Do you view disagreements here on Fluther as a means to learn and grow?

I lasted all of 2 seconds in that video.

I’ve learned over the last 10 years on Fluther that people end up just getting angry instead of learning and growing. There are rare exceptions.

@Caravanfan -That’s 2 seconds of pure, relaxing bliss!
:)

I view some disagreements that way, yes. I’ve learned a lot from posting and debating on internet forums since I was 14. I wouldn’t keep doing this if it was all useless and frustrating to me (I think I’d be a very different person today if I had never joined sites like these). However, in that time I’ve come to be able to differentiate between a disagreement that I can learn from and one that is going nowhere. Disagreements where the two parties are talking past each other, insulting each other, or engaging in gaslighting and other disingenuousness aren’t worth my time. Fluther is also unique in that the user base is very small and we all know each other’s opinions by now. Rarely am I surprised by what anyone has to say. Doesn’t mean there isn’t still more to learn. Hence why I often ask questions here after I see the same questions on other sites. I’d like to know the opinions of everyone here too.

One could argue that all disagreements present that opportunity. And a person with your cheerful nature and sense of humor would instinctively wish that it would be so.

However, and apologies for being negative, there seems to be a lot of people on Fluther who are trapped in a state of being unhappy and pissed off. And I tell you what, at that point there is no learning and growing.

By the way, I have learned plenty of music from you, as well as the occasional glimpse into the bizarre. But then again, we don’t disagree much.

Yes I do. I learn a ton here.

I watched the video only for a minute. I fast forwarded a few times, was a missing something? Just scenery, and nothing I could sit an watch to long. Want to see interesting scenery? Join the facebook group View From My Window, it is fantastic. People posting from all over the world, some write about their situation, it is truly gorgeous. Views of from all the continents, and people posting from NYC who have traveled there to help the hospitals. Fantastic expansive views of coastline and prairie and mountains, and small views of little backyards that are just as interesting. You can always leave the group if you find you don’t like it. https://www.facebook.com/groups/viewfrommywindow/

@josie -Nope, we don’t :)
@JLeslie – You almost beat @Caravanfan‘s record.
No, there is nothing but relaxing tongue in cheek music in that video.
I haven’t been on FB in years but love the idea of that group. :)

How can I answer this without sounding arrogant & all superior? XD
I mean look, it would be folly to suggest no one here could maybe enlighten me, a bit, on certain subjects…I guess lol I’m not coming across well am I?

No, but listen, if disagreements crop up with those I think of as friends-ish, then that’s cool, can’t always agree or share the same beliefs now can we?

When them frosty faced buggers from moodsville rock up & loudly announce their disagreements with anything I say, well then that’s different.
Them I toy with before chewing them up & spitting them out…hoorah!

@ucme -That was a fine answer!
Now, how did you feel about the “thinkin’ music” in my q?
Did it influence your answer in any way? :D

Maybe someone else here will join the Facebook group. It’s beautiful.

People can have disagreements but its HOW they react to something that may contradict what they know or had learnt in the past?
The music is relaxing and I like the outdoors, so I shared this video on Facebook for others who may need this respite today during isolation.
Its beautiful. Thanks for the link.

I view all disagreements this way. If nothing else, we learn how people react to certain types of arguments or methods of engagement. But with luck, we learn how people with a different point of view think and reason.

@Inspired_2write -You’re welcome :)

@SavoirFaire -It is interesting to see the different reactions.

I’ve learned a lot from my time on this site, and I like trying to understand how other people see the world.

People are rarely going to change their minds in a single discussion, or even in many discussions. Our beliefs and convictions just aren’t that flimsy. And when a discussion is being publicly observed, people are often more likely to stand their ground than agree with someone positioned as an “opponent.” It doesn’t mean that they aren’t thinking about the discussions on their own. (I certainly do, and if others don’t that would be disappointing but I’d never know differently.)

@Soubresaut – Very logically reasoned. D
I think discerning between a reasoned, objectively derived position and that of the subjective and emotional should be easy for any logical mind.

No. I will watch other people argue, although I don’t necessarily read every word. I marvel at how people can write paragraph after paragraph arguing or debating. I felt that way when people on Fluther used to argue about Christianity and how stupid some thought it was (or is). I marvel now at people debating about Trump and whether he’s dumb or dangerous.

Nobody was changing anybody else’s mind about Christianity or Atheism, and nobody is changing anybody else’s mind about Trump.

For myself, very rarely now will I argue with people. I just don’t have the time or energy, and I really don’t care to argue. Too much drama. Maybe it’s a sign that I’m getting old.

@jca2 I completely understand that reasoning ;)

Debates are not about changing your interlocutor’s mind. They are about clarifying your own thinking and perhaps convincing some of the observers. But for the reasons that @Soubresaut mentioned, it is very unlikely that any party to a public debate is going to say “you’re right, I’m wrong, thanks for the correction” unless the issue is very clear cut.

And sadly, two of the jellies who I have seen have that reaction when an issue was less than clear cut have since passed away.

@SavoirFaire – If one is going to debate at all, one should be clear in their position.
Discussions are another thing. People may have conversation with others of opposing views without resorting to ad hominem bs.
Let me know when that happens here. XD ;)

@SavoirFaire I agree. :) I often debate to test my arguments and see how my position holds up against a challenge to it. (Or if I’m undecided but leaning a certain way, I want to hear both sides to see which side comes off stronger).

@lucillelucillelucille One can be clear in one’s position and still have more to learn. Just because a knife is sharp doesn’t mean you can’t sharpen it more. And just because a position is clear to you doesn’t mean you cannot clarify it further (for yourself or for others).

Also, I don’t buy into the newly popular debate/discussion/dialogue distinction. It seems artificial and forced to me. In any case, ad hominem BS can be found in all three.

And I’ve had plenty of conversations here that didn’t involve ad hominem BS.

@SavoirFaire – Discussions and debate are two different things but I do agree though that there can always be something new to learn.

“And I’ve had plenty of conversations here that didn’t involve ad hominem BS.”
Me too :)

@lucillelucillelucille Discussions and debates may be different things, but I don’t think there’s any way of defining a clear distinction between the two that will not fail in the face of real world examples (at least not if we are defining them as mutually exclusive, as the newly popular distinction attempts to do).

@SavoirFaire- The point is that there are debates and then there are discussions. Debates hold contentions whereas discussions offer variations.
What is the newly popular distinction?

@lucillelucillelucille The newly popular distinction is that debates are about disagreements, whereas discussions are about putting a lot of ideas out there.* This is simply not true, nor has it ever been. It’s an artificial framework that doesn’t really map onto what actual conversations look like.

——————————
* I am simplifying a bit here. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty, people who insist on this distinction distinguish the two along various dimensions, such as goals of the conversation (e.g., winning vs. sharing) and method of engagement (e.g., competitive vs. cooperative). As someone who studies—and engages in—arguments for a living, this attempt to distinguish between debates and discussions (and sometimes dialogues as well) just don’t match up with either the history of ideas or my lived experience as a philosopher.

@SavoirFaire -Words do mean things. Obfuscation is one.Sophistry is another.

@lucillelucillelucille Of course words mean things. I make that point all the time. But people can have discussions that involve disagreements, and debates can put lots of ideas out there. Debates can be cooperative. Discussions can be competitive. In objecting to the newly popular distinction, I am arguing against an artificial gerrymandering of words that obscures their meanings. And I am doing this precisely because words mean things. After all, we must understand what a word means and what it does not mean in order to use it well.

@SavoirFaire -;)

Debates involve differences of opinion. In a formal debate, one side is pro a certain issue and the other side is con. Discussions tend to be more open ended, although they may involve differing opinions.

There is a tendency on Fluther for differences of opinion to go on beyond the point where they are of any use, but I have learned from those I disagree with, even if it is just to gain insight into how others think.

@LostInParadise – My reasons as well.

@lucillelucillelucille I appreciate it, but I feel like I should say that it’s not a concept I reasoned out. It’s one I learned about, and I just hope I explained it without too much distortion, and that I remember it myself when it’s relevant.

I’m not sure I sort positions into “logical” and “emotional.” I think I try my best (mind you I’m still learning) to understand the reasons a person gives, and how those reasons fit together? But I don’t know that I think of logic and emotion as opposites.