Seriously thoughtful When Reasonable People Take Positions

[Dr. Drib]

It seems to me that many people on the internet do not change their viewpoints, anyway, which seems to echo what pilotbob is driving at. And, when opinions don't shift, anger seems to rear its head. That's when patience runs out and name-calling enters.

Interestingly, absent from this thread are a few names that I readily associate as being in the name-calling category.

Also, (and again, interestingly, I might add), I wonder what those absent participants think of a thread such as this? Interesting speculation, but I don't know if we can really learn anything from it. I just don't know.

I'm wondering: Do narcissistic people know they're a pain-in-the-ass and that they are disagreeable personalities?

Don

[wodin]

Originally Posted by ProfJulie

I agree with Harry's points, but I also think that people sometimes take on a different persona when they are at their keyboard and able to post things in a somewhat anonymous fashion.

I think some people who are shy and withdrawn in physical social settings can become outgoing and gregarious in a virtual social setting. Some people (I include myself here), who are outgoing and perfectly comfortable interacting in physical social settings are not so outgoing in virtual social settings.

There are people on this forum that I don't care for just from reading their comments, although if I sat down next to them and did not know who they were I might like them immensely.

There are also people like me who despite being relatively intelligent, are a little slow on the uptake. I constantly find myself thinking of a brilliant response five minutes after the subject has changed. We tend to be more comfortable interacting in virtual social settings because we have an opportunity to review our responses before pressing the send key.

[slayda]

And then there are the threads that seemingly spring into being already 4 or 5 pages long and as a slow reading country boy is laboriously making his plodding way through them, he sees opinions on which he would like to comment only to have the thread's subject veer off two or three times before he gets to the end of the thread.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by slayda

And then there are the threads that seemingly spring into being already 4 or 5 pages long and as a slow reading country boy is laboriously making his plodding way through them, he sees opinions on which he would like to comment only to have the thread's subject veer off two or three times before he gets to the end of the thread.

Yup, that's why I didn't get around to commenting on post #10 until now.

When I think of a "brilliant response" I just go ahead and throw it out there, never mind that the subject's changed four or five times.

That really gets wierd on those two or three thousand post threads!

[kazbates]

When people feel passionately about a topic, many times their posts are more abrupt than I am sure they mean them to be. Although, since we are typing our responses, abruptness could just be the result of our typing skills!

I know that when I am commenting about something near and dear to my heart my opinion is going to be much stronger than a topic in which I might only have a passing interest. I may still want to participate in the discussion but the strength of my convictions will be considerably less. I know that when posters who have never lived in the USA feel that they can negatively comment on our lifestyles or our politics, I take exception. Good or bad, it's my country and I am proud of it, so if someone belittles the life I have here my posts are likely to reflect my frustration with the comments that were made. In the same vain, it would be wrong for me to post something negative about the UK as I have only a "textbook knowledge" of life there.

That's not to say that anyone should be rude. Even at my most frustrated, I try to post with a clear head and think things through before I submit my post. Rudeness is completely counterproductive. For instance, Simon Cowell's Idol comments would be so much more helpful (and excepted) if he toned down the attitude. The contestants might come away with knowledge that could help them with their singing, even if they are voted out of the competition. In the same vain, if you want to get a point across, a well thought out position is going to be much more accepted than a comment liberally sprinkled with offensive language, no matter how many letters are "*" out.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, all we need to do is apply a little common courtesy and a respect for other peoples opinions.

Kaz

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by slayda

And then there are the threads that seemingly spring into being already 4 or 5 pages long and as a slow reading country boy is laboriously making his plodding way through them, he sees opinions on which he would like to comment only to have the thread's subject veer off two or three times before he gets to the end of the thread.

Or it takes me so long to write, edit, rewrite, edit... that three or more posts have gone out since I read the thread that I feel like a posted in the middle of someone else's thoughts!!

Kaz

[Lady Blue]

Originally Posted by slayda

And then there are the threads that seemingly spring into being already 4 or 5 pages long and as a slow reading country boy is laboriously making his plodding way through them, he sees opinions on which he would like to comment only to have the thread's subject veer off two or three times before he gets to the end of the thread.

