Help me to understand conflict...

[Gomendosi]

So, you want to fight for your rights, well get in line, right there behind the haters, oh, and the lovers of conflict.

I have never understood conflict, is that and Aspergical trait or the way I was bought up, sure it is emotional to have your opinion refuted or called into question, but that can lead to interesting discussions. I was always told that you can talk your way into and out of anything, so conflict to me is an escalation of emotion and disruption of logic, I really like to try to view conflict as a chance to learn, but the older I get the more I see that most people get off on it, at least as far as I can tell, like take for instance here in AC, an example would be:
If I were to start a thread about how I love monkeys and I say; "I really love monkeys, tell me whether or not you do too", because its always good to hear both sides of the equation. Well, ten people come in and rave about monkeys, they're great, they're cuddly, I have stuffed moneys on my bed, I have a monkey keychain, monkeys are pretty, blah blah, blah... Right.
So then number eleven comes along and says I don't even like monkeys, which ordinarily is all fine and dandy, you are entitled to your opinion as you were asked for it after all, but then poster number five sees that and comes back and says, oh that's a shame because moneys are terrific, and then promptly sets out to defend monkeys to the person who [in the opinion of number five] simply doesn't get it... That's usually when all hell breaks loose!

See, I do get that people are passionate about monkeys, I also get that some people don't like them and they want that known, what I don't get is why both sides cant get along. If you don't like monkeys, then say so and leave it at that, alternatively you don't have to visit my monkey thread in the first place, but don't start shitting all over the beliefs of people that do like them, going on and on about how detrimental is the non amorous love of the monkey and being disparaging of monkeys in general, but by the same token, everybody is entitled to their opinion so if somebody comes into the love of monkeys thread and starts to fling poo (very monkey like) then don't start going off your rocker about how monkeys are the be all and end all and how wrong, or possibly evil are they for not liking them, some people don't like monkeys and that's all there is to it... or at least that is the theory.

I see this kind of behaviour in real life obviously but in here it is a microcosm of opinion, why do people force their own opinions down others throats, why cant people accept other viewpoints without arcing up, why cant people not bait and belittle others, why cant people accept criticism of their chosen thing, if you love it so much you would be able to defend it or at least concede there are other ways of looking at it.

There is so much I don't understand about people and they way they interact and I thought being in here would help me with that, but it seems we are all the same even if people have Aspergers or not, really I am not sure it is a good thing that I just cant understand the need for conflict as it gets me in more trouble than can be healthy, but the other side of the coin is it allows me to be unbiased and cut to the chase, or so I believe.

Obviously, it goes deeper than in here of course!, like, I don't understand why people have to die over a piece of land they both hold sacred or why people get killed for sneakers.

But that's a topic for a different thread ; ]

 

[Sparticus]

Oh my gawd I'm so guilty of this... :-(

I think that, maybe we observed this behavior in childhood by a parent or other mentor? Perhaps it is a learned emotion? Plus some are more aggressive, others emotional, some not passionate...and perhaps then you get an explosion when certain personalities meet? Maybe it's PTSD or some have suggested when our self esteem feels low, some people feel energized by argueing & putting down others. Or we might feel victimized by a certain group, we can't grow past it & act out our feelings.

There's a saying about political movements-besides regular people they also attract thug like individuals, who cling onto an idealogy. Well not sure if that helps. Would be wonderful if there was less bitter argueing and more understanding. With that said, wth?! Monkeys? They start th most trouble among the animal kingdom! Are you kidding me! What about the Orangutans? Animals are prejudiced against orangutans for their hair color. Omg...I can't believe, out of all the primates you used monkeys! ;D

 

[Cyanide Lollipop]

My mother (who has a lot of AS traits and I suspect is AS too) is bad for conflicts. She just has to be right all the time. If someone is wrong, it doesn't matter how unimportant it is, she won't let it go and just has to tell them. It costs her friendships too.

 

[King_Oni]

I think, the entire deal with conflict, especially online is; there are no real repercussions.

Online everyone can pretty much barge in on any conversation/debate and give their opinion, no matter how controversial it is. Not to mention how offensive some might be. The best you'll get online is banned from from a certain website. In real life, people might eventually punch you in the face for being an ignorant piece of %#$* (and overal annoyance).

Online conflict has given people who search it, either just to fight someone, debate for the sake of debating or just to get off by pissing someone off, a lot of power through means of being in a geographical advantageous position and you can hide behind a screenname. What are the chances some is going to find out and go through the hassle (and expenses) to hunt me down just because I called him a name and made his plea for something look inferior? Most people don't have that resolve (nor resources) to act like that.

In real life, people clearly have less conflict over trivial matters, or at least keep it more polite in a lot of cases. I sometimes think, looking at certain websites and looking at the comments... comparatively just based on intensity it's like doing hit and runs severe enough to make them visit the hospital. They're clearly not nice... or as someone once put it "they're the thing of nightmares". It takes only a little courage to wish someone a terminal disease online... if you wish so in real life, people will act upon it.

But maybe I'm biased for being online a lot and just seeing a lot of way more over the top insulting and conflict seeking on the internet than I see in the streets.

If I look at family, and maybe it's just my family. I, just like my parents, can be honest and clear and just settle with "perhaps you're right"... and everyone in this house goes through the hassle to find actual back up for his/her claims. That's how argueing and debate should work in a disagreement IMO. And if it's just an opinion.. fine, to each their own. Though I've known people with parents, especially when they were younger, were parents would just as easy beat their opinion into their children. That happens if you're an infant (and shouldn't though), good luck trying that on your 20 year old... he might hit back (unless he's been brainwashed with a lot of humility).

So I think the thing with conflict in general is; the lack of real repercussions. People will most likely not threaten your livelyhood, and that's why people don't care to seek conflict.

 

[Soup]

It's definitely complicated! To render it even more so, people have different tolerance levels & comfort zones when it comes to debating a given issue. Some are so sensitive that the slightest hint of a disagreement or any mild questioning of something they said makes them feel put on the spot, challenged or confronted. THen there are people at the other extreme who love a heated argument & thrive off of conflict. They do not mind having their opinions gutted by a better debater & they love doing the same to other people. They do not take anything personally no matter how heated things become. It is difficult to tell when someone else is feeling overwhelmed by a conflict.

The worst are those who are clearly wrong about something (where there are verifiable facts to substantiate an argument) but who cannot admit it. They insist on arguing on: their ego cannot take the fact that they were mistaken about something. These types my even get mad at the other person for daring to be right about something as if nobody has the right to know more about any subject than they do.

I wonder sometimes if ego investment can be correlated to contentiousness. What I mean is whether it can be proven that the more a person cares about & is passionate about an issue, the more likely they are to be driven towards conflict should anyone express a divergent opinion about it. Some people are prepared to come to blows & even kill in the name of loyalty to some team. It makes no sense at all.

 

[total-recoil]

All hell usually breaks loose when the concept of being right overshadows the truth. It's sometimes not easy to dismiss the importance of being right in search of the actual truth. If we admit we may possibly be wrong in the first place it's easier to find the correct deduction. Anyway the worst explosions I've seen have been usually electrical discussions. Amazing how even the experts in that field wind up confused and then ferociously defend their original position.

So, you want to fight for your rights, well get in line, right there behind the haters, oh, and the lovers of conflict.

I have never understood conflict, is that and Aspergical trait or the way I was bought up, sure it is emotional to have your opinion refuted or called into question, but that can lead to interesting discussions. I was always told that you can talk your way into and out of anything, so conflict to me is an escalation of emotion and disruption of logic, I really like to try to view conflict as a chance to learn, but the older I get the more I see that most people get off on it, at least as far as I can tell, like take for instance here in AC, an example would be:
If I were to start a thread about how I love monkeys and I say; "I really love monkeys, tell me whether or not you do too", because its always good to hear both sides of the equation. Well, ten people come in and rave about monkeys, they're great, they're cuddly, I have stuffed moneys on my bed, I have a monkey keychain, monkeys are pretty, blah blah, blah... Right.
So then number eleven comes along and says I don't even like monkeys, which ordinarily is all fine and dandy, you are entitled to your opinion as you were asked for it after all, but then poster number five sees that and comes back and says, oh that's a shame because moneys are terrific, and then promptly sets out to defend monkeys to the person who [in the opinion of number five] simply doesn't get it... That's usually when all hell breaks loose!

See, I do get that people are passionate about monkeys, I also get that some people don't like them and they want that known, what I don't get is why both sides cant get along. If you don't like monkeys, then say so and leave it at that, alternatively you don't have to visit my monkey thread in the first place, but don't start shitting all over the beliefs of people that do like them, going on and on about how detrimental is the non amorous love of the monkey and being disparaging of monkeys in general, but by the same token, everybody is entitled to their opinion so if somebody comes into the love of monkeys thread and starts to fling poo (very monkey like) then don't start going off your rocker about how monkeys are the be all and end all and how wrong, or possibly evil are they for not liking them, some people don't like monkeys and that's all there is to it... or at least that is the theory.

I see this kind of behaviour in real life obviously but in here it is a microcosm of opinion, why do people force their own opinions down others throats, why cant people accept other viewpoints without arcing up, why cant people not bait and belittle others, why cant people accept criticism of their chosen thing, if you love it so much you would be able to defend it or at least concede there are other ways of looking at it.

There is so much I don't understand about people and they way they interact and I thought being in here would help me with that, but it seems we are all the same even if people have Aspergers or not, really I am not sure it is a good thing that I just cant understand the need for conflict as it gets me in more trouble than can be healthy, but the other side of the coin is it allows me to be unbiased and cut to the chase, or so I believe.

Obviously, it goes deeper than in here of course!, like, I don't understand why people have to die over a piece of land they both hold sacred or why people get killed for sneakers.

But that's a topic for a different thread ; ]

 

[Wessicht]

It's basic group cohesion theory. In any environment where there is an established inner circle, any newcomer must find a way to align himself with the group. The discussion of monkeys simply serves as a ritual by which others can achieve status. e.g. by shouting out about how much they love monkeys, the poster more closely aligns themselves with the original post, which is usually the standard in threads.

Any entity that attacks the ritual or undermines its content threatens the cohesion of the group. Even though the individuals themselves are not threatened, they feel the need to defend the statements of the group. The reason for this is simple. If the members felt no such compunction, then no group would form at all.

But don't get the idea that conflict is bad, Gomendosi. It performs a vital function within groups as a moderating influence. In particular, in-group conflict helps prevent extremism and fanaticism. You can see this in societies that are affected by group-think, where any dissent is met with fierce resistance and harsh criticism.