mjdsharks

I guess I am pursuing because he is my brother and at one point we were close. I guess I was just looking for someone with a similar scenario and hoping someone could have some advice on how to speak to him for him to realize that his relationships fall by the wayside because of his behavior. Our relationship isn't the only one that has had this sort of fate. Thanks.

I wasn't sure where to post this so I picked this category. I hope it is appropriate. I am not sure what to do about my brother so I thought I would come here to see what you insightful folks have to say. For years, my relationship with my younger brother has essentially been a "one way street". I am 32 years of age and he is 29 so I think it is safe to say this started in my early 20s and has continued ever since. I probably ask my brother to "hang out" once a week and if he ever commits to it, he cancels about an hour before. We have played on the same hockey team for years so we do see each other, but as far as a relationship goes, I know very little about him. Within the last year, the disease I have that was causing cancer was put into remission by alternative medicines. He has had no intrigue into the fact that I was developing cancer and had a 30% chance of living past 5 years if and when the cancer developed. I have tried to discuss non-aggression, his views on politics, religion, philosophy, society; all to no avail. I have attempted to engage him in "shallower" type hang-outs where we just watch a sporting event or something like that. I have thought about this for hours and haven't come up with anything to do. I know there essentially is nothing I can do (forcing him), but I do want to approach him about his behavior. I have attempted in the recent past to ask him why he seems disconnected and distant and he simply replies that he has 2 children and a full-time job. It is my sincere opinion that is a just a cover because most of us have similar responsibilities and yet have time to develop some amazingly deep, loving relationships. If anyone has a similar story and has some advice, feel free to offer it up. A thousand thanks in advance. Thank you. MJD

To add something quick, the friend who I was discussing this with has openly stated I should be arrested if I disobey the law, even if the law is unjust. He has stated if I don't pay taxes or use marijuana he would advocate I be arrested. Would it have been better to not engage in discussion with someone like that knowing that I won't converse at my highest potential? I agree that I wrote his arguments off due to their lack of precision and past history of him advocating violence on me. Knowing this, I am guessing I should have recognized my inability to fairly try to hear his point of view, and withdrew before engaging...

Tyler, I will definetly read that book. Thank you. I understand what you are saying. I think it would be wiser to help people be more precise in their language during a conversation as to make sure I understand their point of view, instead of just addressing what they have said. Looking back, I understand that he didn't mean what he said and you seemed to be able to translate his actual words into precise meanings which I need to draw out of people so we can discuss that. Thanks for all the insight everyone. Take care.

I got into a discussion with a long time friend regarding abortion. I don't shy away from difficult topics that people get emotional about. The conversation is paraphrased below. Me: I don't see a fundamental difference between murder and killing an unborn baby. Friend: I don't care how righteous you are, you have no right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Me: The baby is not a part of the woman's body in the same way a spleen or appendix is. When does the baby become detached from the woman? After he leaves the vaginal canal? When the umbilical cord is cut? The baby has every right to not have force initiated on him. Friend: Babies are not babies until they are babies. Me: You can't honestly define a baby by saying he is a baby. Life is defined as "the property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms or inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the environment". On a cellular level, you are ending the human life without his or her consent, so by definition, that is murder. Friend: I think we are both smart enough to tell the difference between a fetus and 8 months into the pregnancy. Me: A fetus at 8 months is still a fetus. I don't follow. Friend: Well it doesn't matter how passionate you are about this, it isn't your choice. We both have valid points but ultimately, we don't have a right to make any choices for someone else. Me: Then can I rape someone because you can't tell me what to do wit my body? Friend: Wow...really Matt? Me: Yes, by that logic, I could make that argument. I don't think you have a valid point there. Friend: Well, I guess this is a win for you! Yay! Me: Why are you using sarcasm instead of discussing the topic? You haven't addressed the biological definition of life I provided, didn't address specifically when it is okay to end the life, didn't discuss where a woman's body begins and where the baby's body begins. You just became sarcastic Friend: You are being an arrogant prick. He then "defriended" me on Facebook and I am assuming wouldn't answer a text. This is just one example of how I talk with people. Friend: Me: Dsayers, thank you for pointing that out. I need to be more specific in what I am trying to state. What I should have said is "how can I get people to be more open to the non aggression principle? I will check out the Bomb in the Brian series and see if that helps.

I'm sorry for the confusing manner in which I conveyed my issue. If I bring up issues politically, socially, etc and say what I believe and justify what believe by explaining the NAP, people see that as arrogant, because I offer no room for exceptions. I try to explain that this is a universal principle and not open to what I or they want to believe. They see this lack of "wiggle room" as arrogant but I see it as something that needs to be practiced universally. I have also been accused of being arrogant because I am not interested in using emotions when debating. I was just looking for some advice on how to deal with emotional attacks. Again, sorry for the strange wording of my post. I am at work and have a broken hand so typing eloquent and well thought out posts are a bit difficult until my cast comes off

Thank you in advance for any help I receive. My question to you all is "How do I deal with continued name-calling and emotional responses from friends when discussing philosophy?" I adhere to the NAP and expect everyone to do the same. I am tactful in helping people understand this objective principle and never resort to emotional responses, ad hominem, etc. I have recently been called names from long time friends. I continually get called "robotic", "your delivery makes me barf", "arrogant", "cocky", etc. Even my wife has said I am hard to talk to and come off as cocky. Is there a way that I can deliver a message of truth in a manner that helps people open up to discussing philosophy? I know that I am hard to talk to because I bring arguments to any topic, while others generally resort to how topics make them feel, or what emotional response they have. However, that, in my opinion, is not my job to be "easier" to talk to by lowering my standards as to get a point across. Any help is appreciated. Thank you