Originally Posted by kazbates

Or it takes me so long to write, edit, rewrite, edit... that three or more posts have gone out since I read the thread that I feel like a posted in the middle of someone else's thoughts!!

Kaz

I'm so glad I'm not the only one this happens to. My posts always seem to be out of sequence to what is being discussed when my post actually shows up. Then I feel like I'm off topic because things have veered around the curve and gone down another street. When I'm working on a post, even a short one, life seems to interrupt constantly, along with my thoughts jumping around, so that I'm thrown totally off balance and it takes much longer than I originally anticipated. I also try to read what I've written before I click submit to check for typing errors and the tone I'm using. I don't want to appear any "stupider" or confrontational than I am or intend to be, just for speed's sake. I'm often unsuccessful but I still try.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by Lady Blue

I'm so glad I'm not the only one this happens to. My posts always seem to be out of sequence to what is being discussed when my post actually shows up. Then I feel like I'm off topic because things have veered around the curve and gone down another street. When I'm working on a post, even a short one, life seems to interrupt constantly, along with my thoughts jumping around, so that I'm thrown totally off balance and it takes much longer than I originally anticipated. I also try to read what I've written before I click submit to check for typing errors and the tone I'm using. I don't want to appear any "stupider" or confrontational than I am or intend to be, just for speed's sake. I'm often unsuccessful but I still try.

I do the same thing! I even use the dictionary to spell check and make sure the definitions are the ones I intended. With so many people posting from all over the world, I don't want to offend anyone by using a word that could be misconstrued either due to regional usage or content.

My life also gets in the way of the timeliness of my posts. Especially, when my 8 year old daughter sees someone's avatar that she likes and makes me go back through the thread to show her other avatars! She loves to look at all the ones containing animals. She was particulary enraptured with the pirate guinea pig and the chihuahuas!!

By the way, Lady Blue, I have always enjoyed the wit of your posts and never noticed a lack of timeliness.

[Lady Blue]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

I’ve often wondered what emotional and educational coinage is at stake when reasonable people disagree to the point of rudeness. I realize that differing personalities often dictate the tone of written discourse, but I’ve also often wondered if two people met who had diametrically opposite views would later find themselves drinking a glass of wine as they discussed their issues, or if they would be ignoring one another. Or would there be an argument right there next to the bar/restaurant?

We’ve often heard a member or a moderator say something to the effect that [this or that comment] was rude, and often – but not always, unfortunately – the person would come back and make a gracious apology and all would be forgiven. And I’ve seen the opposite, as well.

I’m not going to mention names here, but even in the Conservatory there is sometimes a recurring thematic verbal assault upon one member or another. I realize passions run high, but were some of us raised this way, to be intolerant of other’s views? Generally writing, why does this happen? What precipitated this event? Are we that much wedded to our ideals that we sometimes forget what it means to be human? Or is this, indeed, part of what it means to be human?

I think this is fodder for an interesting discussion. Strangely, however, I expect some passionate comments (and the rude remark or two?) if we decide to pursue this discussion.

Don

When I first read this original post I wanted to comment but then saw that HarryT and others, in being quicker to repsond, already touched on some of the points I would have made, and so I just moved on.

Upon reflection, being several days later, I've decided to go ahead and post my thoughts anyway. It's just as acceptable to post like-minded views as well as opposing ones I believe.

The following is a partial quote of my own words taken from a PM between myself and an individual whom I will not name, and I will alter (or add to) the original wording as necessary to keep that privacy in tact. We had this PM exchange several days before Dr. Drib started this thread and I feel compelled to repeat it here. I had initially contemplated starting a thread myself with these same thoughts in mind but Dr. Drib beat me to it. (Kudos Don)

. . . and as such I'm sure you'll agree . . . that the manner in which you post a remark and the words you choose to use, makes all the difference in the perception and understanding of what's being said. If I misunderstand the intent of a poster's words, I do apologize. I can not hear the inflection in their voice, see the expression on their face, the posture of their body, or telepathically read their mind for intent. All I can do is read their written words and judge from that evidence what their meaning is.

. . . when words such as "all" and "every" rather than "many" and "some" are used in making a statement, there is bound to be a strong reaction of some sort, even if it's not volitile. The reader is bound to react vigorously simply because of the "absolutes" implied in such statements.

