Mental discombulations

[trixtah]

I don't know what's going on this week, but in the last few days I've encountered some points of view I fairly vehemently disagree with, from people I ordinarily respect to the utmost. With some of these opinions, at least I know why the individual concerned has that belief, and that does help. Others, I have no idea where it comes from.

It's tricky. It's interesting what a double-standard I find myself having, since I certainly won't argue things as much as I would ordinarily... but that's the nature of the double-standard beast when you know someone personally.

It's unsettling. Normally I can think of some middle ground, but in some of these instances, I can't. It's having to rejig my opinions of people in relation to touchy areas - while not having that middle ground to fall back on - that is the disconcerting part.

Then there are implications of what that means about me. I'm obviously not as tolerant as I like to think I am. When it's someone who I don't care about, they're easily dismissed with "So, they're a fuckwit/wierd/ignorant". When it concerns someone where none of those things are patently the case, and I feel so bothered by it, it makes me wonder about the broader question of just how much I expect people to march in lockstep with my own opinions for me to want to be around them. And the answer to that question, for me, doesn't seem to be a particularly edifying one. Hm.

Comments

[ataniell93.livejournal.com]

Would it be helpful to you to be able to think the other person is "wrong about X" instead of "a fuckwit/a weirdo/an ignoramus"? Because very intelligent, decent people are frequently wrong about things, and you never know when you'll find out that you are one of them (oops). Many people, and I include myself in this, have strong opinions that are based firmly in personal experience, personal history, religious belief and family coping strategies. These opinions are very resistant to change, and arguing with the person without taking those things into account is only going to make the opinions more deeply entrenched than ever.

There is a fairly long list of topics I try to avoid arguing about because if the other person is as entrenched as I am, it'll just be time wasted in a pissing match, and if the other person is going to insist on arguing only from objective facts and logic, they're not going to want to hear about my personal history or my religious beliefs. (In fact, I honestly don't expect my personal history or religious interpretations to convince anyone who doesn't share my personal history or religious belief--but that doesn't mean I can easily set them aside, you know?)

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Heh, I'm wrong about X quite frequently... and I rely on my sane intelligent friends to point that out to me. But yes, I take the lazy labelling route with people I don't know, although they have to be quite consistent with their idiocies for me to feel that way (ie. not just topic X, but Y, Z and ABC as well). It's a bad habit, which I'm slowly eroding. Slowly.

Strong opinions that are different to mine are absolutely fine. For example, the interchange we've just had on the LMB list is in the category of "relevant and interesting perspective", and is totally consistent with what I know of you already. It certainly didn't spark this train of thought, but it was an interesting contrast.

I've just had a couple of instances lately where I've encountered some ideologies that weren't consistent with my view of someone... but I think in that instance I lack the history behind them. And that, as you point out, is often just as important as the objective facts and logic that we present.

So, I think my thing is to learn to ask "why do you think that?" without it sounding like an accusation or an attack on someone's closely-held-yet-not-impinging-on-me beliefs.

[ataniell93.livejournal.com]

If more people would ask casually, "why do you think/believe that" instead of "How COULD you...?" the world would be such a better place. A friend of mine who is also Zionist recently had the experience of someone coming onto her journal and accusing her of suppressing all dissent (despite the fact that Marna and several other people had disagreed politely with something she had said) because he opened the discussion by calling her an anti-Arab bigot, which she is not; however, she is rather religious and has taken several courses on the history of the area, all of which have led her to believe as she does, and this person does not understand why his disinterest in her reasoning has led her to ban him from her journal, because she does not like being called names and yelled at by total strangers!

There are some things that I just can't stomach, but they're all hate-based types of opinions: racist, anti-Semitic, sexist, homophobic, &c.

Our discussion was one in which personal history is actually relevant, because if one doesn't know that many very gifted children flounder in life without proper guidance because their parents, not being gifted and not being wealthy and in many cases lacking free time, one can easily get the idea that gifted kids can take care of themselves. In fact the moderately gifted (Hermione Granger-type) do take care of themselves; it's the ones whose advanced intellect compared to chronological age make them unable to interact socially with peers (and often irritating to teachers) who need special help, and lots of it.

(My own parents decided that they would send me to university at 15 based on test scores and the fact that my father was a professor of business at a local school. This was, bluntly put, a disaster--though it didn't seem so during the first two years when I made straight A's because a small university in West Virginia presented no more challenges than my one year in high school had. After the date rape at 16, graduation at 18 with a BA that I was wholly unsuited for because I never really explored the possibilities, the marriage at 19 and the flunking out of grad school at 20, it should have been obvious, but by then my parents' own drinking problems and my brother's drug addiction had long since taken center stage...)

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

I forgot to say, ICON!!!111!!!!!

Veerry nice. You can keep yer Sean Bloody Connerys, Mr Lindsay pwns them all mightly.

[ataniell93.livejournal.com]

Thanks! Howzabout this 'un?

I have a LOT of Robert Lindsay icons. Robert Lindsay is to me as Sam West is to Marna. Help yourself, just credit me or the maker (if it wasn't me). He's also the PB for my RPG chara jus_ad_bellum.

[saluqi.livejournal.com]

Hrm. I think it's often possible to explore the position in greater depth without arguing or otherwise creating more angst than understanding. Of course, sometimes that takes patience that might not result in much of a payoff in terms of greater understanding (religious questions spring immediately to mind). And sometimes it takes an act of strength and/or courage when the relationship is already under pressure; the old rock the boat issue.

I find that testing "person I know" to "person I don't know" approaches and attitudes is a really useful process personally. In my view, people are often hampered by excusing too much from those they know, and rejecting too much from those they don't. Not always, but often.

I also like what ataniell93 has to say re "wrong about blah" as opposed to "a fuckwit"

As to whether I need people to march in lockstep, I don't, but there are some matters where a particular point of view will necessarily limit how close I get to a person.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Absolutely, with all your points. One problem I have is in being able to explore someone's position without it coming across like I do think they're a fuckwit. While it's very rare that I'll feel that when in an actual face-to-face dialogue with someone, I apparently project it (or something that puts some people on the defensive), and I still haven't worked out why that is.

And yeah, rocking the boat when needed relationship-wise is certainly something I've been historically bad at, although I think that is one area I'm starting to get the hang of. Thank god.

Too right with the contrast between who we know and who we don't. It's a big thing to gate someone into the privileged trusted few who can tell me that I'm being a fuckwit. It shouldn't mean I have a fortress mentality about those who aren't in that privileged group.

That's a good observation about particular POVs limiting the amount of closeness one can have with someone. Hopefully I'm more in that boat than the utterly-controlling mindset. I suppose looking at one's friends is a useful perspective-gaining exercise there. :-)

[aquaeri.livejournal.com]

Excuse me while I squee at Jadir.

I think I'm too tired to contribute anything relevant to the actual discussion.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Honestly, all these people who get distracted by the cute puppays?

Who can blame them. :-)

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

I've been suffering under this lately as well, and haven't come up with a good way to work with it (although there are some useful-sounding suggestions in the comments here). I mostly just sort of "overlook" those aspects of the people in question and interact with them only on other topics. In some cases, though, it's been really changing my impressions, and I wonder if it's doing so fairly.

[filkferengi]

I appreciate your honesty; goodness knows, it's seldom easy. You've definitely given me something to think about.