Arrogance? Insularity? I dunno
May. 21st, 2002 12:25 pmWhy is it that some people are incapable of understanding that there is a difference between "Not listening" and "Not agreeing"?
Having recently been in an argument with someone, I have finally withdrawn from it when I realised that the person in qustion wasn't prepared to accept that I didn't agree with his point and the only possible reason that he hasn't won me over is that I'm not listening.
I find this POV surprisingly arrogant; to assume that your argument is so good that all who hear it shall be won over (so long as they listen) *is* arrogant, I'm sure. Perhaps alternatively it's an inability to understand that others see the world differently, or that your argument isn't that convincing, or that there may be a better way of doing things (in others eyes, anyway). In short, a point of view that differs from your own, and your own argument is of insufficient merit or strength to change that point of view as it does not hold up to counterargument.
Being disagreed with is a part of life - we all come to understand, as we grow, that sometimes others do not see the same world that we do. Sometimes, philosophical or personal reasons mean that we do not see eye to eye with others. I've always felt that in such a situation the best thing to do is understand that you aren't going to agree and either try to find an alternative solution, and try and work around the problem to acheive an acceptable solution. It saddens me that many people, rather than taking action to achieve what they want, would rather bitch because others refuse to take it for them.
Having recently been in an argument with someone, I have finally withdrawn from it when I realised that the person in qustion wasn't prepared to accept that I didn't agree with his point and the only possible reason that he hasn't won me over is that I'm not listening.
I find this POV surprisingly arrogant; to assume that your argument is so good that all who hear it shall be won over (so long as they listen) *is* arrogant, I'm sure. Perhaps alternatively it's an inability to understand that others see the world differently, or that your argument isn't that convincing, or that there may be a better way of doing things (in others eyes, anyway). In short, a point of view that differs from your own, and your own argument is of insufficient merit or strength to change that point of view as it does not hold up to counterargument.
Being disagreed with is a part of life - we all come to understand, as we grow, that sometimes others do not see the same world that we do. Sometimes, philosophical or personal reasons mean that we do not see eye to eye with others. I've always felt that in such a situation the best thing to do is understand that you aren't going to agree and either try to find an alternative solution, and try and work around the problem to acheive an acceptable solution. It saddens me that many people, rather than taking action to achieve what they want, would rather bitch because others refuse to take it for them.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:14 am (UTC)*small popping noises*
Krystyna
no subject
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:21 am (UTC)This is the thing; I don't know the causes of it. I often cease to bother arguing, agree to disagree like a mature adult, and then set about working out ways to get what I want using other methods Accusing people of not listening and sulking just because they dont' agree is...alien to me.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:28 am (UTC)But if you explain, "Yes, I understand, I just don't agree" - then we start to drift into arrogance at that point.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:34 am (UTC)For once I'm actually being properly bitter about something. Bah!
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:47 am (UTC)(My turn to be bitter.)
Jay and Silent Bob on rules discussions
Date: 2002-05-21 08:33 am (UTC)--
"Excuse me, are you the New Zealand ANST Spunkmonkey?"
"Ya..."
"Did you say last week on rulescircle, quote, 'I think we should replace all references in Changeling to cold iron with the word oxygen', followed by this thread documentation, even though you don't have any authority over Changeling?" [drops three inch high stack of printed emails on the ground]
"Ya..."
"Get him." [Much violence ensues.]
Re: Jay and Silent Bob on rules discussions
Date: 2002-05-21 08:45 am (UTC)Re: Jay and Silent Bob on rules discussions
Date: 2002-05-21 08:46 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2002-05-21 05:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:53 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2002-05-21 06:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 06:47 am (UTC)But I'm not listening, you see...
Re:
Date: 2002-05-21 07:20 am (UTC)Thats what pisses me off
Date: 2002-07-04 03:45 pm (UTC)People who say "No" to ideas you present, but can offer no actual substansive argument as to why, or why their way is better, or why a certain rule is enforced.
A lot of the problem is that people invest too much of themselves in their ideas, so by attacking the idea or the establishment they see you as by extension attacking them.
no subject
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 06:10 am (UTC)You did say you wanted a girlfriend with opinions :p
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:23 am (UTC)Spurious example : if you're looking at turning left or right...straight on is only an option if there isn't a wall in the way.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 05:27 am (UTC)But yes, I'd agree that sometimes compromise won't happen and then, at least, you can hopefully agree to disagree amicably rather than turning it into a flamewar or something.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 07:10 am (UTC)and be thankful you are no longer NC. I think I know who you're talking about.
And my inbox has already been graced by "but I thought we were doing it this way..."
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 07:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 07:42 am (UTC)I then pointed out that there was no way I was going to change proceedures in the middle. And that one domain had already decdied not to utilise the 1 member 1 vote idea, and were leaving it to teir DC and DST
He seemed to think I could "make them" vote. How? Pistols at dawn? Baseball bat.
And right now I'm averaging a new complaint a week. I think I'm doing rather well to keep my temper in check.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:12 am (UTC)I have managed to bounce several through that method, but sometimes ....
I think they expect me to wave a magic wand or something
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:48 am (UTC)If I'm proven wrong then I'm proven wrong, fair enough - but to assume that I'm going to be wrong without giving either method a chance to demonstrate in practise - and then to refuse to accept that I might have a different opinion based on (what I consider to be) logic and reasoned thought...now that irritates me. I'm not pulling stuff out of the air here, you know.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 08:57 am (UTC)The main reason I agree with you is that I don't see any way the outcome will affect me directly.
The main reason it's winding me up is, like you say, the appalling lack of willingness / ability to see that anyone could have a different opinion, and the belief that repetition & volume will change your mind.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-21 09:39 am (UTC)However, because of how stuff works already, your way makes more sense to me...
*shrugs*
It's a personal preference thing, really.
no subject
Date: 2002-05-22 01:11 am (UTC)Just me bitching, really.