I am guessing that the three of us learned about earning respect rather than just having it handed to us or bully a fearful respect out of others. Come to think of it perhaps the rudest among us are bullied in real life.
It has been said that only hurt people hurt people. But they seem to get a kick out of it.
I cannot stand face to face debate.
I am incredibly civil and a black belt in listening, simply because I want the other person to explain themselves sufficiently before I feel qualified to respond to something other than a strawman.
In practice, this amounts to the other person waffling/thinking out loud and me having to remember far too many points that spring up along the way for me to both remember them all and string them together into a valid and coherent response in real time.
And that’s the thing about face to face debate - there is no socially acceptable silence within which to collect and order one’s thoughts before presenting them in an optimal, clear and concise manner. If you’re thoughtfully reserved and considering, the other person feels they have to fill the silence with more verbal diarrhea.
The (much more popular) alternative is to jump in with the first thing that pops into your head upon each social cue that the other person has finished speaking. The consequence is a mess of chaotic babble that stands much more chance of amounting to nothing except a resentful stalemate that makes one think twice about ever having a serious conversation with the other person ever again.
And the platitudes! Oh the platitudes and the consideration of the other’s feelings, when nigh on 100% of anyone you talk to will be hurt on some level when you challenge their heartfelt opinions that ground their entire being, with all its behaviours, attitudes, ethics and actions.
Thank fuck for uncivil internet forums, where there are no interruptions, there is time to consider one’s response to a completed and organised point (though clearly not always) and you do not have to worry about hurting the other’s feelings simply by being annoyed by their ignorance and/or stupidity, and for it to actually be (internet rulez) socially acceptable able to say so.
civilization is important…civilizing young people is important…setting standards of behavior is important…
You should change your name from turtle to parrot.
Could I say that face to face without facing social exclusion? No. Uncivil internetz are so much more efficient.
why do you say more efficient…
Because if I was face to face, assuming I even judged it appropriate and useful to point out such a valid comment at all - given that sensitivity is so much higher when face to face and one would be an asshole not to take this into account - I would still have to butter up the person whom I wish to criticise, and spend further time and emotional effort trying to phrase it in a sympathetic, manageable (and potentially watered down and thus less effective) manner. Else I risk being what people call “too honest”, and either ignored or avoided.
On here I can just say what I mean. Job done. Efficient.
Of course, saying what you mean can de-rail threads from substantial and productive discussion, and that can turn it into a bad thing - but then you just learn to steer things back effectively or avoid that danger altogether and it’s plain sailing. Civility can orally cradle my gonads.
What can be done about gadflies?
one thing we can do is ignore them…or just very directly tell them what we think and then ignore any further
discussion…sometimes i get sucked in and debate and that is what they want…they are still juvenile and want heat not light…
one thing we can do is ignore them…or just very directly tell them what we think and then ignore any further
discussion…sometimes i get sucked in and debate and that is what they want…they are still juvenile and want heat not light…
Agreed! It is one thing to accept disagreement; it is quite another if you are accused of lying or your post is dismissed as pure fantasy. If a thread is beneath a person, why would he/she want to post on it? That would appear to be a waste of precious time.
Since the wrong was done in a public forum, apology must be done there also. I apologize for correcting anyone’s grammar. I can’t spell worth a damn. All I ask is that I’m approached without a gun cocked.
Maybe this thread should be in the Rant House.
Too many decent threads become fly swatting.
I hope we’ve got (or are getting) the debating civilly problem under control - I think some have a wrong idea of what debating actually is 
attacking the other rather than questioning their response seems to be de rigeur.
Most of the folks who post here at ILP are people I wish I could know on a more personal level–sit down and have a beer with. Those that appear irritated by posts or see them as folly are only a few. And I ,too, occasionally forget that a good rebuttal was against my idea, not against me as a person.
In the Elizabethan age debates among friends were called fencing. It was the sharpest wit, not the loudest blast, that won the contest.
i would like to put a plug in for DISCUSSION where no one wins or loses…debate is fine but a lot of people here
only know how to attack without saying anything…it is like a schoolyard…
Turtle,
I also yearn for good discussions, those in which I can learn and in which do not have to be on the defensive if I screw up. But–these are debate forums. There are bullies on every playground. The only thing I can do is to try not to be one.
Of the hundreds of people I’ve met in posts, I’ve felt the need to ignore only five. I think most here are trying for civil debate. And sometimes there are really great discussions here.
ier----i honestly didnt think these were structured as debate forums…
Turtle,
I’ve been in at least five philosophy forums and, with the exception of one, found more sharks than tuna. No safe place to swim and absorb. Most have their resident trolls. Be glad you are here.
Would you mind if I move this to Help & Suggestions? I think it’s a much-needed topic for ILP