone
). And I know this because it’s happened to me a few times before too, although I usually try to see things from all sides before making an opinion on something; but that’s besides the point.
Here is where the self-improvement stuff comes in though. Not only do you have to be irrationally self-confident in these social situations, you also have to actually have the skill and knowledge base too. Lemme give you a real-world example: I’m sitting in my gender studies class calling out all the leftist progtard feminist bullsh
it that’s been shoved down our throats for the last 6 decades. When I’m giving my argument (debunking this stupid ****), I don’t just say it’s bs and leave it at that lol; yes, I have to be irrationally confident, but I also have to know the actual facts too, AND
why the feminist narrative is wrong. And not only that, I need to know why someone else is wrong if they disagree with me.
In other words,
you must be able to poke holes in other people’s arguments if they start to argue against you, because when it comes touchy subjects like the ones in my class, you best believe people won’t back down without a fight; you’re basically saying that their life is a lie and that a part of their identity is completely wrong/faulty. It bothers them because it gives them a mini existential crisis in that they have to question their own reality afterwards. Also because attacking something like this is like attacking them as individuals
because it’s become a part of their own personal identity.
In your typical social situations, just mocking them (the other party) and their arguments will do the trick. But if it’s in a more serious environment, you may need to actually elaborate why it’s wrong. This type of stuff gets into philosophy and psychology bc when someone disagrees with you when you KNOW you are right, even after you’ve explained the facts to them, the only way for them to really argue against you is through logical fallacies (e.g. humans need to be alive in order for cancer to grow, and because water keeps humans alive, water therefore causes cancer). And even though
logically these arguments don’t make sense,
socially people may not recognize that until you break it down to them. The best way I’ve found to deal with situations like these is to use clearly faulty analogies/comparisons that use the same logic the person arguing against me is using (you’ve seen them before; these analogies typically start off with “but that’s like saying...”) because it lets other people understand how the argument the other person is making is wrong, and it works in more serious environments too because it also explains why they’re wrong.
Even then, people may disagree with you. At that point, you just make fun of them and/or mock them though. Why? Because others around you now KNOW you are right and they (the other party) is wrong, but is just being too stubborn to admit it. Doing this will emphasize you being right, while also socially punishing/humiliating the other person so as to not mess with you again, which in turn shows more confidence on your end while also showing that you have self-respect. Just make sure that when you do it, you don’t name-call or mock them for something completely unrelated to the discussion at hand because then THAT shows weakness (bc it means that your ego is hurt).
So yeah, social dynamics in a nutshell. This should be in all books teaching social skills and confidence. DJ Bible material. Beyond even Pook. (Like I said, irrational confidence, eh?
)
They don’t hate the guy himself, they just hate the fact that he’s so sure of himself because they know they never could be. It’s just their own insecurity speaking lol
