Probably worth articulating: I really dislike arguing. By the time we've gotten down to anything that feels remotely like arguing it feels to me like we've already lost our shot at making any real progress.
Show this thread
There's a particular kind of person, usually male, who wants to pretend that arguments are emotionally neutral decontextualized arenas for truth-seeking. This is not even remotely true. Arguments are for winning, and winning is about status, ego, identity, etc.
-
-
Much more fun than arguing with someone, although harder to pull off sincerely online, is getting curious; why did person X say thing Y that seems wrong to me? What life experiences etc. led to it? What kind of world must they live in for that to be a thing they'd say?
Show this thread -
Harder to pull this off online because it really helps to be able to communicate sincere curiosity via tone of voice, body language, etc. And if you can't muster sincere curiosity that's itself interesting. What do you feel instead? Defensive? What's needing to be defended?
Show this thread -
Defensiveness makes it impossible to really take in anything that another person is saying, at a level that would actually mean anything. There is no real learning that can take place from defensiveness. From here the fun move is investigating the defensiveness itself.
Show this thread -
It's very rich to be in e.g. circling / authentic relating contexts which hold defensiveness as something that can be taken as object. Loads more fun moving to "I notice I get defensive when you talk about admiring Jordan Peterson" than arguing!
Show this thread -
This is a real example. It turned out the person in question was afraid that Jordan Peterson might be right about some stuff that his friends and family disagreed about, and that if he believed that stuff they might all reject him.
Show this thread -
Circling / AR culture calls getting this level of detail about what's going on for someone "getting someone's world." Mutual world-getting is a million times more fun, educational, connecting, meaningful, etc. than arguing. Once you see it there's no going back, really.
Show this thread -
And unfortunately there's mostly not enough cultural context to do it online, as far as I can tell. I imagine most people would just be weirded out. The level of questioning you need to do it might seem invasive, and most people aren't good enough at introspection anyway.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You may like https://books.google.com/books/about/Dialogue.html?id=cBbxXWEUFsoC … - levels of dialogue, and how to reach inquiry and curiosity. Too many people pause only to reload. (I wish I could remember attribution for that thought, but it has stuck with me.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.