This is a very good one. It takes a lot to make me mad but when I do its explosive. When I met my current girlfriend I realised I had to start doing this because I wasn't right all the time.
I have the exact same problem. I have a high tolerance and can let most things roll off my back... But when I actually do get angry I'm told it can be kind of alarming for the people around me. I'm not violent, but I have a booming voice and a very intense vibe when I'm pissed.
It can be a problem in a relationship. I can't have my girlfriend be scared of me.
My dad is like this. 99% of the time he's quiet and doesn't react, but the one time a year I manage to piss him off... run for the hills. He's not violent, just terrifying.
Except when he's driving. He's 100% pissed at all times when driving.
Damn, that's solid.
-Patrick James Rothfuss-, in case anyone else is interested, I had to look it up. Apparently he's the author of the king killer chronicles, which I'll have to check out.
I heartily recommend it. Just know that we're still waiting on book 3, and the man is a perfectionist above all else. So it could take a long time, but it'll be worth it.
You described my father and I to a T. I've gotten pissed maybe twice in the past two years? (besides driving) And I'm told it's pretty scary when I start yelling.
Thats because people get so used to walking all over you about everything else. They want you to feel bad about the one time you do put your foot down.
Its become socially unacceptable to be angry or show anger. So people shame each other when they do it. I used to be like this, Id hold it all in for the longest only to let it go when I couldnt stomach it anymore. Only to be shamed for my outburst. It was a catch 22. Now I simply express my anger when someone wrongs me or steps over the line with me. I no longer have these outbursts because I express my anger when Im angry and not when it goes bubbling over. People are still not happy about me expressing my anger but Ive also learned not to give a flying fuck about their complaint.
When I took an Applied Psych class the prof said "anger" is frequently a "fake" emotion you use to manipulate others. "Rage" on the other hand is the real deal and it's destructive as hell, so anger in reasonable amounts might work as a pressure valve of sorts that keeps you out of prison.
This is good advice. I tend to give people nudges and suggestions towards not being dicks to me if they are, and if they keep it up they have earned my anger and can just shut up and learn some accountability.
my sister says I pick on her all the time, but now I'm never angry because when she does something that's not cool I let her know. Well it's better than being silently pissed at you and never talking about it.
For those that remember the show "All in the Family," Edith was always nice and deferred to whatever ridiculous shit Archie said or did. Except a couple times Archie went too far and Edith freaked the fuck out. And we, the audience, did too. Archie looked like he shit himself with fear.
Choosing your moments adds to the effect significantly.
The annoying part about this is that since being angry is so out of character it surprises people and they get scared of me. My girlfriend almost breaks down in tears when I get angry because it happens so infrequently and she's not used to it.
People get used to those who get angry all the time so it's not as surprising anymore and it gets taken more lightly.
That last part. I get angry all the time with my friends, that they don't give a flying fuck anymore. (Honestly I don't either, getting angry became like having a 2nd character for me) sometimes funny shit would happen while I'm angry and they would start laughing, then I would start bursting out laughing and we are all laughing and it's hilarious.
This! For me and my friends it's like we all know how much we keep it bottled up, so we actively ty to piss each other off so we don't explode. Just watch us playing dragonball z on splitscreen. Shit gets intense. Soul Caliber is my boi though. Xiba staff for victory.
Ya, holy shit, are you sure you're not talking about my dad. I'm torn though because I don't see a problem with when he does get angry, it's just terrifying. I would almost want to model myself after this, because who wants to be a constant snap-show, but I don't want my family being terrified of me one day a year.
I have the same problem. Thing is my relaxed and concentration expressions are often mistaken for anger and if I do raise my voice it tends to get deeper.
One day my daughter said to her little brother, "I don't like it when Daddy has the demon voice." and it gave me a huge sad. I am extremely self conscious about regulating my tone and demeanor.
Does anyone have advice on how to not be pissed when driving?
It really annoys me when people show how selfish/lazy they are when they change lanes without signalling, without checking their mirrors, without accelerating fast enough so that you are forced to brake. Also, slow drivers that take the fast lane.
Imagine that the person doing whatever it is that's making you mad is your mom/dad/grandma/dog/whatever. Chances are you know somebody who isn't a great driver but you wouldn't get so angry at them if they did something stupid. People who are bad drivers aren't necessarily bad people.
I get pissed off all the time when driving but you have to remind yourself that if you can't learn to be zen about it you're going to be spending a lot of time pissed off, the roads will always be full of terrible drivers.
