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Having recently been in an argument with someone, I have finally withdrawn from it when I realised that the person in qustion wasn't prepared to accept that I didn't agree with his point and the only possible reason that he hasn't won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Having recently been in an argument with someone, I have finally withdrawn from it when I realised that the person in qustion wasn't prepared to accept that I didn't agree with his point and the only possible reason that he hasn't won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 05:34 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)