LJ confessional

[juldea]

Somewhat tangentially to what I think of as my social circle are the people who actively participate in the "LJ Confessional," which is just a post made about once a year, open to anonymous comments, for people to let loose whatever's on their mind. swashbucklr is I think the closest of my friends to that group, and his post announcing the opening of

Comments

[siderea]

This reply is heroic and awesome, just so's you know. :) You're exactly right that it's like you don't know how to talk otherwise. It's a habit, and habits are hard to break. It feels like AUGH WHAT ELSE COULD I POSSIBLY DO?! Also, with a heaping side of, AUGH THIS IS LIKE SAYING ALL THOSE AWFUL PEOPLE IN THE PAST WERE RIGHT.

You've already figured out several somethings else you can do: ask questions, relate your reaction, and think through consequences.

And yes, that's what a clarification is. And "debate" is an interesting choice of word. When someone says, "this thing you're doing, I don't like it", one has the choice of debating it, but it's not the only choice. Debating it means arguing that they're wrong; one can also say, "Huh, maybe you're right, let me think about that" or, "I'm skeptical, but maybe you can convince me" or probably other things, too.

That said, in a debate with someone, myself I generally find clarifying my position to be a very weak position to be in. Best defense really is a good offense; if I'm determined to win an argument, I'm not going to be clarifying my position, I'm going to be clarifying my opponent's position.

[alexx_kay]

"When someone says, "this thing you're doing, I don't like it", one has the choice of debating it, but it's not the only choice."

Some other choices, appropriate in some circumstances:

* I acknowledge that I do, in fact, do this thing.
* I value your opinion enough to attempt to change this behavior.
* I value doing this thing too much to change it just because you don't like it.

Note the clear distinction between the issue of whether the other person is factually correct, and the issue of whether you share their value judgments about the matter under discussion.

I generally have found it useful to debate matters of fact until agreement is reached. Contrariwise, I have found it it useful to *discuss* matters of values until *understanding* is reached; after that point, if you don't agree, going further rarely accomplishes anything.

[juldea]

"I value your opinion enough to want to understand it more, and thus I will share with you what I think is going on, with the expectation that you will return how you see that thing differently, until I reach a level of understanding such that I can determine whether I value your opinion or this facet of myself more and thus change or not."

:P

I... am frustrated, because I am perceiving your final paragraph to be intended as a lesson or lecture, while I perceive that what you say there is what I do. So here we are again, someone is saying "this thing you're doing is bad," but I don't acknowledge that I do it, and I can't attempt to change it because I don't understand it, and I don't know if I value it because I don't know what it is!

I might have fewer spoons today than yesterday. Sorry. :/

My bad.

[alexx_kay]

My post was largely expanding on Siderea's point which I quoted, in a slightly different direction. I thought what she said was true as far as it went, but could benefit from considering more details. I was thinking of this in the abstract, and not in relation to the upthread discussion of behaviors you may or may not engage in. In hindsight, I see how what I wrote did not properly express that, and I apologize for the lack of clarity.

[juldea]

Well, of course all the people in the past were right. I've known my diplomacy style has SOME kind of problem, I just haven't ever figured out what it is! It's even hard to see now, of course. :)

Early in my comment to you, I used both "debate" and "conversation". By the end of the comment, I was using just "debate" because I was thinking more of political "discussions" of late and less of usual conversation.

I doubt my ability to have a good offense in arguments. I think the reason I'm so stubborn is that otherwise, I would be changing my mind in each debate to match the opinion of whoever was most vociferously arguing against me. Learning to dig in my heels when I've thought something through keeps me from losing all my convictions to the latest smooth-sounding statement. :/