Isn't this "absolute" wording as inflamatory as saying "all blacks are stupid," "all Indians are savages," "all Mexicans are thieves," and "all Pit Bulls are killers?" I would assume that most, if not all, of us on this forum are literate. That's why we're here, because we love to read. We have a certain respect for, and understanding of the written word. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to take the written word used in commentary literally, since there are no visual or audible cues to add subtle nuances to the meaning.

Conversely, a poster who is careful to utilize conditional words and state personal views or experiences rather than absolutes, is very often called to task and attacked for comments that were only perceived to be made, and not actually made.

I believe that the tone of any thread begins with the original poster of that thread. If the OP takes care to review their words as well as their thoughts and overall context of the post, and takes additional care not to incite the readers from the get-go, the thread has a damn good chance of maintaining civility and ensuring success in the exchange of ideas instead of arguments.

I also think it's important for each reader to re-read a post if necessary to refrain from a possible hostile knee-jerk reaction to something they simply misunderstood. I think this is especially true in a world wide forum such as MR where language and syntax doesn't always translate well.

Sometimes we're in such a hurry to respond quickly to a post that it backfires and needlessly ignites tempers and an ineffectual heated exchange ensues. We should probably all slow down just a bit. We're not speed reading through a novel here. We're dealing with real people who have ideas, opinions and emotions. And disagree as we often will, it seems a waste of time and energy (and a real risk of alienating good friends) to damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead without taking a deep breath first. It takes twice as long to explain what you really meant as it would to state it carefully in the first place. I'm sure we'll still sometimes be misunderstood but to a much lesser degree and maybe with less severity than otherwise would be the case.

But that's just me . . .

[Ea]

Originally Posted by kazbates

...

I know that when I am commenting about something near and dear to my heart my opinion is going to be much stronger than a topic in which I might only have a passing interest. I may still want to participate in the discussion but the strength of my convictions will be considerably less. I know that when posters who have never lived in the USA feel that they can negatively comment on our lifestyles or our politics, I take exception. Good or bad, it's my country and I am proud of it, so if someone belittles the life I have here my posts are likely to reflect my frustration with the comments that were made. In the same vain, it would be wrong for me to post something negative about the UK as I have only a "textbook knowledge" of life there.
...

Kaz

This made me a little puzzled. Do you say that you feel it's rude to comment negatively on things that one may not have a *lot* of knowledge about? I mean, even if you only have "textbook knowledge" you may very well have an opinion, it may even be an interesting opinion. Do you feel you should then refrain from commenting on e.g. life in the UK?

In the same vein, I wouldn't be able to state any negative opinion about religion because I am not religious myself so I don't exactly have insider knowledge. But what if I had negative opinions on religion? Shouldn't I be allowed to express them?

BTW, I'm not talking about comments along the line of "you're stupid" - that *is* frustrating - but comments put together with some thought behind them.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by Ea

This made me a little puzzled. Do you say that you feel it's rude to comment negatively on things that one may not have a *lot* of knowledge about? I mean, even if you only have "textbook knowledge" you may very well have an opinion, it may even be an interesting opinion. Do you feel you should then refrain from commenting on e.g. life in the UK?

In the same vein, I wouldn't be able to state any negative opinion about religion because I am not religious myself so I don't exactly have insider knowledge. But what if I had negative opinions on religion? Shouldn't I be allowed to express them?

BTW, I'm not talking about comments along the line of "you're stupid" - that *is* frustrating - but comments put together with some thought behind them.

You are absolutely correct that you are entitled to have an opinion whether that opinion is positive or negative. I tend to steer clear of religion and politics exactly because many people have such stong feelings and have usually already made up their minds on those subjects. Very little that I say regarding my own feelings will clarify my stance or change their's, so it's just better to keep the peace. Religion in particular is a "Hot Button" topic for most people. I am a Christian, sub-category: Roman Catholic. It is what I am and what I believe. Do I think everyone should be Christian? No. Do I personally think that people who do not believe in God are wrong? Obviously yes. Do I feel I have the right to tell them that? Absolutely not nor do I have the right to make them feel bad about their beliefs. They are entitled to live their life however they choose just as I do.

