Recognizing and refraining from Interpersonal Disputes

[Madelaine McMasters]

3 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

I was going to reply with a clever post saying that "credible" could mean either "believable" or "believes almost anything". In order to prove my point I looked up definitions, and discovered that the "believes almost anything" definition that I thought was an alternate definition for "credible" was actually the definition of "credulous."

So, as it happens, I didn't post something that was factually wrong.

And, in doing so, I also didn't create Some Wrong-Azz Thing on the Internet that someone else could have quoted as proof.

And there you go.

Yes, indeed. I might have learned as a child that, by the time you can declare something absolutely true, it's not terribly important to many people. To have certainty that 1+1=2, we must agree on the definitions of integers, addition, equality, the depictions of those ideas by certain symbols, dimensions... the list goes on and we must limit our claim to the realm of those agreements.

It's been nearly 52 years since Apollo 11 landed on the moon. I won't go looking for surveys evidencing the belief by some that lots of people believe the landing was a hoax, but you probably believe I could find one. I think there are such hoax believers because they've visited our summer star parties. Of course I can only believe they believe what they say. I've no way to know.

If certainty is proportional to the number of people who agree with you, the Internet has moved the decimal place over a few places. When I was the McMasters family village idiot, it was pretty hard to argue my case in the face of what seemed like perpetual 2:1 odds. As my circle of friends and influence eventually grew, it became less hard. Now, it's easy.

And there you go.

Still, we get up every morning and place our bets.

[Madelaine McMasters]

8 hours ago, Mollymews said:

13 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

This kind of conflict seems increasingly hard to resolve, doesn't it?

i see what you did there

I believe you!

[Silent Mistwalker]

31 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Humans are animals! 

I rest my case! 

[Theresa Tennyson]

6 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

How can a disagreement not be turned into a dispute? I guess the easiest way is, if you disagree just keep it to your self, or say so respectfully. No need for back-and-forth or personal attacks.

But..but..

But "they" want the last word! (So do you.)

But they chose minority views to post, that must mean they are bad and need to be challenged! (Being in the majority doesn't make you right or good.)

But they chose "purposefully" to post hurtful content! (And this actually affects you..how?)

But their argument is supported by "bad" people with "bad" agendas! (Who made you the arbiter of "good" and "bad"?)

But their statements are demonstrably false claims, because science and/or common sense! (Since you know so much, shouldn't you be wise enough to ignore such a weak argument?)

But their statement includes political remarks! (Then, you should know better to engage.)

But they are trolling! (Oh? Why do you care? You should not be affected by a troll.)

But they personally attacked me! (If it was false, why should it bother you? If it was true, you may want to thank them.)

Some time ago I came to the conclusion that the problem with Facebook and disinformation isn't the algorithm.

(This is not to say that algorithms are flawless; I'd say that the problem with Youtube is the algorithm.)

The problem with Facebook is that it's your friends. If a friend posts something that's demonstrably wrong you aren't likely to contradict them. You'll probably just roll your eyes, or at most hide their posts for a while. Because, why create drama among your friends?

Meanwhile, that leaves the demonstrably wrong statement sitting out there ready to be propagated.

With something like Twitter or Reddit, at least the demonstrably wrong statements usually get contradicted immediately below so you get to see both sides.

Edited April 23, 2022 by Theresa Tennyson

[Ceka Cianci]

28 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

OMG, someone on the forum with common sense!  I don't know what to say!  🤣

Not saying I won't take advantage of dropping a good come at me bro meme..

Those are just too good to pass up..

hehehe

 

[Love Zhaoying]

2 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Not saying I won't take advantage of dropping a good come at me bro meme..

Those are just too good to pass up..

hehehe

 

Anything can become a dispute if that is one's mindset:

- Are we calling the poster represented by the bird-character fat? Bird is chomky.

- Are we calling the poster represented by the stinger 2-dimensional due to their beliefs and background? Bug is literal WASP.

