We are drawn to those who agree with us and validates us in a way.

[Jolie77]

But here's the underlying question --

Does it matter what we agree about? Is there a difference between those who bond over a negative goal versus those who bond over a positive goal?

 

[jillio]

I want to be sure I understand your question before I answer. Do you mean people that form a bond as a result of different opinions, or people who bond to accomplish a negative goal...like two people who team up to commit robberies or two people who are together because they are both addicted to drugs?

 

[Jolie77]

I want to be sure I understand your question before I answer. Do you mean people that form a bond as a result of different opinions, or people who bond to accomplish a negative goal...like two people who team up to commit robberies or two people who are together because they are both addicted to drugs?

Sort of.

What I mean is - For instance when 2 people agrees on a negative goal such as advocating for an issue (such as abortions, political crusade, smoking, drugs or whatanot) that others does not agree on; Would that mean they are better off bonding/agreeing on it than the ones that bonds/agrees on a positive goal?

Let's say - You and I both agree/bond over the importance of abortion and others does not see it that way, Would that matter too?

Is it wrong to bond over a negative goal than a positive goal? Or is it right in it's own way to do so?

 

[jillio]

Sort of.

What I mean is - For instance when 2 people agrees on a negative goal such as advocating for an issue (such as abortions, political crusade, smoking, drugs or whatanot) that others does not agree on; Would that mean they are better off bonding/agreeing on it than the ones that bonds/agrees on a positive goal?

Let's say - You and I both agree/bond over the importance of abortion and others does not see it that way, Would that matter too?

Is it wrong to bond over a negative goal than a positive goal? Or is it right in it's own way to do so?

Okay, I got it now. No, as far as the bond is concerned, it would be just as strong either way. The reason for that is, if we agree on abortion, politics, smoking, etc. we don't see it as negative. We see our goal as positive. It is others who see it as negative. Just as someone who campaigns against abortion sees their goal as positive, but others see it as negative.

I think what is most important in the bond is that there is agreement.

 

[Jolie77]

Okay, I got it now. No, as far as the bond is concerned, it would be just as strong either way. The reason for that is, if we agree on abortion, politics, smoking, etc. we don't see it as negative. We see our goal as positive. It is others who see it as negative. Just as someone who campaigns against abortion sees their goal as positive, but others see it as negative.

I think what is most important in the bond is that there is agreement.

You're correct. However, I have to wonder - When a party happens not to view it differently - we are still drawn out to validate them in a way which means we could as try hard as we could to "change" their mind. When that happens - It may seem like we're trying too hard to the point where it turns out ugly.

I'm just trying to get to the bigger picture where not just about everyone could agree to disagree. In that case, perhaps it's just me but I've been seeing how it can actually offset something else in a view, not only because of what is said but because of how the words are instilled to 'dance' around it.

They are very aggressive, but why are they so hostile? They are almost totally uninfluenced by reasoning and evidence, but why are they so dogmatic? We have more than its fair share of hypocrites, from top to bottom; but why are they two-faced, and how come one face never notices the other? Yes, We can give the flimsiest of excuses and even outright lies about things they’ve done wrong, but why do the rank-and-file believe them? What happens when authoritarian followers find the authoritarian leaders they crave and start marching together?

 

[jillio]

You're correct. However, I have to wonder - When a party happens not to view it differently - we are still drawn out to validate them in a way which means we could as try hard as we could to "change" their mind. When that happens - It may seem like we're trying too hard to the point where it turns out ugly.

I'm just trying to get to the bigger picture where not just about everyone could agree to disagree. In that case, perhaps it's just me but I've been seeing how it can actually offset something else in a view, not only because of what is said but because of how the words are instilled to 'dance' around it.

They are very aggressive, but why are they so hostile? They are almost totally uninfluenced by reasoning and evidence, but why are they so dogmatic? We have more than its fair share of hypocrites, from top to bottom; but why are they two-faced, and how come one face never notices the other? Yes, We can give the flimsiest of excuses and even outright lies about things they’ve done wrong, but why do the rank-and-file believe them? What happens when authoritarian followers find the authoritarian leaders they crave and start marching together?

Very interesting points. Here is what I think happens most often in the "agree to disagree" situation:

Person A: This is what I believe!!

Person B: Well, this is what I believe and why I believe it.

Person A: You are attacking me and telling me I am wrong.

Person B: No, I am telling you that I believe differently and showing you why I do.

Person A: Well you are just insulting me.

Person A then goes about doing everything they can to defend themselves when it isn't even necessary. That's when things start to turn ugly, because Person A will insult Person B, and Person B will respond by insulting back. Person A just can't seem to grasp the fact that a different opinion is not a personal attack, and that support for one's beliefs is not an insult.

What happens when one who craves an authoritarian leader finds one:

That is the very stuff that cults are made of.

 

[Rio]

lI hope am answering this question correctly, if two people agree on an issue they bond automatically. If these two people meet two opposing individuals on a certain view. In my opinion, you will see not see persons A & B get bond with C & D on a particular issue.

First, if you are in a debate fine, get your facts straight , find good arguementive sources to help support the topic. If you are in a debate team work together to have a good foundation debate with the opposing teams.

 

[shel90]

I am more likely to bond with those who share the same viewpoints as I do than I am with those who dont.

 

[Hear Again]

I am more likely to bond with those who share the same viewpoints as I do than I am with those who dont.

Same here.

That doesn't mean I can't be friends who don't share the same views. (I happen to be friends with alot of Conservatives) It means I get along better with those who do.

 

[shel90]

Same here.

That doesn't mean I can't be friends who don't share the same views. (I happen to be friends with alot of Conservatives) It means I get along better with those who do.

