Recently, I have run across a group of (what’s the best way to put it) egotistical, self-righteous cowards. They came upon a message board that I was on, and decided to insult every last person on there. They claimed that everyone was ‘hypocritical’ and trash talked them. When they ran out of ideas, they insulted people’s grammar (despite the fact that they themselves weren’t so good.) My friends and I tried to reason with them, yet they ignored us and continued on. I attempted to stop them, only to find that they were illogical brutes (that being the most fitting word) who hated conversations with any slight hint of logic. I am not sure if this topic has been done before, or if this title has been done before, but my question(s) still remain(s) the same. Why do some people (if not most) find it nessecary to avoid any form of logic or reasoning in a conversation? I thought humans were rational creatures, but my cat has more of a concept of rationalization than many people I have met. Why do people feel the need to do this? Is it some form of fear? Fear that if they lose the fight that they can’t live with themselves, and the only way to win is by pounding at their opponent until they give up? Or is it just plain laziness and lack of caring in what they say that drives them to be so foolish? Is it the fact that they can be discreet on the internet and feel as if they can get away with anything, while ignoring the emotions of others in the process? I do feel that I can trust this site for good input on this topic, for people here seem dedicated to what they do, unlike many others.
Humans prefer to rationalize their behavior rather then be rational.
i think you get the kind of people who like to consider themselves as nonconformists (oh what a joke, theres no such thing as nonconformity), and as such they feel that they have to trample all over everything so that they can find some kind of feeling or superiority. or in other words they feel that they are lacking in some areas of their life, therefore feel insecure and have to rubbish others in order to make themselves feel better! the internet is a ‘safe’ place to do this as they know they arent going to get physically confronted by someone, or ‘sent to see the head teacher’. its rather a sad little game isnt it?
I agree 100% with your responses. But as sad as these people are (and they truly are sad), the sadder ones are those who try to appear all “sweet” and supportive of each other, and then get their backs up when a “strong personality” appears. I’ve encountered this a few times recently, and the following is what I wrote on the topic elsewhere [edited slightly to make it make a bit more sense]:
Some people who claim to be “activists” or who claim to want to “help” others may try to present themselves as “nice” or “fighting to support the underdog” or “benevolent leader,” etc., yet when push comes to shove their tone changes dramatically and their REAL self emerges. They become quite nasty. I have seen this happen so many times–no, not just in relation to ME…–that I’m getting a better handle on this phenomenon. IMO, such people are rarely effective in what they do because they are suppressing such an integral part of themself in order to present the type of person they think they need to act like in order to achieve their goals. But you can’t repress such an important part of yourself for so long without getting stressed out and eventually revealing that true part of yourself.
I think that is why such people suddenly disappear (or become irrational as thelovelynicola pointed out) when the going gets rough: they are afraid of letting that part of themself run wild and thus must flee so that such a thing doesn’t happen. However, despite (or as a result of?) their attempts to avoid fully “releasing the dark side,” if you look really carefully, you can see little blips of their true character popping out here and there; but most people don’t pay such things much heed b/c they already have an image of that person as a “nice” person (for lack of a better word). Thus, whereas if Person A had said “XYZ,” many observers would be offended, yet if the type of people I’m referring to in this thread said the exact same “XYZ,” the observers would be far less likely to be offended b/c it is so “out of character” and they would likely interpret it differently and/or attribute the statement to other factors as opposed to suddenly thinking the speaker was a jerk (in short, they would downplay the statement).
I know, it’s not the prettiest way of looking at life, but this is something I have seen so often that I thought I’d comment on it. Recent history [on another board] seems to support me on this one.
And almost none of these people can acknowledge when they are wrong, which really demonstrates their TRUE character (or lack thereof). They are obviously different from people who apologize TOO much, even when they really have nothing to apologize for (not really a good thing), or from those who are INTERNALLY strong but externally not as strong (these latter people may thus not APPEAR to be dominant, etc., but they ARE still strong and able to apologize or recognize their foibles b/c of that very inner strength…that is, such admissions will not knock their fragile egos down, thus it’s no big deal).
But the really “interesting” compariosn is between the people I’m discussing in this thread (externally strong but internally weak) and those who are both externally strong and also internally strong (and thus can acknowledge their mistakes and shortcomings for the same reason as mentioned above). The sad thing is that many, if not most, people cannot make the distinction between these two groups–they cannot reconcile the notion that an outwardly “strong” and “good/sweet” person can be so internally “weak” and “not so good/sweet” (for lack of better words).
Although many people might say they know all of this (i.e., what we see on the outside is the opposite of what is on the inside), if you look at many of the dynamics and conflicts on boards such as these, you can see that most people tend not to RECOGNIZE this truism in all but the most obvious cases.
I’m not sure if the preceding makes as much sense without the context in which it was originally written, but I’m sure everyone can find an online conflict that played out the way I’ve described. Sadly, the characters I’m writing about are often those you would hope would know better…[/b]
Mr Hammer, meet Mr. Nail.