Ever wonder why people argue so much?
So did I, so I sat down and figured it out one day.
- Miscommunication. In which there is a difference of opinions about the meaning of a term used in the premise of the argument. In this case, you are not so much disagreeing as you are incapable of communicating with other members of your species. Sadly, this is the most common form of disagreement. At times, you will know this is happening, and the other person will insist that the definition of the words does not matter. You will try to figure out a way to put sterilizing agents in their diet Coke.
- Ignorance of logical fallacies. These are techniques many people use, often unknowingly, to try to be “right.” They don’t actually support an argument, but they seem to. There are many fallacies that most people are not familiar with. They are fun to know about, and at times use. Read about them at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacies
- Perpendicular social conditioning. This is where different people have been brought up to believe different things that some (or all) of them have not adequately questioned, and now they are in conflict. Ex: “Marriage is between a man and a woman” Vs. “Equal rights.”
- Void of solution, (acceptance of no good choice,) Here people argue about what they should do when neither option is desirable. This is not a spectrum issue, as described below, but rather an issue in which a proper solution has not been presented, or accepted for serious consideration, but a solution is needed and so people argue about what to do when all suggested options are undesirable. Ex: should income tax go up or down?
- Prioritization. Similar to perpendicular social conditioning, but different in that rather than the disagreement coming from people not questioning what they are taught, it comes from well thought out lines of reasoning hitting a blockage because of differences in the characters of the people discussing the issue. When two people prioritize things such as security and freedom differently, they may legitimately disagree about what policies should be in place. When you disagree with someone, if you cannot find this root, one of you is probably right, (or both of you stupid,) if you can, you may have a legitimate disagreement, with no way to resolve it, save by entering into a deep philosophical analysis of your respective systems of prioritization.
- Ego. Some people just want to be right, and will keep fighting to prove they are, long after they have realized they are not.
…about politics
In politics, people are largely unaware that, in addition to the above, disagreements stem from ignorance of two separate issues:
- Budgetary concerns: in which the solutions most people propose don’t take into account the need to find financing for them. Ex: build a giant wall across the border to Mexico.
- Spectrum issues: in which people argue about something as though its nature is binary, when in fact it is not. Ex: gun control, which is actually about the degree to which is should be legal for one person to have the power to affect another person or group.
|