• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Arguments: The folly of two irrational people.

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“I’ve seen useless argumentative subjective arguments between individuals. What they don’t know is both are projecting their own internal reality into another.

Another person with a different set of genetics. This a person with different set of pre-born characteristics, and persuasions.

The arguers are not taking into account the other persons unique birth, parenting, early life experiences and the other persons entire life path.

I’ve said that it takes two irrational people to have an argument. One is metaphorically banging their head uselessly against the North wall and being bloodied.

Meanwhile the other is metaphorically banging their head uselessly against the South wall. Both are not using active listening skills. They are not communicating. They are rather ‘Talking AT each other.’

Neither is listening nor are they using active listening skills. This would mean reflecting, paraphrasing and other skill sets.

They are rather talking at each other. In a sense getting louder and louder. All the while more abrasive and rude. They are both basically pouring gasoline unto the fire.

They are so intent on spreading their own message, that they are oblivious of their own thought distortions.

There is a difference between communication and talking at a person with one’s own message. Their is a difference between listening and hearing only themselves.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“We have two ears and one mouth. We should listen twice as much as speak.” and “When I speak I only repeat what I know. If I am silent I may learn something.”

If I practice active listening skills in my communication, I may learn something. Utilizing active listening is truest discussion. It is when two people speak and yet are heard. Validation and feedback is part of thought empathy.

There is a difference between communicating and talking “At” a person. It is far different to listen rather than hear only yourself. True communication is a two way street.

In an argument both parties are talking “At” another party and both are hearing only themselves. They are both operating on a one way street only repeating their own individual message.

The argument only grows more heated. As both parties are not communicating with each other, each of the arguers repeats their message. It is akin to throwing gasoline on a fire. Discussion yields results and growth.

As both parties listen to another’s viewpoint, there understanding grows. Their horizons broaden and the person can mature by having a much more broad perception of different problems.

Those that argue don’t grow. As they don’t broaden their horizons by being of closed mind set. They remain stagnant. This is like saying I know it all. I am right. You are wrong. There is no compromise between adults.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“Argument at every cause should be avoided. It shows the manifest ignorance of the person.”

“We don’t argue to make a point with negative commentary. As long as two ‘Rational’ human beings communicate, then growth is possible. Maybe compromise.

This requires among ingredients needed: tolerance, respect for other peoples beliefs, and open minded.

There needs willingness to understand another through the use of dialogue using these ingredients in one’s discourse. Without these ingredients , if one reverts to negativity, then they unconsciously are projecting.

They become triggered. They are projecting their own unconscious conflicts, unresolved issues, emotional baggage and unknowingly their psychic wound. They pollute unto reality their issues. There is no discourse with those clearly irrational.

Irrational is not someone who has a different position. It is one who uses cognitive distortions in their speech and writing. They are clearly manifest. These distortions are clearly defined in CBT: cognitive behavior therapy.

As well REBT: rational behavior therapy. If one uses clearly labeling, pejoratives, and name calling, emotional reasoning, generalization or all or nothing thinking then their thinking is clearly not disciplined.”
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“Learn to pick your battles. Know when not to engage someone who is coming from a blatantly negative position.

They may disparage you or your opinion with subjective labels, pejoratives and name calling. They are clearly triggered and blindly lashing out using irrationality.

Do not engage. They are projecting their own issues. To uselessly engage them would amount to both being irrational and protecting their ego’s.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“No one can insult us but ourselves. No one can shame us except as a byproduct of our speech, and or actions.

In the Bible it says the body is the temple. I would add so is the mouth. If what comes out is profane, name calling, belittling, perjoratives or calling other people names

it is a reflection of your inner being irregardless of the external situation or person. By spewing forth hate and judgment you defile the temple and cast shame unto yourself.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“Do you take ownership and together with it self responsibility for your own thoughts, feelings, speech and actions? Or do you blast other people with your unknown to yourself unfinished business?

Do you lash out and blame reality for the way you feel? More importantly do you hold on to this pollution and bile of the soul?

