It has happened many times to me. Also, but not exclusively, on *.stackexchange sites.
- Someone makes a statement. Often, but not always, they do this as a response to a question I asked.
- What they say doesn't seem right to me! It is in conflict with what I think I know / it seems self-refuting to me / it seems to me to overlook something important that has considerable ramifications to the topic / etc etc.
- I think that just accepting what I was told and moving on is likely suboptimal for at least two reasons: * I understand that I may be wrong and I may be influenced by some misconceptions that prevent me from understanding the topic, so if this is the case I would like to ask this person to clear my misconceptions (or else I won't reach understanding) and * It has sometimes been the case that it turned out I was right and the person to make the statements was wrong - another big reason to try to ask him to respond to my doubts rather than simply accept that he is right and I am wrong.
However: All too often when I present my doubts to the statement-maker the results are not what I intended. I am often told I'm rude and argumentative; and even if I'm not being told this the person I'm talking to often simply quits the conversation. Even on SE it has happened at least twice to me: (1) After posting a comment under an answer I was told that because of my attitude the answerer would not answer any more questions from me in the future and (2) After posting a comment under another answer to another question I saw this answer deleted and my question downvoted.
My guess is that I have a nasty habit of crossing the line from asking a person to elaborate what they just said to fighting their statements and trying to prove them wrong. My guess is that while people typically like to elaborate what they just said they nevertheless don't like to see their statements attacked and don't like to have to defend them; rather, they quit the conversation. Makes sense actually; if I know better why was I asking in the first place?
I hypothesise there is one way to try to remedy the situation: try to somehow ask my follow-up question in such a way that it is clear that I am not doubting the accurateness of what I was told. To make the person I'm talking to believe that I believe I am wrong and they are right and I'm just asking them to help me understand why exactly am I wrong. I don't think I'm good in games of this kind, yet I tried this once or twice and I think the results were good; but nonetheless I don't like this method! It seems manipulative to me, it seems to me that by trying to achieve this I am actually trying to lie to the person I'm talking to because it is not true that I believe I am necessarily wrong and they are necessarily right. Often I turned to be wrong indeed; but since, as I said, it did happen a few times that I turned out to be completely correct I don't think I can nor should assume this outcome cannot happen again. And I want to be an honest person.
It would seem that I need to somehow both (a) avoid challenging the statement that was told to me, only ask to elaborate this in light of A, B or C, but at the same time (b) avoid communicating to the person that I believe they are necessarily 100% correct and my doubts are necessarily 100% incorrect!
How to achieve this? (And if this is possible? Ie doesn't (b) imply not (a)? I mean: If I present my doubts but do not believe these doubts are necessarily incorrect am I not automatically challenging the statement I've been conveyed to and therefore upsetting the person I'm talking to?)