Disagreements go on forever when both parties are arguing out of a state of ignorance, for it is only knowledge of truth that can bring peace guidance to the lost and sight to the blind. People can disagree for eternity when neither party can see the true nature of what it is they disagree on. One faulty argument can never kill another, only the irrefutable truth can can bring death to the pestilent, fallacious mutterings.
I had a recent thought. Don't take it seriously:
Everyone internally agrees about everything. They just don't know it because they express themselves through different means.
You're seeking identification through intelligence.
This reminds me of someone I know who has always suffered from very low self-confidence. He believes he's not really liked or likeable to other people, and so clings very strongly to the idea that he's more intelligent than most people (which, in terms of raw IQ, he is) as a basis for what self-esteem he has.
He told me that a psychiatrist once put it to him that the reason he sneered and scoffed at "non-intellectuals" having serious discussions was because he liked to feel like he, and others like him, were alone entitled/qualified to do that. He had to believe that there was *something* he "could" do that others couldn't or shouldn't, and defend that territory, to compensate for all the things he believed he couldn't do that others could - mostly, socialising and making friends. Facing the idea that all kinds of people can and do have interesting discussions would mean that there was nothing, really, that other people couldn't do that he could, and would have undermined the basis of his self-esteem: I'm more intelligent, therefore I have *proper* discussions, whilst other people just talk about mundane, uninteresting nonsense.
He realised with horror that he was an elitist, and that his elitism stemmed from self-loathing!
Last edited by proximo; 11-06-2009 at 08:11 PM.
I'm male and over 30, FYI.
Preferences: 20% Extravert, 98% Intuitive, 68% Thinker, 17% Perceiving