This may be connected to the old saying "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
What I mean by that is that people knowing they have been lied to (for whatever reason) are adamant in "being right".
I think it's something else altogether.
For example, it occurs to me that neither monkeys swinging through the trees nor snakes slithering through the grass engage in 'right fighting' .
The obsession with being right- meaning factually accurate not 'right thinking' in a moral or ethical sense, seems to be a uniquely human trait( although the latter certainly does come into play).
" Are you coming to bed,honey?"
" I can't, somebody is wrong on the internet ! "
The obvious example here would be Ivermectin
.
Suppose person A believes it is the cure for covid.
Further suppose that person B knows, factually, that it is not.
Person A is adamant in their belief and will not be convinced otherwise.
Your hypothesis would pursue the reasons for person A's beliefs.
My line of inquiry seeks the rationale of person B.
If person A's behavior has no direct impact upon person B, then why does person B care, at all, what person A believes ?
And why is disabusing person A of their notions even remotely important to person B ??
Right fighting is an odd pursuit, isn't it?