[Serious] You should FEEL BAD because you disagree with me

[Little lunch]

Most people are hurtful because they are also hurting.
But there are also misunderstandings between people who have different personalities.
And there are individuals who belong to groups that have misunderstandings with other groups.
It's my belief that the majority of people are good people but have different ways of showing it, often each equally as valid as the other.

[brewer]

Are you the one who decides what is, and is not, a viable argument?

I'm not talking about arguments. I'm talking about non-arguments.

For example, in August of 2014 typhoon rains caused mudslides in my area. 73 people were killed overnight and a rescue worker died the next day. A friend of mine was trapped and traumatized and has never been the same since.

A young woman who disagreed with me about the value of religion took this as an opportunity to joke. She said, among other things, that the god I believe in [though I don't believe in god] was incompetent because he should have killed me as well.

Do you think this is a viable argument?

You're right, that's not an argument, it's a personal attack.

Because this is out of context it's difficult to understand about her motive. Could she have felt personally attacked by you in a past interaction? My own personal opinion is that you sometimes come across as talking down to people.

[EgoDeath]

Most people are hurtful because they are also hurting.
But there are also misunderstandings between people who have different personalities.
And there are individuals who belong to groups that have misunderstandings with other groups.
It's my belief that the majority of people are good people but have different ways of showing it, often each equally as valid as the other.

This, and I think much is often lost over text. People can interpret "Hello!" and "Hello." as totally different messages, even though they're essentially saying the same thing. Most people do not know how to convey tone through text, and even if they did, there's no saying that the person on the other side will know how to pick up on it or would interpret it correctly.

Some things are pretty obvious regardless of tone or interpretation... If I call you a name it is obvious when I mean. But there can be many interactions leading up to an insult that are seemingly hostile to one person (causing them to resort to insults), when in fact it was nothing of the sort.

[Sal]

Depends on what grounds someone disagrees with me. If it is some ad hominem, I ignore it. If it is warranted, and I'm in the wrong, I'll correct myself, if I think I'm in the wrong.

I try to keep my feelings out of arguments over the Internet.

[brewer]

Depends on what grounds someone disagrees with me. If it is some ad hominem, I ignore it. If it is warranted, and I'm in the wrong, I'll correct myself, if I think I'm in the wrong.

I try to keep my feelings out of arguments over the Internet.

Not a touch typist???

[Sal]

Depends on what grounds someone disagrees with me. If it is some ad hominem, I ignore it. If it is warranted, and I'm in the wrong, I'll correct myself, if I think I'm in the wrong.

I try to keep my feelings out of arguments over the Internet.

Not a touch typist???

wat

[Losty]

Most people are hurtful because they are also hurting.
But there are also misunderstandings between people who have different personalities.
And there are individuals who belong to groups that have misunderstandings with other groups.
It's my belief that the majority of people are good people but have different ways of showing it, often each equally as valid as the other.

I agree with this and would add that there’s something about the internet that makes people about 10 times meaner than they are in real life. It’s weird. I try not to fall into it but I find myself saying things to people online that I would never say to someone in person.

[EgoDeath]

Most people are hurtful because they are also hurting.
But there are also misunderstandings between people who have different personalities.
And there are individuals who belong to groups that have misunderstandings with other groups.
It's my belief that the majority of people are good people but have different ways of showing it, often each equally as valid as the other.

I agree with this and would add that there’s something about the internet that makes people about 10 times meaner than they are in real life. It’s weird. I try not to fall into it but I find myself saying things to people online that I would never say to someone in person.

This is something I think we should all actively try to avoid with each post we make. Maybe I'm biased here because I do this, but I think with every post, you should ask yourself, "Would I say this to this person in real life?" I'm a bit of a brash person and say what's on my mind, but I STILL try to ask myself, is this a genuine interaction I would have with someone or do I only feel safe saying this because I'm on the computer?

Most times, I post things I would have no issue saying to someone in real life, with, hopefully, language that's a little bit clearer and more concise. I find this important because, realistically, if you're one person online and another person in real life, who are you really? Is your persona online more accurate to how you feel? I doubt it. Who we are is hugely dependent on who we interact with and how we interact with those people, and if we start to define who we are as what we're willing to say when no one can see our face, I think that's a pretty slippery slope. Some people argue that "character is what you do when no one else is around," but I don't know if that paints a complete picture.

If anything, maybe we can sort of move the meter both ways. We can learn to treat people with a little more respect when we're anonymous, and learn to be a little more outspoken with people in our actual lives.

I'm not quite sure if I'm convinced that our "true selves" comes out when we're anonymous, like a lot of people suggest. I just don't think what we say on an internet forum because we feel "unhinged" is necessarily going to be the truest representation of ourselves.

[Brian37]

Suppose you're talking about some philosophical point. Maybe the definition of a word, or the quality of some piece of evidence. 

I can understand debating that more or less endlessly. People disagree, and this is good, because our thinking can only progress through discussion and dialectic. 

However, some people join those discussions solely trying to make other people feel bad. They type things without arguments, for the sole purpose of hurting someone else's feelings. 

I have never understood this.

For those on the receiving end: has this ever changed your mind? 

For those who do it: what is your goal?

I don't care if someone feels bad when I point out a reality.

If you don't accept, for example, global warming, I am not going to sugarcoat your ignorance. One would be wrong to ignore or deny it, and to me, would be dangerous in their voting habits too.

I also don't care if it makes someone feel bad when I point out the politician they support is a dangerous bully. 

I don't care if someone feels bad when I tell them evolution is fact and creationism and ID are garbage.

I don't care if I make someone feel bad if they support bigots or are bigots themselves. 

Some facts in reality are far too important to allow bullies or ignorance infect public policy to the point of being dangerous to things like education, economics, national and global stability. Some things are NOT up for debate. I don't mean from a free speech human rights aspect, I mean FACTS beyond personal bias are worth defending and should not be politicized.

[brewer]

Not a touch typist???

wat

feel........... touch............ lame joke???