- Are we making some statement challenging a poster's education? The picture is "the birds and the [bees]"..

- Are we literally asking people to argue, or is it a light-hearted joke?

Everything is as you see it, for you.

[Persephone Emerald]

6 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

I was going to reply with a clever post saying that "credible" could mean either "believable" or "believes almost anything". In order to prove my point I looked up definitions, and discovered that the "believes almost anything" definition that I thought was an alternate definition for "credible" was actually the definition of "credulous."

So, as it happens, I didn't post something that was factually wrong.

And, in doing so, I also didn't create Some Wrong-Azz Thing on the Internet that someone else could have quoted as proof.

And there you go.

And you learned something new. Isn't Google wonderful?  

I sometimes stop myself before posting something because I want to be sure I'm about to use a word correctly or that I can actually back up what I think is true. I wish more people would do this. I know it saves me from some embarrassment.

[Love Zhaoying]

Found the quote that applies to arguing: "I learned long ago never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”

[Love Zhaoying]

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

8 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

But their argument is supported by "bad" people with "bad" agendas! (Who made you the arbiter of "good" and "bad"?)

I like your other categories, but don't understand this one.

Are you saying nobody can determine what is good or bad?  Or nobody should be able to judge this in the world?

The irony..each of my statements had a "but", indirectly addressing "whataboutism". I said neither of those two things, and was strongly tempted to not reply. 
 

A general principle which I left out is: Just because someone "questions" your statement, or even "demands" a reply - does not mean you need reply. Not replying shouldn't make you "weak" or even (gasp!) "wrong" in other's eyes.
 

If, as a random example, somebody questions your statement and in doing so a) twists your words, b) misconstrues your intent, c) puts words in your mouth, d) takes you out of context..(I could go on)..that's on them! You don't have to engage.
 

If their "question" demands an answer, then - if you truly believe they were far off base in "asking" - someone else may step up and help explain things. If their statement or "question" is apparently to draw you out, challenge you, etc. then it should be apparent to others and again - others can also judge whether some reply was needed. It's not on you.

[Luna Bliss]

Just for clarification, Love, my confused emoticon is simply saying I don't quite understand....is not some kind of dig where people are implying a poster must be crazy for saying something.

[Rolig Loon]

16 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Found the quote that applies to arguing: "I learned long ago never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”

I've heard that one and the musical one, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."  Both are versions of Mark Twain's apocryphal words, "Never argue with an idiot. You’ll never convince the idiot that you’re correct, and bystanders won’t be able to tell who’s who."  As far as I can find out, the earliest version is in Proverbs 26:4: "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him."  It's good advice, whichever version you like.
 

 

[Luna Bliss]

18 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

44 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Found the quote that applies to arguing: "I learned long ago never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”

I've heard that one and the musical one, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."  Both are versions of Mark Twain's apocryphal words, "Never argue with an idiot. You’ll never convince the idiot that you’re correct, and bystanders won’t be able to tell who’s who."  As far as I can find out, the earliest version is in Proverbs 26:4: "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him."  It's good advice, whichever version you like.

How do we know we're not the pig, fool, or idiot though? 

With so many genuine conflicts I view neither side as being a pig, fool, or an idiot... rather there's just gross misunderstandings and people get defensive and act badly.

*speaking of sincere conflicts between people and not griefers here

[Madelaine McMasters]

37 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

I've heard that one and the musical one, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."  Both are versions of Mark Twain's apocryphal words, "Never argue with an idiot. You’ll never convince the idiot that you’re correct, and bystanders won’t be able to tell who’s who."  As far as I can find out, the earliest version is in Proverbs 26:4: "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him."  It's good advice, whichever version you like.

I think Twain deserves a seat in the Pantheon of the Apocryphal. I think he'd approve.

The version of this idea I've seen attributed to him is “Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

https://marktwainstudies.com/the-apocryphal-twain-never-argue-with-stupid-people-they-will-drag-you-down-to-their-level-and-beat-you-with-experience/

From that page (emphasis mine):

There is perhaps no greater testament to Twain’s lasting reputation than the habitual misattribution of miscellaneous wit and wisdom to his name. The circulation of such apocryphal aphorisms was common enough in the 20th century. It has only increased with the popularization of digital media.

With each passing year, there are fewer wonderful quotes I feel confident I can attribute to him, or anyone.

Edited April 23, 2022 by Madelaine McMasters
Dunno how my profile pic got into the post!

[Ceka Cianci]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Anything can become a dispute if that is one's mindset:

- Are we calling the poster represented by the bird-character fat? Bird is chomky.

- Are we calling the poster represented by the stinger 2-dimensional due to their beliefs and background? Bug is literal WASP.

- Are we making some statement challenging a poster's education? The picture is "the birds and the [bees]"..

- Are we literally asking people to argue, or is it a light-hearted joke?

Everything is as you see it, for you.

I see my exits from arguments as an art form.. All I can hope for as an artist is, that my art has a different meaning for each person.. Eye of the beholder and all that stuff..

 

 

hehehe

 

 

[Rowan Amore]

I'll just be using this as my go to for end of argument...

[Luna Bliss]

58 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

4 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

9 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

But their argument is supported by "bad" people with "bad" agendas! (Who made you the arbiter of "good" and "bad"?)

I like your other categories, but don't understand this one.

Are you saying nobody can determine what is good or bad?  Or nobody should be able to judge this in the world?

The irony..each of my statements had a "but", indirectly addressing "whataboutism". I said neither of those two things, and was strongly tempted to not reply. 

But I never said you said either of those things. I am asking if that's what you meant, because this is what I was imagining it could mean.

So, I was asking for clarification. I don't understand why you were strongly tempted not to reply.

[Love Zhaoying]

16 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

With each passing year, there are fewer wonderful quotes I feel confident I can attribute to him, or anyone.

There's a great meme category about this now. Example:

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

But I never said you said either of those things. I am asking if that's what you meant, because this is what I was imagining it could mean.

 

5 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Are you saying nobody can determine what is good or bad?  Or nobody should be able to judge this in the world?

Sometimes, it is sufficient to merely quote someone.

[Qie Niangao]

Recent rumors of on-set misbehavior notwithstanding, I must quote Bill Murray on the subject of arguing:

"It's hard to win an argument with a smart person. It's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person."

[Luna Bliss]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Sometimes, it is sufficient to merely quote someone.

That's often true, and I do understand how you might not want to see some assumption that had no bearing on what you were saying. But in my defense I was formulating this theory about how people label themselves as 'the good ones' and the others as 'the bad ones'. Or visa versa.  I had a kind of deep understanding about it all, and so this was on my mind.

Maybe later I'll go back and try to understand what you were saying.

[Love Zhaoying]

32 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I see my exits from arguments as an art form.. All I can hope for as an artist is, that my art has a different meaning for each person.. Eye of the beholder and all that stuff..

Lol imagine, a docent telling people the "correct interpretation" of your art!

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Rolig Loon said:

I've heard that one and the musical one, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." 

They never met Arnold Ziffel!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Ziffel

[Rolig Loon]

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

How do we know we're not the pig, fool, or idiot though? 

That is the meta-conclusion that you should draw from all of this. I remind you of yet another apocryphal quote: "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

To make a horrible pun out of it... "One man's fool is another man's person."

[Randall Ahren]

Would these be examples of personal attacks in posts leading to interpersonal disputes:

1. It's about time you started taking notes. 🤭

2. I can't believe y'all are grown ass men calling yourself "alpha men"

3. Google Dunning-Kruger effect. Because you are pulling stuff out of your posterior at this point, with great confidence.

4. Someone seems to have lost tract of their ridiculous posts.  ^^

[Silent Mistwalker]

How about a little context before we go off the deep end.

 

If people don't want other people to play off their jokes, they shouldn't post them.