Talk:Contrarian

I beg to differ; the word "contrarian" does not exclusively (only) pertain to contrarian investing, but has also been used in other senses where the individual in question differs markedly from conventional wisdom in one or many fields. "Contrarian" is usually even more against the grain than "alternative" is, and usually "alternative" has liberal or left-wing connotations, while "contrarian" often has libertarian, conservative, or right-wing ones. It also differs from being merely eccentric; here's some examples:

An eccentric might like spinach-flavored ice cream;
An alternative might like indy rock or blue grass in lieu of top-40 pop hits;
A contrarian would be like an agnostic who attacks freethought and evolution, or someone who says something that is extremely unpopular is actually beneficial and good (such as: pornography, teenage pregnancy, drug use, using tobacco, drinking alcohol to excess, drinking & driving, being selfish on purpose, telling lies, etc.).

Vegetarians (at least before the 1990s) might have been considered eccentric (since then they are just merely alternative); People like Objectivists, rational egoists, satanists, etc. might be considered contrarians, along with such odd-balls as "punk rockers for conservativism", or "cowboys for liberalism".

Here's an example of usage of the word "contrarian" in a sense which I believe does not pertain to investing, in an article here on Wikipedia (and one which I did not create or edit): David Berlinski: 3rd sentence.

what's contrarian about the view on Wings? After all, they're only the band The Beatles could've been. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.226.10 (talk) 10:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shanoman (talk) 03:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Krugman

Why was Paul Krugman's opinion placed in the beginning of the article and no one else? I removed this considering there is already discussion in the article sufficiently about Mr. Krugman's views. I would suggest if anyone has more contemporary views of what it is to be a Contrarian their quotations would be highly helpful in the article to help fully establish it's modern meaning when used in different ways.

My 2 cents, Thanks. comment added by Ronmrutherford (talk • contribs) 22:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Devil's advocate > Contrarian

I have always had those two terms intertwined. A contrarian merely plays role of the Devil's advocate. Is my understanding of these two words wrong? I am not being a snob, I am genuinely asking a question. Is my usage of the Devil's advocate and Contrarian as mirrored terms false? They do appear to be the same, in practice. Believe me, I have known a few. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.105.46.93 (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contrarians

Do they argue just to be different, or do they really believe what they argue about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.251.169.69 (talk) 21:00, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Contrarianism and nay-saying section

Nothing in this section has been verified and it possesses an original research flavor. Combine this with the strange tangent on the grammatical rules of starting sentences with conjunctions in the second paragraph, I recommend this section be deleted.MrFurious2 (talk) 00:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree entirely. Brings down the article considerably. Happydemic (talk) 12:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I originally tagged this as OR, with the intention of having a discussion over it, but seeing that this year-old comment suggesting its removal has met with no disagreement, I'll just go ahead and remove it. If someone can find anything of value to salvage from the section, please do, but as it stands, it's completely unencyclopaedic. D4g0thur 07:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]