I can only (and do only) speak for myself when I say I don't like to speak negatively on things I know little about. I've noticed many times that people who take a negative position, particularly about the USA, do so based on a very wide and general knowledge of the topic. Often, this lack of intimate knowledge forges an opinion that could be taken as offensive to the people who do have that knowledge. I know that I am a bit sensitive when Non-Americans discuss my country in a derogatory way based on a "snapshot" of what they see. I have not and will not comment publicly on the election process in places like Great Britain and France simply because I do not live there and know little about the problems facing the residents on a daily basis. Yet people from all over the globe took an active and, at times, vitriolic role in our last presidential election. That's not to say that I don't have an opinion about "global" matters. My family and friends can attest to the fact that I am very passionate in my opinions. I just don't discuss them publicly or attach absolutes to them as discussed by Lady Blue in her post. However, I will admit that using a VERY touchy topic as my country probably wasn't the best choice to make my point about rudeness.

But to your original question about rudeness; no, I don't think it is rude to take a negative position. Taking one side or another on a topic is simply a choice. I personally prefer to speak on subjects I have a solid knowledge base from which to pull, particularly in an intellectual setting such as this forum and particularly when I am taking the negative viewpoint.
Kaz

[HarryT]

With the very greatest respect, Kaz, what the president of the United States does can - and often does - have an impact way beyond the borders of the US, so I think that those of us in other countries are entitled to have (and express) opinions on the US elections. It has far more effect on me who the president of the United States is than it affects you who the British prime minister is.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by HarryT

With the very greatest respect, Kaz, what the president of the United States does can - and often does - have an impact way beyond the borders of the US, so I think that those of us in other countries are entitled to have (and express) opinions on the US elections. It has far more effect on me who the president of the United States is than it affects you who the British prime minister is.

You are absolutely correct, HarryT, which is why I made the comment about my choice of examples being a poor one. Once again, it goes back to my posting about "what I know". I hadn't really considered the impact of our elections in the global arena. When it comes to the presidential elections, I have always felt that it boils down to the lesser of two evils! Who will do the least amount of damage to my little world. I would like to say that I am more enlightened and "globally aware" but I am afraid I am more apt to worry about my home, family and community than anything else. What I should have stayed with was the negative comments about life in the US, ie. education, gun control, etc. I sometimes feel that the rest of the world only gets a narrow view of us through the media. The same narrow view that I get about other countries. I do not want to base my opinions on what we are fed by the media and since I have no personal experience outside the US, I don't fell comfortable publicly voicing an opinion one way or the other.
Kaz

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by kazbates

What I should have stayed with was the negative comments about life in the US, ie. education, gun control, etc. I sometimes feel that the rest of the world only gets a narrow view of us through the media. The same narrow view that I get about other countries.

Unfortunately many Americans get a narrow and inaccurate view of ourselves through that same media, and those in other countries often have exactly the same problem. That same media tends to shape our thinking or ourselves and others, depending on what they show us. For instance, the Somali pirates are either a bunch of $#!*$ attacking innocents who need to be bombed out of existence, or desperate men from a hopelessly poor country who need serious help and aid, depending on whose media you tune in to.

That is always a danger, and it is up to individuals to look further than what the media tries to spoon-feed us, to get the truth.

One of the values of forums like this is to bring different sources of information together, which can help an individual see all sides, and make a more informed decision about a topic.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by kazbates

...

However, I will admit that using a VERY touchy topic as my country probably wasn't the best choice to make my point about rudeness.

But to your original question about rudeness; no, I don't think it is rude to take a negative position. Taking one side or another on a topic is simply a choice. I personally prefer to speak on subjects I have a solid knowledge base from which to pull, particularly in an intellectual setting such as this forum and particularly when I am taking the negative viewpoint.
Kaz

Thanks for the clarification. I almost understood you POV to be that it would be best of we all shut up out of politeness and only stuck to things that would not risk hurting anyone. To me, that's too close to a kind of self-censure that I really don't agree with.

I know what it can be like when you hear/see what the press in other countries write about your country, and what other says, but not everyone belives everything the press tells them. USA is also so big and makes so much 'noise' on the world scene that it would be expected. It goes the other way, too. I have seen some odd things said/written about Denmark, but usually I just shrug it off - it's not worth the effort (though, given the size of my country, I should probably be grateful they have heard of it at all )