Disagreement vs. argument

[beefche]

When does a disagreement turn into an argument? I see it so often in forums when 2 or more people have a disagreement that some will interpret as arguing (sometimes I agree and other times I don't). So, I'm curious on what your personal criteria are for when disagreement becomes arguing.

[Vort]

Technically speaking, an "argument" is simply a discussion or a point under discussion. But the way we generally talk about things, an "argument" is always bad, so I take its meaning that way for the purposes of responding to your question.

A disagreement has one characteristic:

1. People disagree.

There is not really anything wrong with this. In a conversation, this disagreement can become a source of discussion, which can be enjoyable and mutually beneficial.

When does this discussion become an argument? I think there are two criteria, either of which might be sufficient to classify it as an argument and both of which almost certainly qualify it as an argument:

1. Bad feelings ensue in one or both (or many, if there are more than two) parties

2. Communication ceases, which is signaled by some or all of the following:

a. people quit considering what the "other side" is trying to say or understand understand what the other person really means

b. people won't respond rationally, or perhaps not at all

c. if they do respond, it is only on a "feeling" basis rather than a rational basis

Whenever you hear someone say, "Well, that's just the way I feel!", you may be quite certain that honest discussion has ceased, that they are no longer open to considering ideas other than their own, and that anything else from that party will only be argumentative.

[Misshalfway]

A little push back never hurt anyone. It keeps us from getting to secure with the quicksand on which we walk on.

Edited August 15, 2008 by Misshalfway

[Vort]

Beefche, how did you get an animated GIF for your avatar?

[pam]

the quicksand on which we walk on.

Sounds like something from one our favorite movies.

[pam]

Beefche, how did you get an animated GIF for your avatar?

Have you also been mesmerized by it? Do you find yourself staring at it for 18 minutes at a time? Kind of like another person on this site. I won't mention names but his initials are "ceeboo."

[Flyonthewall]

reminds me of a Monty Python routine...

Monty Python Sketch - The Argument

[Misshalfway]

Sounds like something from one our favorite movies.

And I never miss an opportunity to quote from it!!! Hahahahaha

Hey Pam, Get your roots done!

Edited August 15, 2008 by Misshalfway

[beefche]

Beefche, how did you get an animated GIF for your avatar?

I have no clue. I found the avatar awhile ago and have used it on other forums. So, it's saved somewhere on my computer. I just downloaded as I normally do when downloading avatars.

Sorry for such a technical explanation. Hopefully, you're not too much of a computer geek that you can't interpret my well articulated instructions.

[beefche]

The reason why I ask the OP is because on another thread there were 2 people expressing their opinions. I, as an outsider, did not read any animosity, arguing, or anything negative. Simply 2 people expressing their opinions in which do not agree.

Yet, person A felt that the thread had become argumentative. Person B made it clear that he/she did not feel that an argument had insued...simply 2 people expressing differing opinions.

I've seen this on other forums or even IRL. When does a disagreement become an argument?

[Flyonthewall]

When the name calling starts. As soon it moves beyond a difference of opinion, to personal attacks.

Or when one side or both, cannot agree to disagree, and they cannot leave it alone until they have convinced the other the error of their way.

[Connie]

Vort and Flyonthewall have given some very good definitions. It is only at the point where it becomes obviously a personal attack that i will disengage or if it is clear to me that the person is determined to take my disagreement personally. I do not see someone disagreeing with me as a personal attack, just a discussion of two opposite points of view, which to me is fun and interesting. I actually started a thread called Conflict that is somewhere on this general discussion forum where some interesting information is given on why someone would consider a disagreement with their ideas as a personal attack. You should take a look at it.

I think it's a shame when someone defines what they will and will not discuss. It shows a closed mind, in my opinion. The only time to disengage a conversation is when it is obvious it has become personal--name calling or attacking the person instead of the ideas. Or when the other person has obviously chosen that course on their own even though you have not attacked them as a person, which to me means they consider an attack of their idea as an attack on them personally, again see the Conflict thread (very interesting info).

