cynicist Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Thanks for taking the time, Robert...I'm not sure if you're asking "what actually happens (including internally)" or "what crazy story are you making up that you're trying to avoid by staying engaged"...I think it's probably the first, so I'll go w/ that one, if that's not it I can try again. You continue engaging because you imagine some negative outcome if you do not. (you've already established that you knew the outcome of the argument itself, so it can't be because you think you are convincing them) What would happen if you chose not to participate from the beginning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamuelS Posted July 8, 2014 Author Share Posted July 8, 2014 this image comes to mind:Well, in the case of somebody misrepresenting my arguments "Sam says X" when I clearly said "not X" (or not so clearly, perhaps, in the case of more complex ideas), I think that if I don't stick around and clear it up, people will believe I said the opposite of what I said, or whatever the misrepresentation is...And I just had a "light-bulb moment" that seems to fit my original "why?"...in the case of this particular group, I joined with the specific intent of becoming a better communicator (in order to spread ideas more effectively), and when an interaction goes like that, it may as well be a giant flashing neon sign saying "people don't understand you, you suck at communicating!"If I didn't engage at all, there'd be no appreciable difference "in the world" at large, but I wouldn't be misunderstood and I'd probably be happier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynicist Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I think that if I don't stick around and clear it up, people will believe I said the opposite of what I said, or whatever the misrepresentation is... Right. You think that if you don't continue to argue and 'defend the truth' then the other person 'wins' by default. I know from experience it is pretty frustrating and often I would respond even if I didn't particularly enjoy it. It comes from a desire to control/change how the outcome is perceived by others, which is fundamentally manipulative and somewhat disrespectful to their intelligence. I get the feeling of anxiety, but if you are making solid logical arguments and the other person is simply misrepresenting you, then wouldn't logical/intelligent people be able to identify that? And if you are trying to change the minds of idiots who are moved more by who can deliver a smackdown better, or who has the better presentation, then you automatically lose anyway when you have to resort to their level of discourse. I've met a few really awesome anarchists in the group I'm having these arguments in...I don't know if that's the "carrot", or what...it sure doesn't seem to be doing much for anxiety management in the moment, but maybe it's bringing it to the surface to deal with now so I can move on? This clearly has more to do with how others in the group perceive you. I think if you can feel free to call people out when they are 'misunderstanding' your argument and end it when you perceive manipulation on their part, that will go a long way to relieving your frustration and showing a positive example for other anarchists. I have to ask though, how is this a group of statists mixed with anarchists? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamuelS Posted July 8, 2014 Author Share Posted July 8, 2014 It comes from a desire to control/change how the outcome is perceived by others, which is fundamentally manipulative and somewhat disrespectful to their intelligence. I get the feeling of anxiety, but if you are making solid logical arguments and the other person is simply misrepresenting you, then wouldn't logical/intelligent people be able to identify that? I can see that, and it makes sense...I really don't have much respect for the intelligence of many in that group, which of course leads to the question "why am I arguing with idiots?"...and I sure try not to, I'm pretty quick to block people when I don't think anything productive can come from it...this creates another "problem" -- if somebody I've blocked is reading it, they're only seeing the misrepresentation of my perspective, this was definitely the case in this instance and something I considered, consciously, as I continued to engage... This clearly has more to do with how others in the group perceive you. I think if you can feel free to call people out when they are 'misunderstanding' your argument and end it when you perceive manipulation on their part, that will go a long way to relieving your frustration and showing a positive example for other anarchists. I think you're right...and the troller really knows how to set the hook w/ me, I was actually about to disengage fairly early in, when the guy said something like "oh, that's right, run away when you've clearly lost the argument, just like all the other ayncraps" along with some other controversial statement...and I freakin' knew I was being manipulated, right then and there it was crystal clear, and I still swallowed that bullsh*t -- hook, line, and sinker. I have to ask though, how is this a group of statists mixed with anarchists? It's a debate group...well, it's supposed to be...I can't speak for others, I think there's similar motivations amoung a bunch of us, but I joined the group to introduce people to the ideas, to show them the gun in the room...the fact that all of them have serious issues with the current system seemed like an opening, but has proven to be a mirage or perhaps more accurately a projection of my own interest in exploring ideas logically despite any discomfort it may cause.Of course, all this leads me to "why didn't I block the guy sooner?"...well, he's really quite intelligent, and I know he could understand the arguments if he wanted to, and I want him to want to...I want to be right, and I want others to be right, not like "agree with me, dammit", more "is this the truth? I think so, but lets explore it." -- while it's a bitter pill, it seems you've hit the bullseye in calling it manipulative...aww crap.Thanks for taking the time and sharing your analysis, Robert, this is quite helpful!I am left pondering...I want more people to understand this stuff, I want people to want to know the truth...that's not ignoble, is it? I know before I joined that group I'd gotten great pleasure in helping people 1-on-1 that actually wanted to learn and expressed that desire, I think next time I've got the burning desire to discuss these things I should seek out more interested parties. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynicist Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I think you're right...and the troller really knows how to set the hook w/ me, I was actually about to disengage fairly early in, when the guy said something like "oh, that's right, run away when you've clearly lost the argument, just like all the other ayncraps" along with some other controversial statement...and I freakin' knew I was being manipulated, right then and there it was crystal clear, and I still swallowed that bullsh*t -- hook, line, and sinker. What an asshole. I want to be clear that if I were in the same group when that happened I might respond as you did. You can't expect to always be above that sort of thing with histories like we have, that's why it's so toxic to be around people like that. They trigger us. I am left pondering...I want more people to understand this stuff, I want people to want to know the truth...that's not ignoble, is it? I know before I joined that group I'd gotten great pleasure in helping people 1-on-1 that actually wanted to learn and expressed that desire, I think next time I've got the burning desire to discuss these things I should seek out more interested parties. That is a beautiful impulse that I happen to share, I think you just need to find higher quality people who are more deserving of your energy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts