Confrontation tends to have a negative connotation and is stigmatised in almost all social circles. I experience this myself on a daily basis both online and offline. I continue to behave as I do because of my own principles. In my own way, I look people in the eye because I care. I care both about the message and the person receiving it. This can understandably be a confusing statement for most but allow me to explain myself since there has been a lot of fuss about my stance and it might be perhaps my fault—taking some things for granted.
Direct approach allots me time to concentrate to what matters. I can easily deduce people's motives and histories from aspects of their personality, appearance and behavior by observing the way they choose to interact with their environment. This stance might suggest a negative undertone that might even signify anger or frustration. At least to me this is never the case. Confrontation is merely a behavioural device in order to access a situation while at the same time evaluating the person. We are designed to accept the positive much easier than the negative and criticism can make many feel unease. What I learned from experience though is that this method can be used as a distiller machine to separate those who matter in life vs those who don’t—or better—separating the wheat from the chaff.
It is important to note here than being contentious or being blunt are often smudged together. I consider myself more of a blunt individual but people often mistake my stance as hostile or even downright rude. This is rather disappointing since it demonstrates how political correctness and standardized social etiquette has sculpted a society around us that functions on superficiality, shallowness and overgeneralizations. This is another reason why a showdown becomes vital for accessing those around me.
Getting around social norms can be quite challenging since the established a-la-cart behaviour doesn’t leave much room for experimentation. First impressions matter and so it is preferred to be “safe than sorry”. Admittedly, we all open up when our relationships grow in time, but by then it is too late. We often come to realise that we don’t really know the other person as well as we thought we did.
I can’t count the times acquaintances expressed their disappointment about how surprised they were to discover after two or three years, the truth about their partner or their employee. This is perhaps the biggest advantage of an uncomfortably honest confrontation. Considering my experiences so far it saved me precious years from life and unimaginable monetary losses. The reasoning is quite simple. Initially people tend to hold a shield to cover up their masked personality. Most are easily agitated when you scratch the surface. Being blunt shakes ones superficial persona, often catching them by surprise. In time it becomes more evident who holds a solid character and who doesn’t. If one manages to expose the mask up-front, the task for evaluating one’s character becomes far easier. On the other hand, keeping appearances and waiting for time and random events to reveal one’s true nature can cost energy, time and money. In essence, compared to most people around me, I save years from my life whether those are pointless friendships, intimate partners of business endeavours. The cost? Random up-tight nobodies that are too focused on how other people see them instead of how they reglect to themselves. In practise a win-win situation.
Nonetheless, as most of you might have realised after spending a couple of decades on this planet, the blunt and/or confrontational scene doesn’t look very promising for the weak-hearted. “Test-driving” humans is not something many people dare to delve into. Why not though? Every single product we enjoy for long periods of time is being put under strenuous tests. From cars to hardware equipment, computers, cellphones and computer networks; they all need to be tested against unforeseen and continuous challenges if they are to be released in the market. We demand our items to be trustworthy and not to let us down when something unforeseen comes up. Sadly, very few humans go through similar testing and yet millions are released in the market every year. For me, being confrontational is my own unique version for screening humans. And yes, as you have figured out already, not many make it through my blunt mesh.
Contentiousness also tends to sharpen on a great extent my bullshit detector. In time, it creates a special set of goggles that enables special detection for sweet talkers, manipulators and people who keep a standardised lingo to sell either themselves or their ideas. For the sake of making an example, let’s take a hot-tier woman who is praised daily. These women have developed a rather sensitive bullshit detector which enables them to distinguish between genuine and shallow complements. Evidently, exposure to stimuli sharpens perception. Of course they might appear “bitchy” or “ill-mannered” for the untrained eye but they only do so because they can’t afford to pay attention to every single person that hits on them. Being blunt works much the same. There are just way too many “unscreened” people released in the social market—from business to social networks. Distilling those who matter becomes of utmost importance to ensure one’s livelihood.
Personally, I am willing to sacrifice quick rewards and even social image for the sake of integrity and honesty. I learned that it pays out massively in the long run when it comes to both financial and personal rewards. I have very few personal and professional acquaintances but all of them have made it through my screening before I made any commitment with them. I was rarely let down since they were too able to see past my behaviour and through my real intentions through my actions. My actions always reflect my words. That is my personal insurance for anyone that gets to stick around.
Professionally, I know the tricks of the game. I know about deception and manipulation in order to keep appearances but I don’t do it just to pitch sales. In my line of business (design, marketing & advertising) it is impossible not to deceive the public. Nonetheless, I choose to reveal mind tricks to my customers because I enjoy the beauty of honesty and sincerity —at least with those that pay me to do it. It also makes things a bit more challenging. With every chance I get I also try to explain how advertising is essentialy an elaborate deceptive scheme.
At the end of the day, being confrontational, rewards me with much more rather than choosing to follow a passive social etiquette. I don’t remember the last time I lied, even small white lies. Last job I got, I told the boss that the company looked like a fucking circus and that I could fix some of the issues. He was surprised for a few seconds but then he immediately offered me the position. In my first resume I described all my fuckups and how I would probably continue doing mistakes and fixing them at my new job. I still believe I got my first job in a major New York company just by being brutally honest and not because of my naked resume.
I am old enough today to understand some harsh truths about how social contacts work. For example, everyone wants honesty but when you are honest with them, you are more likely to be perceived as an asshole. This is the sad truth that very few admit. This is after all why most people choose to be sweet-talkers rather than being blunt. The vast majority of people despise me for the way I talk but when they have a problem, seeking a sincere opinion, they always manage to ring me up, gladly accepting my harsh criticism. That for me is much more rewarding than keeping a superficial day-to-day-coffee-shop-level of friendship. This also makes me realise how messed up most people’s lives are, hiding behind a mask waiting for things to change—by willingly trying to be the same as everybody else. I can guarantee you that I have no real friends (by choice) but rather selected acquaintances. Even so, I treat the few that stick around better than most people treat what they call “best friends”. This is why I still answer my phone, giving advice to those who ask for it—even if I know I will probably hear from that person in a year or so when another big issue comes up. People come and go. Most never really afford to change but rather only become more of who they already are.
Confrontation has got a bad name due to the structure of our society. The masses wanted to keep a code of behaviour that could be standardised for better social cohesion thus they created authorities to enforce it. This is how and why most behaviours were eventually labeled “sinful” or “inappropriate” even if there is nothing inherently "bad" with them. The tradition still continues today in our judiciary system with not a single shred of scientific evidence to back the claims that confrontation, rudeness or even swearing can harm individuals one way or another. We are brought up in communities where some modes of behaviour gain more gravity than others and so we teach our children to perceive some modes as “bad” and some others as “good”. This is more or less how the epidemic of “I am offended” came to flourish with people getting "traumatised" under the most normative situations. We suddenly became too sensitive for no apparent reason other than our own self-entitlement. The result? Politicians, salesmen or even friends maintain a posh, eloquent-skin-deep lingo that perpetually promotes misunderstandings and manipulation. We like to hide our head in the sand pretending that everything is OK. We become in a way a form of “behavioural statists” when it comes to business, sales, money, friendships. “It’s just how things are man”. Bow or perish.
You might have also noticed that along my arguments I use some sharp epithets that might even be perceived as swearing for the sensitive folk—the vast majority of people. I pay little attention to this complaint since I consider all forms of language as a musical repertoire—ready to be celebrated when one has the chance rather than confined into conventional molds. Every single word has its place in a conversation, even swearing. Some studies demonstrate that swearing can in fact have positive outcomes in human relationships. For example one study showed that people who swear have better vocabularies. Researchers like Timothy Jay and Kristin Janschewitz outlined many benefits of swearing while at the same time dismantiling many of the common myths that add to the negative aspect of swearing. Remember, most things that we think we know to be “good” or “bad” are nothing more than propagated myths to ensure social cohesion. Question everything, especially those which we perceive as de-facto truths.
Most things around us fail because we refrain from being blunt. Instead of criticizing something and clearly putting out there how we see it, we tend to use savoir vivre and carefully crafted language. We do so in order to pass the message but also retain our persona. We believe that this works because the other person responds with much the same hypocrisy. Unfortunately, if politics taught us anything, is that this kind of rhetorics deteriorate the situation by sweeping the real problem under the rag. Constructive criticism and keeping appearances don’t go together.
If you have seen me being critical towards Steemit or being confrontational with some of its members, be assured that I do what I do because I care, aiming for its improvement. I prefer my actions to speak rather than my words. 9 out of 10 startups end up in failure within 5 years. While I can see the aspiration towards Steemit in becoming the next Facebook, we need to remind ourselves that it has more chance following a hi5 path, or even not even making it to that level. This is how the markets are. Like I said before positive thinking is overrated and can actually damage one’s goal—blinding towards the real issues that usually stare us in the eye. This is why I have been criticizing all the senseless shilling about “dreams of grandeur” that only hurt Steemit's potential. If anyone doubts my positive aspirations for the platform then check the projects I have already been involved in so far or the objective suggestion posts that I made. Through my encounters in here I made plenty of “enemies” but I also managed to meet a handful few that made the endeavour worthwhile. I hope this post clears the air in regards to why I do what I do because let’s face it—not many dare to go balls deep in a platform where keeping appearances with the whales,is literally, all the money. If this is not caring beyond monetary rewards, I don't know what is.
This was brilliant. Maybe the most brilliant thing I've read on Steemit in a while.
Thank you stellabelle. Much appreciated.
"I can easily deduce people's motives and histories from aspects of their personality, appearance and behavior by observing the way they choose to interact with their environment....What I learned from experience though is that this method can be used as a distiller machine to separate those who matter in life vs those who don’t—or better—separating the wheat from the chaff."
Respectfully @kyriacos you're not that good at deducing people's motives. Your judgment of me as being "dodgy" is an example of how judgementalism clouds a person's vision.
After eleven years of online humanitarianism, if I were "dodgy" it would have been reported. I challenge you to find one example or report that paints me as a person of bad integrity. You may find cops or other activists not agreeing with my opinions but you cannot find a single person who reports that I fucked them over.
I am curious. What "aspects of my personality, appearance and behavior" have given you the opinion that I'm "dodgy." Is it my heavily tattooed body? My dreadlocks? Can you give examples?
I am referencing the comment you made about me elsewhere on Steem:
"Most friends of mine left because they are appalled with the close jerk circle Steemit has become with many of these shady images—from convicts to dodgy ex-cops or runnaway scammers. It has become blasphemous to mess with the shilled trending Totems. What do you expect? Your regular folk to see the front page and say "Wow, I am enligted by the tinfoil, i think i will invite my friends over"?
Can you share with us who you are? What's your name and resume of achievements and failures? Where can we go to find out all about you. Is there anything online? Just curious.
Well said, Barry. I've been curious why @kyriacos isn't willing to be transparent with this community either. All he's bothered to say is he's a designer on a small island somewhere. I've added my comments here as well.
Why are you so obsessed with his identity? He writes what he writes, that's what matters, and you can react to that, agree with him, disagree, get angry, be amused, laugh out loud, think he is full of shit, has good points but doesn't know how to make them, whatever you like. How is his real-life persona relevant?
Anyway, if you're that curious, it took me all of five minutes to find out who he is, and so could you. He likes table tennis, does that help you in judging his postings?
@lukestokes
I made myself transparent to those I chose to be. I don't think it is important to know somebody's identity. Even if you find out who I am from those who do know me you will be pleasantly surprised.
And yet you actively judge who others are by the transparency they allow. Doesn't that seem like a double standard? Morality aside, from a game theory perspective, you see how they may encourage others not to participate with you because it signals you are not a trustworthy actor and have something to hide while taking full advantage of everyone else's transparency?
Non-sequitor. I judge what is written based on the histories they provide to defend their position.
Game theory is mostly a fancy word used mainly from economists that don't know how to sell their bullshit. Not a thing in the way you think it is. Whether I am trustoworthy or not can be deducted in time through my actions. This is how I always gain favour in the longterm even from those you initially dislike me.
This paragraph sais everything for me. I am not saying you did something "bad" but I am accusing you of trying to deceive individuals through emotional manipulation by misrepresenting concepts such as humanitarianism and anarchy. This is why I believe you are dodgy. You see, the candy of "humanitarianism" is licked from self-righteous individuals who think they are "selflessly" offering something more to the world than the rest when they are not.
You, Barry Cooper, are nothing but an ex-cop who felt bad about his previous carreer and then by talking about it online tried to justify his remorse with some skin-deep anarchic and libertarian ideas. All you do is talk about how "bad the state is". That doesn't make you more of a "humanitarian" than anyone else on the face of this planet. In the same way protestors who want the state to support refugees instead of themselves are not humanitarian even if they claim to be.
We all "humanitarian". We all care about SOME people around us but not so much the rest. You chose one group of people related to your guilt (anarchists/libertarians) and then marketed that idea as something special.
not only they will take it personal, they also tell you that you are rude, hostile and arrogant. pfff. i wish i could upvote this 10 times.
You one of the rare authors on steemit which I really looking forward for every new post or comment you publish. To bad that my English is not good enough for serious conversation. But I really enjoy every post of yours. I agree with most of your opinions. Keep good work.
Thank you. Comments like yours make me reconsider my staying in the platform
Please don't go. I'm sure you have a lot of secret admirers and not just followers here.
I just saw this not being online much but for sure you got a new follower . I relate to a lot you wrote and I have no issues with your blunt honesty . I bet you don't have many friends .....I didn't read most comments . I like it if somebody cuts the BS and it was done in a brilliant way , very interested to get to know you better , read More
ad hominem is the worst shit that someone can do in an argument and also the sign of defeat [ and of a small minded individual yes ].
I strongly believe that criticism , constructive criticism, of what something DOES NOT WORK is the path to success, in personal life...in business. IF we don't have criticism [ can we say negative feedback?] how do we know we are not on the right track.
Results! Sure, results are a way to gauge success of your strategy but really, results are very misleading, short term anyone can be successful. Sustainability is much more important imho. And for that, you need wisdome, numerous tries and yes, critique.
I don't always agree with your posts nor your comments and covering every insensitive thing you say or attack on "i just want the best for Steemit" is not really flying well with be...but I do think your honesty and your heart are in the right place. Keep up the good work better!
r.
You keep saying "ad hominem". I don't think it means what you think it means
Haha. Ok ok!
It actually means "attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself". Calling someone a "dumbass" in a discussion, or doubting their integrity, intelligence or knowledge is an ad hominem attack when it occurs in an ongoing discussion.
You could be a Dutchman! My husband has a hard time here in America because the Dutch are blunt, it saves time and money.
@reddust
I am actually thinking moving to Denmark soon
I haven't enjoyed a post so much for a long time. That being said, not everybody is able to be confrontational. For a long time I looked down on my own perceived weakness, but after being surrounded by people such as yourself all my life, especially my husband and best friend. (Who told me the other day that my hair looked like shit and it was time to do something about it.) I have started to figure out that there are different ways to manage crap. I ignore it. I suspect I may also be the "earth" for people like you. Keep pushing buttons!
How is ignoring the manipulative insults toward you working for you?
No, I had to agree, my hair was looking like shit. I fixed it. True friends know where they stand with each other.
I misunderstood you then. It's one thing if you just talk to each other like that for fun, another if it's disrespect you just ignore for whatever reason
Sometimes "comments"is not the best form of communication. I value bluntness if it comes from a loving place. On the other hand, if I encounter idiocy or plain rudeness, I usually don't respond. Not my monkeys, not my circus. It also denies the trolls their much sought after fight.
watch Black Mirror S03E01
It's idiots that I ignore ;)
Maybe your hair does look like shit and you should do something about it
I have pondered my feelings for a little while and gone through some of your stuff. I appreciate raw truth and can take it. What I have noticed about the truthful individuals in my life is that they are not constantly confrontational, only when it is needed, which makes it so much more effective. I suspect you may take secret delight in being an asshole, and if that is what floats your boat, by all means.
I always considered friendships superficial and annoying and never had one for over 20 years. My husband was enough for me, and still is. Things change, and if you are open minded you may be surprised by a human connection. I would say I wish you luck, but you probably need some time for reflection more.
And yes, my hair was shit. I fixed it. It's awesome now.
Some people enjoy debates in many forms. It's important to have an intellectual hobby then.
oh boy. this hits the post so much
Love it!
You need more commas. My eyes hurt now.
@complexring What should I do to make you follow me, resteem or up? )))
Perhaps a slight variance of your approach is more productive.
Just a Suggestion:
Do you want to squeeze the most value out of the living organisms in any particular environment or set of circumstances, getting the best and "realest" of what they have to offer? Then be empty of judgment and desire.
In your interactions, don't be present as the "judger" of who is or isn't worthy of your time. Empty of judgment, empty of a desire for something to get out of the interaction, I find that the "real person in there, inside of what may appear to be a very shallow individual, at the surface" finds the courage to meet and speak...and, viola, you're interacting with a strong individual that has something valuable to share with you, almost like magic.
You see, people naturally fear judgment because reputation is strongly correlated with one's odds of survival and one's probability of thriving. The judgment of whether they're worthy of your time or not, IS the problem; it's the wall, or mask, that separates you from really meeting the self that they so desperately try to keep alive and comfortable.
The part that you might be missing with your approach is how your impression so strongly puts people into a defensive psychological stance, because, quite frankly our intentions scream out to everybody at the subconscious level - everyone will quite naturally sense your highly judgmental perspective.
The irony of it is that the people you meet and determine aren't worth your time might be very welcoming, resourceful, engaging people with useful skill sets and talents that can enrich your life, they may just happen to struggle with their fears of judgment and your attitude will only drive them further into their shells. In other words, you get the worst version possible. Your very need to get usefulness out of people drives it away.
When in the presence of a more compassionate/ empathetic individual, these same people will open up, sharing that enriched and enriching version of themselves - and I must emphasize "will" in that statement. We can only know this for ourselves by experimenting with it and testing it. But I'm confident that you'll find far more impressive qualities in people if you can manage to enter interactions a little "emptier".
A more succinct way to say everything I've just said is: don't approach from the ego (how can/ will this person/ situation benefit me), but rather from pure curiosity and 100% engagement in the senses of "what's really happening inside and outside (of me)". The former leads to constriction (pulling inside of one's shell to protect from judgment), the latter leads to trust and openness (the real individual shines through).
Seeing other as self and vice versa? Surely the best outcome for the situation is the optimum over-arching goal which will, in turn, provide the best outcome for you. Altruism is now viewed as a Darwinian survival tool!
Which is more effective/ energy efficient: to behave in a way that gets each person that we meet to behave "productively" (our conscious want), or to behave in a way that drives each person towards holding back and becoming defensive (in direct conflict with our want)?
There's an unnecessary obstacle that we tend to create when we approach this type of situation from a strong sense of ego (control), that's typically removed when we let go of our need to have things go a certain way (come in with an agenda). What tends to happen is the conscious manifestation of decisions around the goal move in direct conflict with actually achieving that goal. The want for manifests the seeming need to strive for. But this simply isn't the case. Letting go of the want for brings the very thing that we want, regarding our interactions with other people. It's the belief that it's anyway other than what I've just stated which creates the illusion that we must grind for it.
As I've, to this point, alluded to, this happens because the ego is often in direct conflict with the unconscious wants/ needs.
It may appear, at the superficial (shallow) conscious level that we're making the "right choices" to move towards our goals, but, often, in reality, our actions cause the type of reactions (at the unconscious communication level between ourselves and others) to drive our interactions the other way, away from us getting closer to reaching our goals, strengthening the sense of need to fight and push for our desire(s), making it take far more energy and time to get what we want than necessary - we're creating resistance!
Now, if we approach it again, this time without an agenda. The goal is still there, in the unconscious, but now we're not clumsily trying to move the interaction in a certain direction and/or unwittingly misreading the situation - clumsy and inaccurate, because the conscious mind has access to a very limited amount of intellectual resources, in the moment, compared to the vast warehouse of information and understanding within the unconscious. Now we behave naturally, getting the most out of the interaction with the least effort (energy expenditure), just like the very few others out there in the world that are at the apex of our species - leading our evolution.
But can we accept this, you see? Can we accept that we've spent all this time being unnatural/ weak, what amounts to wasted life? Can we accept that it takes some amount of faith and courage to let go and face a bit of an unknown to be at our strongest and to have the best chance at getting what we want out of life?
There's a reason why the "elites" are smaller than "one-percenters" on this planet. It takes a fair amount of courage to move through this world with real (psychological/ intellectual) freedom.
Sometimes (pretty much all the time), it pays to hear. One cannot learn whilst speaking. The attitude which pervades the world towards Muslims is one such case. The cultural, linguistic and heritage we encounter turns our hearing off and we digest sounds. Active listening can provide many solutions which were invisible without this skill - and it is a skill which requires honing.
Absolutely no arguments from me on these comments. But, I must add, that "active listening" doesn't involve only the ears or comprehending the meaning of spoken words in context.
(As an aside: I should hope that I don't have to add "IMO" to everything that I say, here, but I assure you that I'm not so deluded as to believe that it's anymore than just that - a belief.)
It involves a sensitive awareness of one's own consciousness (all the senses) AND the "input", which those senses perceive - it's a very intimate/ spiritual way to exist. This ties somewhat into what I said in my last comment. When one is deeply aware of themselves (conscious processes) and their surroundings, they can see (sense) how their ego interferes in many ways with getting what one wants from life and/or allowing oneself to be consciously aware of what is their true agenda(s).
What people often discover when they start really listening is how embarrassingly pretentious they've behaved in the past, without ever realizing it. The amazing discovery is that there's a lot more awareness available at any one moment than we had ever noticed in the past and expanding into that available awareness empowers us to glean more and more value (often insight) from the circumstances of every moment, in every way.
The rub is that the more aware we become, the less personable the relatable self (ego) becomes - it tends to slip further and further into the "background" and, over time, becomes forgotten past as "surface (superficially focused) consciousness" is discarded for deeper (more meaningful) insight. One becomes so engaged in perceiving "what is" in the moment that very few resources are left over to write, and maintain, a drama (self). This is what I consider to be the "natural state" - the state at which one's brain is unimpeded by unnecessary anxieties/ irrational fears (ie operating at its highest efficiency) - it's intellectual/ psychological freedom.
All that I've said here might amount to nothing more than hot gas, but it surely seems sufficiently fleshed out in my own experiences to be the most feasible of possibilities/ explanations.
Agree upon what you say ... though one alternative view which we might consider is that when one gets to this level of communication, one should equally realise that the experience should be relevant and engaging for both or all, depending upon the forum. Hence, one needs to ensure that engagement is a two-way/multi-way street. Be entertaining and enjoy the experience!
watch Black Mirror S03E01
both of you
I only want strong willed individuals around me. in my experience softies turn their back when a problem arises. I am aware of what you are saying. This is why I do what I do.
I also do it because it is fun. I am curious about learning how people react in non-conventional situations.
I only need to trust a selected few. Trusting many people means you give up self control.
Most entertaining and downright truthful thing I've read on steemit yet. I've understood a lot of the false personality bullshit ever since about 10th grade in highschool when I would notice that all my peers would speack to one another without communicating anything at all. It was all just empty words if that makes any sense. Like they were talking to one another just to be heard, not to communicate. And it was like a game where one person would say some sentence devoid of content or meaning, and the other would follow, and it was this stupid back and forth where both parties would speak, without saying a word at all. Its trully disheartening to see how superficial every aspect of our society is? I mean, how do you stay sane in an insane world?
Fantastic post.
Thank you
You're welcome. Keep at at it. It is refreshing to have someone cut through the bullshit and give us a reality check.
watch Black Mirror S03E01
you will thank me twice
Will do. I have it stored up to watch since I have seen none yet so will start from the beginning.
blocked by everyone! lol
:D
I feel it's important to be upfront is because you don't want people to believe a lie. I understand that sometimes, you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but most of the time, you have to tell them how it is. Constructive criticism is something needs to be done.
Your philosophy may be understood to some point.
May also add there is not right or wrong. Only consequence. Agree that negativity is of conquest. Confrontation can also be of conquest. In closing just to say some confrontation may be helpful in some ways if presented to be beneficial to both sides of the confrontation.
I get it and don't fault you for your brash ways. As a representative online to over 30 companies I have to be a little more suave with my personal brand. I use my verified name everywhere. It carries great risk but it also carries many rewards.
I believe this platform will do very well. We would not have staked our brand on it if we did not think so.