Here's the conflict thread: http://www.lds.net/forums/general-discussion/13513-conflict.html

Edited August 16, 2008 by Connie
add link

[Gwen]

i can't really say for online but i know i've had this discussion with hubby. i will be hurt for a long time about an argument we've had and he will say it was just a disagreement and have no idea why i'm upset. i have very calmly repeatedly said....."honey, if at any point in a "disagreement" you feel inclined to say 'please, don't yell at me'.....IT'S AN ARGUMENT!!!!! and it will come back to haunt you" lol

[skippy740]

"Seek first to understand, then to be understood." - Dr. Stephen R. Covey

In online forums where all we read are the text of words on the screen, it's VERY important to put proper emphasis on certain words and phrase things appropriately. (That's why I CAPITALIZE certain words - to give emaphasis, not to shout.)

I almost never say "This is the way it is!" or anything of the sort. This implies a closed-mind to anything contrary to your opinion and will incite more defensive posts.

I will usually say things like:

- "I'm not completely sure, but..."

- "But what about ..."

- "I always thought..."

- "This is what I've always been told..."

- "Help me to understand..."

"Put [your ego aside] so that OTHERS may be right!" If we have too much of our ego and pride into our posts so that we are not open to learning, then this is a good time to practice using some of the phrases I put above. Phrase it differently, so we can all learn from you but not in a "dictatorial" way.

Being able to do this demonstrates a personal security in yourself and your beliefs.

I will always post my reference links and ask the other poster to post theirs - for greater collaboration and understanding.

There are two things you should always be trying to get across to those reading the thread:

1) That you have a valuable opinion worthy of discussion to clarify for all posters and readers, and

2) That you are a person worth having that discussion with.

I think those 2 points are really worth learning and adapting into all facets of your life, not just online.

For a reference, take a look at this thread in an investment advisor discussion board:

Registered Rep. Broker Forums: Anyone have RMD knowledge?

Someone posted a question, and I gave (what I thought) would be an appropriate answer. Others gave their opinion also. I gave another opinion, then the original poster stated some things that I already knew, but other things that I didn't. It could easily be read with a tone that says "Hey stupid - it's like this. See?"

I now have a choice: I can either - become sulky and not participate in the thread. I can shout insults or I can reference what he's talking about and see if I can learn something. Again, I don't mind being wrong, and long as it's done tactfully and with references that lend credibility.

On the 2nd page of the thread, I showed a reference to something that backed up the original poster's thoughts and admitted that he was right! We can all now benefit from the discussion, and not just take it as one person's view over another.

BTW, if you ever think I'm shouting... you have CAPSLOCKAPHOBIA! :)

Edited August 16, 2008 by skippy740

[beefche]

i can't really say for online but i know i've had this discussion with hubby. i will be hurt for a long time about an argument we've had and he will say it was just a disagreement and have no idea why i'm upset. i have very calmly repeatedly said....."honey, if at any point in a "disagreement" you feel inclined to say 'please, don't yell at me'.....IT'S AN ARGUMENT!!!!! and it will come back to haunt you" lol

Hmmm, now that I wonder if men or women are more likely to interpret a disagreement as an argument.

[Connie]

Hmmm, now that I wonder if men or women are more likely to interpret a disagreement as an argument.

Seeing as women are more emotional in general than men, i might be more inclined to say women, but i really don't know. I'd love to hear others thoughts in regard to that.

If a verbal disagreement has gotten to the yelling point i would probably interpret that as argument, however.

[Truegrits]

My husband and I never scream or yell. We will discuss...which may lead to an argument, then if neither of us are going to "change" our view, we just stop talking about it and either go on to something else, or walk away. Neither one of us are quick to anger, which is good, because in everything else we are pretty much opposites... :lol: