Agree to Disagree

[shyguysteve]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=agree%20to%20disagree&defid=1616960

This is one of my philosophies and one of my favorites. Ask your self about a conflict any conflict any disagreement and think of why you're doing it or why is someone else doing it and why can't they or you just accept people are different and continue with your day?

 

What is so hard with accepting that? Do you practice this? Have you been to stubborn to let an argument go until you are certain that they agree with you?

 

I have argued to much and just let differences be differences. I like just letting it go not holding it in and letting it boil its a bad feeling.

Edited March 20, 2013 by shyguysteve

[lemmingllama]

Well, its likely because people want that feeling of winning the argument, or they just enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing. I fall into the latter group, which is why I typically try to play Devils Advocate whenever I can. The way I see it, its not about making them agree with you. Its about getting them to consider their own answers and see if they are correct, even when other answers can be seen as valid or flaws can be found. This reevaluation can lead to stronger answers. Argument can be the price of innovation.

 

Still, when arguments degrade to shouting matches, typically its just because of the person that you are arguing with, not the argument. We all have those people who we cant lose to.

[† Emotional Outlet]

For one, if everyone adhered to that belief, this subforum would be pretty quiet!

 

I get the intent behind "agree to disagree", but I don't think it's applicable in every situation.

 

For things like taste in music, food, and clothing--stuff that's personal taste, I can get behind some agreeing to disagree. I'm not going to fight over whether Popeye's is better than KFC, or try to convince people that root beer sucks. It's not worth it and there's no real point in doing it.

 

For stuff that's like, I dunno, personal in nature? Like say you slighted someone and they were upset, but you didn't realise it. They bring it up and ask for an apology, and then you start getting into an argument about whether or not you have to apologise. I've been on both sides of that kind of situation--if I'm the one who did the slighting, I generally won't try to argue and just apologise. I don't get to determine when and how a person should feel. If I'm the one who is slighted, though, I'll be a little insistent that they listen to me and consider my point of view, and I won't much like it if I'm told to "agree to disagree".

 

Not everything needs to be a huge discussion, but avoiding them constantly and just slapping on "everyone's different, just let it go" really devalues everyone involved.

 

For stuff that's a little heavier, though, I definitely don't buy it. If you're getting into it with someone over something like, say, gay marriage, saying "let's just agree to disagree" can feel dismissive, no matter who says it. It's like they don't care enough about your opinion to listen to you and they just want the conversation to end. Depending on the situation, having someone try to shut you down in the middle of a heated discussion can be frustrating, if not devastating. (Plus, can you imagine if international debates and talks went like this?)

 

I definitely don't agree with forcing people to have discussions they don't want to have. That's abusive and everyone has their limits. There's plenty of willing participants in the world who are glad to have a lively debate, so you don't have to kidnap someone and force them to talk about abortion. The way I see debate, though, and the way I have the rules in here set up, is that discussion is key. It's not always about changing a person's mind or "winning" (I've never been a huge fan of graded/scored debates). While I don't participate in every debate, I do read them. I build my opinions from various sources, including those I disagree with. It builds depth of understanding and solidifies beliefs to have them challenged and to challenge others.

 

I know, especially on the Internet, people like to take these disagreements as a platform to troll and farm lulz because no one likes to read walls of text, but there's plenty to be gained from having a discussion on a topic of contention. As mentioned, it could be a learning experience for those involved, as well as an opportunity to teach--it's all about the mutual exchange of ideas. You could notice a factual error that should be cleared up, although being overly pedantic toes the line at being trollish. Or you could just be trying to enrich the discussion--point out variables, put a different twist on hypotheticals, bring up a different point of view that has yet to be considered. It can be interesting and fun to have these discussions, even if people get heated.

[Pinkie Pie]

Personally, I don't step in when it comes to an opinion unless it's especially ignorant or hurts the subject the opinion is on.   

Sometimes there are opinions that just honestly baffle me so I ask about it, and debate happens, but I tend to follow the rules of debate instead of saying that I'll agree to disagree.