I represent many brands as well doing the same and more of what you do but I don't mention it with every chance I get. I prefer to pick my customers rather than having them pick me.
Yup-sometimes I swear like a mo fo but my vocab is better than average.
You may be interested in a comment I made, a few weeks back, about why civilised arguments are good, on this post.
Three things came to mind when I read this, not attacks, just my associations:
There is nothing wrong with being confrontational, as long as you don't forget you can also be confrontational and wrong at the same time; being confrontational doesn't necessarily mean you're right, or making a good argument.
Without judgment and confrontation nothing changes, true that. How harsh you are in your judgment and how fierce you are in your confrontation depends on personality also, not just on honesty. Being very confrontational isn't necessarily morally superior, or even the best way to achieve a goal.
Also, watch your blood pressure. Nobody wants you to pop a vein when you are being confrontational. Well, some might, but sod them.
When I was younger I was way more wrong. I made lots of mistakes and learned from them. As I grew older the errors stopped occuring.
I am not claiming moral superiority. I claim sincerety
I doubt that these days you're never wrong. Very few people are, and I've seen at least parts of your arguments being ripped to shreds by sound reasoning, after which you are prone to resort to ad hominems and generally go Cartman. Doesn't the confrontational style make it more difficult to admit that you're wrong? It sometimes seems to clash with intellectual honesty.
Many of your postings are very well put together and make a good point. Some make an interesting point, but the arguments and reasoning in them are flawed. Being confrontational doesn't excuse that. I think you have a few steps more to go before you're error-free.
I am never claiming "truth" about others. If you have noticed in my posts I rather point out how things around us are subjective and how there is not really black and white but rather gray zones.
I haven't seen any arguments of mine being shred or anything. Maybe by your standards. But please, do state them and we shall discuss them again.
You are being eay too generic. I don't do generic. Point 1 and I shall demonstrate to you how most likely you are wrong.
How do you know you are "right" mate. Come on. You need to step it up here.
"As I grew older the errors stopped occuring" is what I was referring to, but I may have taken that too generally. I thought it referred to your postings, meaning you are never wrong. When you go ad hominem, I assume you have stopped arguing properly because you are out of arguments but just refuse to admit there may be some flaws in your reasoning. At that point, I lose interest because your arguing becomes even more flawed. If you want specifics: I am referring to this post. Even though you put forward an interesting point in that posting, I am quite convinced that (to my surprise, most of your posts are much better) your factual knowledge and reasoning suck in that post, and that I have sufficiently shown that. Tough love going both ways, is that OK too? Or are you infallible?
But "As I grew older the errors stopped occuring" could also refer to the confrontational method of judging, or weighing, people. If the latter, I have a question: I can well believe that being confrontational reduces the false positives to zero, but to be error-free you would also have to have zero false negatives, and that requires monitoring people you found too light, to see if you weren't wrong about them. Do you?
You keep saying ad hominem buddy but I don't think you understand what it means.
Now that you have learned what an ad-hominem is copy-paste the phrase which you think it has occured.
In that post i provided plenty of evidence. You are stuck because of your own ethical knowledge and perspective about on side of the war instead of the other. Why? Simple. You are a westerner and you had your mind crafted from western based propaganda.
Step it up ocrdu. Getting likes for some of your posts does not mean you are correct. Stupidity marches in numbers. never forget this.
Hm. Nesting problem. Re: @kyriacos You keep saying ...
You didn't answer the second part of my comment above, not the first time you ignore questions you can't handle.
I have known what an ad hominem is for 35 years, thank you. Saying "you're a dumbass" or "go to bed", especially, but not solely, without referring to a specific argument is an ad hominem, because it is "attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself". (Look it up if you have to.)
Now that you have learned what an ad hominem is: ad hominems come in many guises, because of what they imply. Even if you (incorrectly) classify them as personal attacks rather than ad hominems, they have no place in an adult discussion. Here are the quotes you requested:
"go to bed."
"intellectual dishonesty at its best yet from another "murica" man"
"sigh. pathetic human beings..."
"i have no respect for people who are this ignorant"
"Seriously now. Open a book" (Hilarious, for the people that know me.)
More recently: "you had your mind crafted from western based propaganda." (Also hilarious)
Not exactly ad rem remarks, wouldn't you agree? (Look it up if you have to.)
Nowhere do I say getting likes means I'm correct. Some stupidity, however, also marches alone and doesn't accept criticism from outside the comfortable bubble of arrogance, not even to improve their own argument. That is not only intellectually dishonest, it is also sad, because at some point, only the sycophants will respond to your posts, the rest will just shrug and remember Schiller's words: "Gegen Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens". Ad hominem intended.
You can either use my input to improve your reasoning skills or go Cartman again and sulk until the "I am always right" feeling kicks back in. Either way, I will keep reading your postings. Enough said.
never said those words by themselves. I rather added them at the very end. You still don't get it boy.
anws. in time you will
Your post resonated with me on so many levels. Having grown up with Asperger's I never quite understood "reading between the lines" until I better understood the nuances of the language and more about the people I was in contact with. This is part of the reason why my intimate group of friends is so small - because we can speak our minds. In essence: Say what you mean. Mean what you say. And they know if they ask my opinion, I will give them my honest thoughts. With most other people, I usually come with a disclaimer - "Do you want me to lie or do you want my honest opinion?" Strangely, most of them want the lie. And because of that, I slowly disassociate myself from them because I don't have time or the patience for games. It's not about being bitchy or rude. In my case, I consider it self-preservation.
i can relate. Don't listen about the "syndrome". Its bullshit. Psychology is more like social engineering rather than anything else. It takes the average behaviour as the "correct" one, where the rest have to works towards to.
Everything I wanted to say. Excellent post. Keep it coming!!!
What you're describing is asperger syndrome.
I don't believe in psychology, only neurobiology. A syndrome is nothing more than the deviation from normality. In other words, social engineering.
To me this post is more proof than anything else I have seen by you, that you have great value to offer.
With that being said EVERYONE and EVERYTHING can improve.
I don't really disagree with anything you say, in truth I find more to relate with you in this post than I do 99% of posts here on Steemit.
Since I cannot disagree with you objectively based on logic then the only "downfall" you could have is not learning when lessons are presented.
If you are truly great then when you meet a being/argument that is actually "superior" to your current comprehension you will acknowledge it.
If you simply don't see it then it is wise to challenge it. Yet if it presents it self, in order to be ever evolving and noble, you must acknowledge it.
So far I haven't seen anyone who makes more logical or objective arguments when in "conflict" with you, than you do. So in that sense it would be silly for you to digress. Yet if it happens and you still fight, then you are just as delusional as the rest, fighting to upkeep your own narrative.
So far I feel you could be "nicer" but other than that there is little to challenge, and if you don't give a fuck about being "nice" which I can respect, then it matters not!
Ultimately it matters not what others expect, judge, want, force, try to get, manipulate etc. All that matters is that you feel good about what choices you make. If that is the case then fuck all who have a problem with it!
Best Regards~*~
I used to do it a lot in the past. I do it less and less now because I tend to learn from my mistakes
I don't have one other than everything is subjective and subject to interpetation. I mainluy go against the dogmatists who think that they know everything.
exactly.
This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.
Learn more about and upvote to support linkback bot v0.5. Flag this comment if you don't want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts.
Built by @ontofractal
I hate confrontation. So that generally leaves me in the place of continually choosing to be a "peace maker" instead of a "peace keeper." Now that I'm in my 30's I'm becoming a lot more comfortable with myself and it's getting easier to speak my mind. Personality type and childhood environment have a lot to do with this as well.
Love your outlook to life, it is a breath of fresh air.
I you ever decide to leave the community... please let us know... So some of us can start to power down eventually...
I will stick around even if I said I will stop writing posts because of the "punishing" stance some major whales keep towards me.
Your perceived punishment is just that, a particular viewpoint. Not upvoting is not the same as punishment.
Downvoting would be punishment.
I just (manually) went through your history for over 2 months. The most I saw, as far as whales are concerned, was @nextgencrypto and @enki downvoting separate comments.
Compromise leaves you compromised. Thank you for the honesty you share. I hope you inspire sheep to learn how to bark.
this is actually what I am going for. Jump-start the sheeple around me.