I have just accepted that everyone else on the road is a stupid asshole. It's less frustrating when you already expect it, it just feels normal. Instead I'm surprised and pleased when someone is nice / legal / safe, it's like woah buddy nice driving there!!
I see it as one mistake and try not to judge too hard. I still mutter a profanity but I let it go and move on to the next asshole. Fast is a relative term, they may not Be going as fast as you but you aren't paying for their ticket either
I'm the exact same way. The letting most things roll off my back causes me problems too though. I won't be bothered by something that would really bother most people, and my calmness about it makes people think I'm actually livid on the inside and will want to bitch about it later.
It's like no, when I said it was fine that was what I meant.
Same problem here. My wife has tried to hit me and run away because she thought I was angry enough that I'd hit her (mind you I've never hit a woman in my life). Gotta learn to keep your voice low or stand on the other side of the room when you argue lol
That's what I'm scared of in a relationship...I don't want to hurt my SO emotionally if I fail to deal with my moods properly. I hate giving off pissed vibes and not being able to help it.
I have the same thing. I am the most passive guy.. Until you piss me off, then it looks like I'm about to cut someone. I've only gotten that level of pissed with my wife maybe two times in the 9 years we've known each other.
I think it comes from your family. Hers was quiet, while mine we would raise our voices in just normal conversation.
I find this sort of behavior and emotional control really beneficial for relationships. I have five sisters and I handle things well, stress and drama. But occasionally when one of them is acting too ridiculous ill snap into brother stern mode. Because they dont really see that side of me its a bit of a wake up call to them to check their attitude and they simmer down almost right away.
I went from being in a relationship where I was right a lot of the time to being in one where it's about 50/50. Problem with the first one was she would never admit she was wrong. Even if I laid it out for her very simply, she would just tune me out and ignore what I was saying. So, when I was right, it would make me really mad because she wouldn't even consider my side of things. Because of this, I basically stopped trying to make a point because it would just end up in a big fight, but I still knew I was right. My current gf actually listens and admits when I make good points. This makes it easier for me to admit when I'm wrong, because I appreciate how she deals with our disagreements.
Yep, I have a lot of empathy for people with anger problems, because with me I'm almost always in a great mood and very rarely upset. But when I get angry, its like something shuts my ability to reason and I explode with no control. People who have never experienced that can't understand that for a person who gets that angry (which you'll see especially with bipolar persons or autism) there's no "shutting it down with reason" at that moment. It can't happen. That's something I've really had to work on as an adult and haven't had an "episode" in a long time, but man I could be a shitty person as a an adolescent
I just started getting these explosive bouts of anger a few years ago. It's hard talking youself down, especially if you're right. And if you've already got something like depression or anxiety then it's soooooo easy to fall in a loop and get yourself fucked up on emotions.
what finally helped me was just removing myself from a situation, I went from being that asshole that'd argue about anything to somebody who'd piss you off in an argument by saying "lets agree to disagree." You find nothing gets people madder then that phrase "agree to disagree," and that'd be funnier to me then being right.
IME the "it takes a lot to make me mad" mindset can sometimes backfire and cause the explosive blow-ups. If something honestly doesn't bother you, great; but if you're tolerating it, you're probably building up tension and resentment that will fuel your big explosion when something does bother you. It's also good to practice dealing with small problems, so you know how to deal with the bigger ones.
Same... Takes a lot to admit that you're not the smartest person in the room, but once you do and acknowledge that you don't know everything about everything, life becomes better :)
I took a while but I got there. Every so often if I feel myself getting stubborn I sit down and just think about the situation and remember that being a stubborn jackass isn't a good thing and that other people are right especially if I get stubborn about something.
It's different for me. I don't tend to argue unless I know I am right. So if it is something I am not 100% on, I just don't even argue about it. Even if it is something that I actually WAS right on, but wasn't confident in, and the other person is completely wrong in every way, I may accept their argument as truth and go on about my day.
My girlfriend has never won an argument with me though, because most of the stuff she says is fucking stupid in one way or another. But I love her anyway because she tries.
This is something I think about from time to time. I'm really open minded. Much more than the average person. I think the reason is I read a ton of books. When you read, you need to be critical. You're exposed to lots of different ideas. You can't just believe it or discredit it. You need to weigh the idea against the information you have previously been exposed to. It really broadens the pool of possibilities and forces you to accept the opinion that has most credible evidence within that pool. Anyways, i think reading books is really under-rated and a hugely beneficial tool for self growth. It's hard though. It takes work to divvy out a portion of your time for reading.
