How Do You Deal with People Your Disagree With?

Depends on what you think are 'facts'.
Just because someone watches CNN or FOX doesn't mean they have facts. They have an opinion based on 'advocacy journalism', viewpoints predetermined based on the person reporting or the networks mandate to lean one way or another.

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser"

I will only discuss a topic until I come to the understanding that there is not compromise.
Continued dialog is nauseating sometimes and not worth continuing.
 

When someone and I have different opinions sometimes I will say "I disagree" and why. Sometimes I will say nothing too because I view the person as potentially being argumentative. I don't like to argue because it often leads to put-downs or condescending remarks.

If someone is being decent I will gladly continue to discuss the matter.
 
VaughanJB said:
So, I see a trend in discourse, fueled in large part by Social Media. While opposing opinions have always been fuel for hate and violence, when it comes to friends and neighbors, I think people are more likely to look beyond disagreements on an issue. Online, it seems all bets are off.

There are many big divides, but the largest these days seems to be politically based. SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS OVER POLICY ARE, I BELIEVE, BANNED HERE, SO LET'S NOT GO THERE.

I've found that discourse over the political divide now quickly leads to insults, dismissal, and then to "I don't want to discuss this with someone as deluded as you". Which is a shame, because in an age where misinformation is rife, where critical thinking is at a low, where facts are dismissed as lies, and education is known primarily as "propaganda", discussing issues is more needed than ever. This is especially true due to the propensity of the creation of Echo Chambers.

So my question is simply - how do you deal with people you disagree with?

Me? I honestly think dialog is the answer, but that requires two people working together - a listener at times, and a speaker. That we have to spend time outside those echo chambers, or be controlled by it (the essence of indoctrination). I try to deal with it by having a dialog, and at the worst, simply accept that we don't all have the same experiences, priorities, beliefs, and intention.

You?
Click to expand...
A couple of biblical verses come to mind. While not written exactly for the current situation, I find them helpful at times -

Matthew 7:6 ... "cast not your pearls before swine"...

and Matthew 10:14 ... "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."

I interpret both sayings, that have made their way into common usage, to mean "Don't waste your time or your breath on a lost cause."
 
Sippican said:
Depends on what you think are 'facts'.
Just because someone watches CNN or FOX doesn't mean they have facts. They have an opinion based on 'advocacy journalism', viewpoints predetermined based on the person reporting or the networks mandate to lean one way or another.

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser"

I will only discuss a topic until I come to the understanding that there is not compromise.
Continued dialog is nauseating sometimes and not worth continuing.
Click to expand...

As I've stated before, broadcast news is primarily there for entertainment. If you want facts, you have to go elsewhere. There is not a single news source you can take as read - they all have a bias. IMO.
 
I welcome discussions. I like to listen to other points of view. I love to learn. As long as the discussion remains healthy, I will stay in it as an active participant.
I do not tolerate insults, violence, or belittlement as a part of a discussion.
I want to thank Matrix for removing a few obnoxious posts on the Israel/Hamas thread.
 
Last edited:
I used to want to get down and have it out the the SOB. Now, I know yammering at the SOB is useless- logic will never get through. ( Of course, I'm always right.) So, now, I smile, thank them and walk away- it confuses the hell out of them. :)
 
Last edited:
In my mind, opinions should be the result of accurate information, not a substitute for it, which so often happens. That being said, I also remember that some beliefs I have held in the past, I no longer embrace, which is a graceful way of saying I was wrong. So I try to be keep an open mind, although I do tend to inquire as to what led them to that conclusion or where they obtained the information they have based it on. I am a big fan of sound reasoning as opposed to reasons that sound good.

I believe it was Plato who said that opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. Perhaps there was a bit of tongue in cheek there, but it does merit some agreement. So to me, as long as they have tried to obtain reliable information, and have put some thought into it, I will give them credit. As incredible as it may seem, in the land of the stupid, the moderately stupid is king. I'm not looking for any crown, but I will settle for being moderately stupid as I engage in any discussion, and I try to allow that in others.

I have learned that the brain has trained itself to be an energy saving organ, so it looks for shortcuts. That can be done by quickly categorizing things, or gravitating toward quickly finding sources that agree with the already constructed belief, so it isn't necessary to tear down that edifice and start over. Anyone can have interesting perspectives and view on something I hadn't really thought about, so I have found that I can learn something from almost anyone, with the possible exception of those whose brains have run amok.
 
bobcat said:
In my mind, opinions should be the result of accurate information, not a substitute for it, which so often happens. That being said, I also remember that some beliefs I have held in the past, I no longer embrace, which is a graceful way of saying I was wrong. So I try to be keep an open mind, although I do tend to inquire as to what led them to that conclusion or where they obtained the information they have based it on. I am a big fan of sound reasoning as opposed to reasons that sound good.

I believe it was Plato who said that opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. Perhaps there was a bit of tongue in cheek there, but it does merit some agreement. So to me, as long as they have tried to obtain reliable information, and have put some thought into it, I will give them credit. As incredible as it may seem, in the land of the stupid, the moderately stupid is king. I'm not looking for any crown, but I will settle for being moderately stupid as I engage in any discussion, and I try to allow that in others.

I have learned that the brain has trained itself to be an energy saving organ, so it looks for shortcuts. That can be done by quickly categorizing things, or gravitating toward quickly finding sources that agree with the already constructed belief, so it isn't necessary to tear down that edifice and start over. Anyone can have interesting perspectives and view on something I hadn't really thought about, so I have found that I can learn something from almost anyone, with the possible exception of those whose brains have run amok.
Click to expand...

