I am equally argumentative with people I discuss philosophy with outside of the forum, but those people who have the knowledge and skills required are generally rare. Thus, I make my abode around here (where the % of such people is greater), trying to force out whatever bits of knowledge I can get out of others :P . Does it enrich my life? I would guess so.

But I do hope I'm not a Bitter Crank, we already have one around here :P

Yes it has very much enriched the past 48 hours of my life.

I think people generally behave negatively toward others (in the manners to which you refer) as a form of stress relief.

As such stress will diffuse through our humble forum, going from one user to another (generally in the form of reciprocated rudeness).

Perhaps people just have a lot of stress as of late, but I do agree with you that it's less than enriching..

I'd rather not argue with anyone. It's just that some people have the nerve to not agree with everything I say. If they'd just fall in line and treat every utterance like manna from heaven . . .

I'd rather not argue with anyone. It's just that some people have the nerve to not agree with everything I say. If they'd just fall in line and treat every utterance like manna from heaven . . . — Terrapin Station

>:O >:O

Actually, if that was the case, I think I'd leave the forums, since there would be nothing left to learn no? :P Without conflict there is no progress.

I see conflict as useful to an extent, as it can help me figure out how to better express my views, but only as long as I'm not basically talking to a wall . . . and too often online I seem to be.

I wouldn't say that I'm trying to develop or progress my own views. I don't feel like I'm trying to figure anything out. I'm satisfied with my views and have been for a long time. Although I suppose in some respects my views continue to evolve nevertheless. And I'm not trying to learn anything on message boards other than what other folks' views are, just for curiosity's sake, but only as long as their views seem to be coherent . . . and too often they do not.

But I'd seriously have no problem with people agreeing with me, wanting to be followers, etc. I'd happily be a cult leader (although preferably with a much higher percentage of female cultists).

I've had a few decent conversations with people on this forum...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/648/systems-vs-existentialism#Item_31

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/406/is-your-interest-in-philosophy-having-an-effect-on-how-you-live-your-life#Item_56

What we do here is test our metal. If you do not extend your ideas for examination; you have no idea how strong they are. Of course there will be people to harass you – did you come here thinking otherwise? That would be naive, stupid or both. People attack other people for a variety of reasons, but mostly because their domain is threatened. When I posit an idea I expect to step on somebodies toes. At least I hope I do. However, I also have the expectation my opposition will be intelligent and somewhat honorable. Philosophers are a tough bunch, which is not easily intimidated. There is also a kind of policing system in place.

All of the above at some time or other. I spend time away from the forum when the exasperation becomes too much to bear or if it all seems like a waste of time. At least I have a good sense of humor to get some form of relief from all of the wrath that you people invoke in me.

I like the model of Socrates that Plato presents to us. The guy just didn't get angry or argumentative.

I think clear language goes a long way in fostering better debates, which tends to lead to more respect. Of course I'm not always clear. But I think clear, well responded debates allow room for us to become aggrevated by the ideas themselves, not the people. I think that's the ideal.

While one who sings with his tongue on fire
Gargles in the rat race choir
Bent out of shape from society’s pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he’s in

But I mean no harm nor put fault
On anyone that lives in a vault
But it’s alright, Ma, if I can’t please him.

The Gospel of Bob, ch4, v3.

Does this forum enrich your life? — schopenhauer1

Goodness, no. But, I have found it enriching having brilliant debates and discussions via private messages and getting to know some people personally. Occasionally, an opportunity for fruitful discussions that do mirror out flaws in your understanding or opinion can make the time spent here worthy in some small way and for others expressing their personal concerns may give them insights that they would have otherwise never attained. But, ultimately, all virtual environments enable us to escape from reality for a bit and vent our frustrations; it is merely an intellectual form of entertainment.

I find *some* people are [insert critical word] here *some* of the time, and that's all right if it stays civilised and sometimes it sharpens one's thinking process. If it was what you call it, 'most' people 'most' of the time, I wouldn't come.