Right...the key word here "more likely"

Doesnt mean I wont be able to bond with those who have differing views.

 

[Hear Again]

Right...the key word here "more likely"

Doesnt mean I wont be able to bond with those who have differing views.

Exactly.

Take Reba for instance. She shares different political viewpoints than I do yet we are still friends.

 

[Jolie77]

Very interesting points. Here is what I think happens most often in the "agree to disagree" situation:

Person A: This is what I believe!!

Person B: Well, this is what I believe and why I believe it.

Person A: You are attacking me and telling me I am wrong.

Person B: No, I am telling you that I believe differently and showing you why I do.

Person A: Well you are just insulting me.

Person A then goes about doing everything they can to defend themselves when it isn't even necessary. That's when things start to turn ugly, because Person A will insult Person B, and Person B will respond by insulting back. Person A just can't seem to grasp the fact that a different opinion is not a personal attack, and that support for one's beliefs is not an insult.

What happens when one who craves an authoritarian leader finds one:

That is the very stuff that cults are made of.

That is what I often seen when a lot of misunderstanding underlies with the issues when both parties are having a debate with. Sometimes when a point comes across as too strong and it may seem like it's an insult when it really is not. So, How would it be possible if one could still be able to deliver it's stance without coming on too strong to make it seem like it's insulting?

lI hope am answering this question correctly, if two people agree on an issue they bond automatically. If these two people meet two opposing individuals on a certain view. In my opinion, you will see not see persons A & B get bond with C & D on a particular issue.

First, if you are in a debate fine, get your facts straight , find good arguementive sources to help support the topic. If you are in a debate team work together to have a good foundation debate with the opposing teams.

Very well said. I think when it comes to try to find facts to support your reasoning - it also will bring and/or shed some lights to it rather than basing it off to make it seem like it went off board.

Sure, I've had some friends who does not agree with me - and - I'm fine with that. I'm ok with it. The world would be a boring place if everyone were to agree with everything. To make a thought that is provoking could also literally bring some "eye" opener to learn a thing or two.

 

[jillio]

That is what I often seen when a lot of misunderstanding underlies with the issues when both parties are having a debate with. Sometimes when a point comes across as too strong and it may seem like it's an insult when it really is not. So, How would it be possible if one could still be able to deliver it's stance without coming on too strong to make it seem like it's insulting?

Well, we can all try to be more diplomatic, I suppose. But the problem is, no matter how diplomatic we are, we cannot control another person's reactions. Some will see insult in even the most diplomatically phrased difference in opinion, simply because they feel they are being "corrected". This most often comes from the person's own insecurities and the fact that their opinion may be based more on emotion than on logic. When one attempts to discuss something from a logical perspective, and another has an opinion based solely on emotion, the second person will always be on the defensive. I think the solution lies not so much in being careful about the way something is said as it does in being careful not to react emotionally, and respond emotionally, during a discussion.

 

[shel90]

Well, we can all try to be more diplomatic, I suppose. But the problem is, no matter how diplomatic we are, we cannot control another person's reactions. Some will see insult in even the most diplomatically phrased difference in opinion, simply because they feel they are being "corrected". This most often comes from the person's own insecurities and the fact that their opinion may be based more on emotion than on logic. When one attempts to discuss something from a logical perspective, and another has an opinion based solely on emotion, the second person will always be on the defensive. I think the solution lies not so much in being careful about the way something is said as it does in being careful not to react emotionally, and respond emotionally, during a discussion.

Or it could be due to the differences in one's command of the language being used..if one has a different command than the other, misunderstandings are likely to occur in which people are left feeling offended or insulted when it really wasnt the case.

 

[jillio]

Or it could be due to the differences in one's command of the language being used..if one has a different command than the other, misunderstandings are likely to occur in which people are left feeling offended or insulted when it really wasnt the case.

That is a very good point. Also different cultural backgrounds can lead to misunderstandings of what is insulting.

 

[Jolie77]

Or it could be due to the differences in one's command of the language being used..if one has a different command than the other, misunderstandings are likely to occur in which people are left feeling offended or insulted when it really wasnt the case.

I hadn't thought about that but you do bring a valid point about how the languages are used.

Not everyone have the best use of their language and sometime, well -- It can be a challenge to get one's point across when the upbringing of their language are used differently.

 

[deafbajagal]

For me, it really depends on the issue at hand.

With my personality, I get along with just about anybody and can go with the flow...but I have a hard time with trusting others, thus bonding with others.

 

[Cheri]

I personally bond well with people who shows respect in others opinions, than those who shows lack of respect in others opinions. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and having a right of an opinion does not make an opinion any right or any wrong.

{Mod's Edit - Comment removed thus provoking} It doesn't mean all deaf people should share the same values, opinions and thoughts as other deaf people, we are all individuals and have our own set of minds. {Mod's Edit - Comment removed thus provoking/enticing} it's the respect I'm seeing is not given to others who they disagree with. This is just how I see it.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Or it could be due to the differences in one's command of the language being used..if one has a different command than the other, misunderstandings are likely to occur in which people are left feeling offended or insulted when it really wasnt the case.

That's how i see in people's reponses to others' commends differently. Like most of us don't have the same language or concepts that more likely that lead to misunderstanding or feeling insulted often when it wasn't the case. bingo.

indivdual people's minds sure aren't same!

 

[shel90]

That's how i see in people's reponses to others' commends differently. Like most of us don't have the same language or concepts that more likely that lead to misunderstanding or feeling insulted often when it wasn't the case. bingo.

indivdual people's minds sure aren't same!

That's true...

Oh well...life goes on. I cant dwell on it too much. Not worth it.