Nice post, you hit on the nub of many conflicts online today. That being, this line: "I also remember that some beliefs I have held in the past, I no longer embrace, which is a graceful way of saying I was wrong". Today, especially online and with certain topics, people are right-fighting. That is, the disagreement/argument comes down not to an exchange of views, but one or both participants trying to insist they are right, and the other is wrong. It's a really great way to learn nothing. :D

A stance on an issue is rarely a life and death moment. What's needed is some perspective. At the very heart of say, science, it's not about being right about something, it's about testing scenario's, taking in new information as it arrives, testing things you know will fail, because a failure can tell you as much as a success. If doubt is cast on a theory, you go back and look at the theory and adjust as you go. But in online "debate", I too often see right-fighters, and when they get frustrated, they essentially rage quit. It's just another way to bury your head in the sand.

You've been wrong, I've been wrong, and in fact, we've all been wrong about something. I'd of hoped this would have led to some humility, we surely know we could be wrong about something, right? But nope. And I don't think this is entirely down to the individual, I think it's partly down to the way Social Media works. For example, it's easy to fall into the trap of believing that if you get more likes than an opposing video, you are clearly "right" and more popular. But Likes are a construct of the software, they're not necessarily telling (it can be trivial to bump up your views and likes on some platforms). And so it goes. So opinions become a popularity contest.

Add on top some who internalize their beliefs as though they're sacrosanct, immutable, and beyond reproach, no matter what, and you start to get personalities shaped by ideas in crazy ways. As you say, being wrong can happen, and there's nothing wrong with that as long as you were both sincere, and have some humility. As such, debates can actually be fun and enlightening, rather than full of rancor and abiding hatred toward someone else.
 
VaughanJB said:
Nice post, you hit on the nub of many conflicts online today. That being, this line: "I also remember that some beliefs I have held in the past, I no longer embrace, which is a graceful way of saying I was wrong". Today, especially online and with certain topics, people are right-fighting. That is, the disagreement/argument comes down not to an exchange of views, but one or both participants trying to insist they are right, and the other is wrong. It's a really great way to learn nothing. :D

A stance on an issue is rarely a life and death moment. What's needed is some perspective. At the very heart of say, science, it's not about being right about something, it's about testing scenario's, taking in new information as it arrives, testing things you know will fail, because a failure can tell you as much as a success. If doubt is cast on a theory, you go back and look at the theory and adjust as you go. But in online "debate", I too often see right-fighters, and when they get frustrated, they essentially rage quit. It's just another way to bury your head in the sand.

You've been wrong, I've been wrong, and in fact, we've all been wrong about something. I'd of hoped this would have led to some humility, we surely know we could be wrong about something, right? But nope. And I don't think this is entirely down to the individual, I think it's partly down to the way Social Media works. For example, it's easy to fall into the trap of believing that if you get more likes than an opposing video, you are clearly "right" and more popular. But Likes are a construct of the software, they're not necessarily telling (it can be trivial to bump up your views and likes on some platforms). And so it goes. So opinions become a popularity contest.

Add on top some who internalize their beliefs as though they're sacrosanct, immutable, and beyond reproach, no matter what, and you start to get personalities shaped by ideas in crazy ways. As you say, being wrong can happen, and there's nothing wrong with that as long as you were both sincere, and have some humility. As such, debates can actually be fun and enlightening, rather than full of rancor and abiding hatred toward someone else.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better. Whenever there is an open mind, there is a gateway to the ocean of knowledge, and we can wander along it's shores picking up pearls of wisdom as we go. Personally, I think everyone should be skeptical of all things but open to changing his mind. A fool knows everything except his own ignorance.

A great deal of what one finds on so many topics prostituted on the internet, is merely manure for the weak minded and gullible to grow weeds in, and unfortunately it does. If it's not there, it can come from the mouths of "trusted" representatives. Who can forget the now infamous term of "alternative facts".

Many people will never learn what they think they already know, and sadly that's the runaway train we all passengers on, unless we are willing to wait for the slower train of fact finding. The answer has to be that the thoughts we are in possession of, we just don't know them to be false. It's like buying a work of art, and you live with this work of art on your wall, and all your life, you believe it to be genuine .... the real deal. But what if it isn't? What if it is a clever forgery that you never discover? How many of us are living with that forgery?

I think the old adage still applies: Garbage in, garbage out.
 
bobcat said:
Couldn't have said it better. Whenever there is an open mind, there is a gateway to the ocean of knowledge, and we can wander along it's shores picking up pearls of wisdom as we go. Personally, I think everyone should be skeptical of all things but open to changing his mind. A fool knows everything except his own ignorance.

A great deal of what one finds on so many topics prostituted on the internet, is merely manure for the weak minded and gullible to grow weeds in, and unfortunately it does. If it's not there, it can come from the mouths of "trusted" representatives. Who can forget the now infamous term of "alternative facts".

Many people will never learn what they think they already know, and sadly that's the runaway train we all passengers on, unless we are willing to wait for the slower train of fact finding. The answer has to be that the thoughts we are in possession of, we just don't know them to be false. It's like buying a work of art, and you live with this work of art on your wall, and all your life, you believe it to be genuine .... the real deal. But what if it isn't? What if it is a clever forgery that you never discover? How many of us are living with that forgery?

I think the old adage still applies: Garbage in, garbage out.
Click to expand...

Skepticism today is thrown about on EVERYTHING. That's the trouble. It's not enough to be skeptical about fact A, some people use that to dismiss Fact B, Fact C, Fact D if it came from the same source. Or worse, came from "SCIENCE", as though there's a publication, or even organization named Science that is blame for everything. Ho hum, 2023 is one hell of a time to be alive. :D
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top