Does this forum enrich your life? — schopenhauer1

Ask not what your forum can do for you. Ask what you can do for your forum. :P

To be a little more objective (for lack of a better word) in such described situations of disagreement, one might find it helpful to remember the subtle but definite difference between "being" and "doing", between "is" and "acts". I would agree with the metaphysical tenet that saying "I am (...)" is an extremely powerful statement, one that in fact has much influence in defining and determining the actuality of what one becomes. This is affected by how often it is repeated and how much intent is invested. (btw, just to be clear... repeatedly and passionately saying "I am Spiderman" will more likely make someone a bit neurotic rather than giving them superpowers. But odds are it will have a definite effect.) Likewise, the statement "You are (...)" has much weight. Who doesn't at least slightly cringe when someone wishes to define us, proclaiming boldly "In my opinion, I honestly think that you are ... "? Even if it is a compliment or praise, odds are the experience is awkward or uncomfortable.

Contrast this with a "doing" point of view. Then for example, saying "I think Bert is stupid" becomes something along the lines of "I think Bert acted stupidly in that case". Okay, the second example doesn't exactly roll off the tongue as easily as the first. And in the heat of emotion, it may seem kind of wishy-washy to speak like that. But it is an important distinction, imho. For instance, i would admit to doing many stupid or bad actions, but would not say that i was stupid or bad, even at the time in question. Another example is the phrase ad hominem, which usually refers to verbal or written personal attacks. But criticizing, insulting, attacking someone's words as opposed to their person, appears to be allowed by free speech by stopping short of libel. At least as far as I understand the terms in question. This is speaking very generally, of course. Each situation will have its particularities. But hopefully this is a helpful distinction, and is one useful not only in disagreements.

Ask not what your forum can do for you. Ask what you can do for your forum. — TheMadFool

>:O

And to that I would add:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day participate in an online forum where they will not be judged by the colour of their font, but by the content of their posts.

What are you talking about? I'm a ray of fuckin' sunshine. You clearly haven't read my work closely enough.

In all seriousness, though, philosophy is a subject that tends to make people cranky (academic philosophy at least) because it involves a lot of argumentation, so it's easy for people to look grumpier on a forum like this than they really are.

There's only so much psychopathology masquerading as badphil one can take. It's better for everyone this way, lest I have a Falling Down moment.

Goodness, no. — TimeLine

But, ultimately, all virtual environments enable us to escape from reality for a bit and vent our frustrations; — TimeLine

Oh good. Now I can safely ignore you when you start talking about rational autonomous agents, and dismiss you for just venting out your frustrations. Cool! (Y)

There's only so much psychopathology masquerading as badphil one can take. It's better for everyone this way, lest I have a Falling Down moment. — WhiskeyWhiskers

Fallin' down from where?

Fallin' down from where? — Agustino

A high horse, I'd imagine.

A high horse, I'd imagine. — unenlightened

That's not bad, he may get a taste of the earth finally! :P

:-!

Pegasus forever!

You're like a broken record singing the same song over and again. I like Kant, deal with it. Now, stop stalking my every post.

You remind me of Mr. Collins.

I notice people tend to move from a conversation to an argument very quickly as soon as topics get complex or opinions differ. What people unconsciously end up doing is always trying to take the opposing viewpoint and end up actually supporting viewpoints they would otherwise disagree with, purely because they are in an argument and they want to compete and win. Rarely do I meet people who try to find the truth in the other person's statements, it is more people trying to find the flaw so that they can use it to justify that they can win an argument against you. Defence mechanisms of the ego, which all developed because our primate lineage. Kind of sad because we are living in the most technologically advanced age and yet still behave like we did 2,000, nay 10,000, nay 2 million years ago.

Rarely do I meet people who try to find the truth in the other person's statements, it is more people trying to find the flaw so that they can use it to justify that they can win an argument against you. Defence mechanisms of the ego, — intrapersona

Good observation. (Y)

There are some awesome posts though. Tweet worthy:

Are women generally submissive to men? Yes, I think they are. Why, the reason is obvious – men are physically stronger — Thinker