In psychology we are trained to take ownership of our emotions. In addition of our own thoughts, speech and actions without lashing out with our own

unfinished business, unresolved conflicts, emotional baggage and our unhealed psychic wounds.

We do this by saying, “I think. I feel.” Those who are negative and blame others or the world are like pollution projecting their own issues unto others.

I’ve learned long ago to never engage a person coming from a negative place and attitude. You can’t reason with them. They are clearly coming from a place of irrationality, anger and negative energy.

Do not engage but walk away. Don’t be in a battle of protecting your ego just because someone is negative toward you.

They have life lessons to learn. To those as described above, they are emotionally, spiritually and psychologically immature.

Don’t show your own immaturity by arguing with them, or trying to get them to see your point of view or convince them you are right. For then you’d have two irrational people.

What both parties don’t understand is that philosophically both are projecting illusions of their own issues unto others. Neither party is practicing active listening skills.

Bruce Lee said, “Be like water” in his martial arts discipline. I employ a similar philosophy when it comes to my interpersonal dialogues. I don’t loose my cool.

Every attack by this person who was triggers and was argumentative. For each of her nonsensical subject opinionated attacks, inspired me on how to handle the situation.

In Judo, Jujitsu and Aikido we use the opponents attacks against them. Philosophically wise to not take anything personal.

Just stick to my boundaries which I clearly spell out for the person I am engaging in a conversation of hopefully mutual respect.” LightSun

#communication #Projection #Selfresponsibility
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
#projection #discussion #boundaries #argument #triggered #listeningskills

“What is the difference between an argument and a discussion?

When I write I set up my boundaries. If a person engages me on my page, they play by my rules. They don’t have to accept it.

If they stray away from the topic of the debate with a triggered argumentative response filled with subjective opinions I merely ignore. I’ve written it takes two people to have an argument.

One is metaphorically banging their head bloodily on the North wall and the other person is banging their bloody head uselessly on the South Wall.

What two irrational people are doing is not using active listening skills. They are merely repeating themselves over and over all the while it’s as if they are pouring gasoline in their own irrationality.

They don’t even realize they are triggered. They are in a dictionary sense ignorant that they are indeed projecting their inner reality unto another person.

They are not even aware they are projecting their unconscious cognitive schemas of their belief system that are made up primarily by parental, peer and societal expectations.

No one has a right to tell another person what to believe in. If they do, then they are speaking as God.

I don’t touch it. I let the person stay in their irrational position. What is irrational? That which isn’t objective fact and empirically proven by hard science research methodology and the results replicated.

Instead subjective attacks, subjective opinions or sources which I personally don’t give credence too.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“We have two ears and one mouth. We should listen twice as much as speak.” and “When I speak I only repeat what I know. If I am silent I may learn something.”

If I practice active listening skills in my communication, I may learn something. Utilizing active listening is truest discussion. It is when two people speak and yet are heard. Validation and feedback is part of thought empathy.

There is a difference between communicating and talking “At” a person. It is far different to listen rather than hear only yourself. True communication is a two way street.

In an argument both parties are talking “At” another party and both are hearing only themselves. They are both operating on a one way street only repeating their own individual message.

The argument only grows more heated. As both parties are not communicating with each other, each of the arguers repeats their message. It is akin to throwing gasoline on a fire. Discussion yields results and growth.

As both parties listen to another’s viewpoint, there understanding grows. Their horizons broaden and the person can mature by having a much more broad perception of different problems.

Those that argue don’t grow. As they don’t broaden their horizons by being of closed mind set. They remain stagnant. This is like saying I know it all. I am right. You are wrong. There is no compromise between adults.” LightSun
 

LightSun

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,028
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
#9
“I takes two irrational people to have an argument. Metaphorically one person is banging their head on the North wall.

The Second party is banging their head on the south wall. Both are caught up with protecting their own message.

They don’t practice thought empathy, feelings empathy, feedback or validation. They are both like pouring gasoline unto a fire that represents their argument.

They are triggered and reacting with their own emotional baggage, unfinished business, psychic wound and unconscious conflicts.” LightSun
 
Top