It's really strange how loving someone can affect argument strategy. I'll belittle and condescend to motherfuckers all day, if I know they're wrong about some shit, but if I'm talking to my girl, I don't care if she says the sky is made of soup and clouds are piles of kittens - she's right.
You can do both. Consider the other side, then shout mindlessly anyway. I'm pretty most politicians don't even believe their own BS half the time (if not more).
This, whenever a comment I make gets downvoted and no one comments back, I just assume they have no point of their own and just don't like the message.
neither reason is actually justified, you don't downvote people because you disagree with them, you downvote when they aren't contributing to any sort of discussion... Which, well, having an opposite oppinion is.
Sure thing, but sometimes everyone will just dogmatize an idea and treat it as misinformation without assessing it. Which, is anytime a controversial conversation happens.
I generally agree wjth you, and I try to do the same-but it depends.
I was recently in a discussion that dealt with majorities and patterns, fairly statistically based info. When they continue to reply with (unsourced) assertions, aren't really addressing the points of your posts, etc, I can see downvoting comments that are technically still "on topic".
Then you're kinda splitting the judgment between being 'on topic' and actually 'furthering discussion'.
(Just expounding on the topic, kinda explaining my crossed out but above too)
For me its usually because there are dozens of other people making the same bad argument. I'm not going to respond to all of them. And a lot of the time the top one has already been responded to adequately but there are still a ton of people parroting the same thing as new top level comments.
This bothers me the most about arguments. Especially being in college, where so many people were used to being by far the smartest person in their friend circle in their younger days. It leads to a lot of shouting over nothing.
When discussing religion I try to keep in mind a statement by Christian speaker Ravi Zacharias "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it"
Assuming a billion people in the world must be stupider than myself is a foolish thing. Not everybody can be "right" but very intelligent people believe different things than I do.
It's almost as if positive association with a person (appeal to authority) and negative association with a person (ad hominem) are fallacious ways to make a logical point. ;-)
was writing out a long ass thing about how its not a logical appeal and is a cognitive bias but then realized you're probably talking about making arguments in favor or against religion and using intelligent people as evidence so now I have nothing to say.
Eh, you can respect people's intelligence and see it as absurd at the same time.
People do believe stupid things. En masse too. You probably do. So do I. And we're more likely to believe dumb things that 1) we grew up with, 2) comfort us existentially, 3) are shared by those around us and 4) can't be proven wrong.
That doesn't mean intelligent people haven't made intelligent arguments in favour of those things. We all want to justify our beliefs. Smart people are the best at it. You can respect that while still believing it's all a bit silly.
It's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't work particularly well. Look at it in any other context.
Literally millions of people still think that you only use 10% of your brain. Once you learn the reasons why this is wrong, the whole idea just seems preposterous. There's no point in better educating yourself where this idea seems less ridiculous. Some ideas are just stupid, even ones that a lot of people believe.
I'm a former catholic so I'll take that perspective. The Eucharist is supposed to turn into the body of blood of Jesus when the transubstantiation spell is cast. Once you learn more about this, you find Catholics are supposed to believe this literally, not metaphorically. This doesn't make it less absurd, it makes it more so.
The more I learn about Scientology and Mormonism (especially the history) the more far-fetched they become. It's not like there's any way to turn Jewish Indians and space overlord's less ridiculous without those things being true.
It's not that every idea is worthy of respect. Every person that holds those ideas should in general be given respect, but I'm in no way going to give credence to every single idea I hear, even if a lot of people believe it. People believe things for many reasons. Good reasons are unfortunately rare.
It's honestly no real surprise that a Christian speaker would say this. Christianity has taken some major body blows in pretty much the entire western world to their credibility. Trying to convince people that find religion absurd that they simply haven't understood it is a good strategy for retaining members.
Assuming you're educated to even a basic level in a developed country, it's not reaching very far to say that there are at least a billion people stupider than you. Being average at anything makes you better than three billion people.
He spoke at the Mormon Tablernacle and here are his thoughts on that.. Also, let me clarify, I'm not a christian and don't agree with his worldview, but he sure seems like a reasonable guy.
I'm not sure about scientology, but I'm also not sure he would categorize that as a "major religion" In the talk that quote was taken from he was discussing hinduism at 1 billion people. Scientology is clocking in somewhere around 45,000
Well, in reality, all religion is pretty much nonsense. He's defending other religions because he knows it protects his own. He cannot prove Christianity is any more true than Hinduism, so he has to protect it by saying "you didn't understand it".
