That was the point I was trying to make when I said "not abrasive and argumentative, just different". Maybe I should have said different perspective.

Incidentally, I find working with people with different perspectives hugely helpful when problem solving, although you can see how vastly different perspectives can also cause problems in understanding. I suspect there's a sweet spot, depending on your role/company/environment.

Ironically you just mistook a contrarian with a critical thinker.

Oops. Maybe I don't understand "contrarian" as well as I should.

Wikipedia says "A contrarian is a person who takes up a contrary position, especially a position that is opposed to that of the majority, regardless of how unpopular it may be", which to me reads like a reactionary thing. People with different views, that's just how they think. They don't do it for kicks to antagonize people. Right?

The way I think of 'contrarian' is someone who takes an opposing position strictly because it is in opposition to others, and not due to sincerely help beliefs or the actual merits of the position.

But I think I should apologize to you and the parent post. I just saw an opportunity to come off as being a little clever. I have no idea if the parent poster was actually trying to be contrarian or not. And while I'm just trying to boost my ego, here you are still actually trying to have a meaningful conversation and to understand where others are coming from. Good on you, that's truly admirable. I wish I did the same more often.

Thank you for reminding me why I read HN comment sections. I appreciate this sort of earnest, well-intentioned dialogue. It is unfortunately not so prevalent on the wider web.

I have a different understanding, it's not resistance for resistance sake, it's the willingness to dissent when you disagree. The first thing that pop to my mind is a book by Christopher Hitchens called "Letters to a Young Contrarian". While he enjoyed arguments he did not argue for argument sake for a position he did not hold.

Ironically, you just mistook a critical thinker with someone who agrees with you.

People prefer critical thinkers when they help them in their grand vision. Unfortunately, a critical thinker may have some things he wants too.

Totally agree, and I would add that critical thinking leads quickly to positions that are not generally accepted.

We need contrairian people as a balance to people who think they are infallible. Both should be a small percentage of society with the remaining majority willing to change if needed.

Being a contrarian is no more valuable than being a yes man.

Neither has any societal value.

I can't disagree more with this statement. Echo chambers are dangerous. Just because everyone in the room agrees doesn't make it a good idea.

The kinder term for contrarian is devil's advocate. If no one else will, you need someone to present an opposing viewpoint.