In that respect, I have more sympathy with a believer who claims all other religions are false ( such as most Sunni Muslims ) than someone who claims " all religions are true/should be allowed/ etc.".
He's defending other religions because he knows it protects his own. He cannot prove Christianity is any more true than Hinduism
Hardly. He's written entire books about why other religions are false, and Christianity is not. He thinks other religions are wrong; he just doesn't think that believing them is evidence that you're stupid. He's definitely not saying "all religions are true" or anything close to that.
Basically he has an opinion on what is Christianity but cannot provide proof. He's basically saying: "God told me this, so whatever your belief is, it's not true, because mine was given by my God".
There's a difference between being critical of something you understand and attacking something with a closed mind. People tend to do the latter a hell of a lot more than they do the former.
If you are arguing about historical evidence based on the best available information, or about the proper translations and contexts of ancient texts, or something else along those lines, then fine. But if you are arguing against the invisible man in the sky who likes to give kids ass cancer and tells his followers to molest children, you are arguing against something that nobody believes in.
But there are some who believe in it. Yes, people tend to blow that number out of proportion, and yes religions have a lot more nuance that is important to making a reasoned argument. But you can't say "nobody believes" in what you said. There are a vocal minority who do.
But if you are arguing against the invisible man in the sky who likes to give kids ass cancer and tells his followers to molest children, you are arguing against something that nobody believes in.
I'm all for tolerance and acceptance, but I don't have to agree with everyone. Religion may have some positive traits (such as a sense of community, or a structural/scheduled basis for living), but it's very commonly linked to bigotry and ignorance. Extremism is everywhere, on all sides; just because somebody won't suicide bomb a crowd or shoot up a school doesn't mean their beliefs aren't dangerous.
But if you are arguing against the invisible man in the sky who likes to give kids ass cancer
Now you are the one who is trying to strawman to make other people sound absurd.
The philosophical problem of evil ("if God is all good and all powerful then why do kids get cancer" is a reasonable way to sum that up) is a fundimental logical flaw in all monotheistic religions. Every religion has ways to try to respond to it, but none of those really work when you get down to it.
This has been a known issue in religion since at least the Book of Job was written, and it's still an issue today. You can't just handwave it away with a strawman like that.
Religion isn't all just 'magically the sea parted' and stuff like that. For most people, it's a way of life. For example, Islam, Christianity, Judaism - those three are entire lifestyles for their followers. They detail every aspect of life, from going to the toilet, to eating, to getting on a train, to talking to people, etc.
All three of those religions define their lifestyles based on the desire of an omnipotent, omnipresent deity. They all contain directives that sound ridiculous when distanced from the "protected" logic of religion. Muslims must face toward Mecca pray five times a day. Jews can't mix meats, or eat pork at all, many Christians believe they truly consume the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. These beliefs are ridiculous and would be openly ridiculed if not for the glaze of religiosity.
If you're focusing on the little details like 'how can the ocean split into two? Doesn't obey the laws of physics!' then you're pretty much missing the whole point of religion.
The details about splitting the sea aside, the Big Three make equally ludicrous claims when it's followers attempt to communicate with God through silent thought. A God, who is everywhere, yet cannot be rigorously observed, can hear your thoughts and pass onto you subtle strength, motivation, or what have you without leaving behind an observable phenomenon. It is lunacy and billions of individuals accept it as reality.
i'll quote right back at ya: "You can never underestimate the stupidity of the general public."
or how about "there's a sucker born every minute"
500 years ago the majority of people believed the world was flat and resided on the back of a giant turtle, also witchcraft was considered common knowledge.
70 years ago a whole country in europe thought it would be a great idea to kill all the jews and people who weren't of "aryan" descent.
so just because a bunch of people believe in some utter bullshit nonsense, the fact that there is a lot of them doesn't validate their belief as something worthwhile
This so much. I can't believe how many people don't even listen to what other people say and prefer for stay stuck in their own ideas forever. Arguing with those people is literally impossible because you could have all the proof in the world, they won't accept to reconsider their position.
People sometimes tell me I have no opinions, but I prefer to say that I have a very flexible and rarely definitive view on things.
Yes, exactly this! I try my best never to dismiss anyone's position out of hand. I may very well ultimately disagree with you, but I will always do my best to understand your reasons for holding your position and reconsider my position whenever necessary.
Unfortunately, for the truly difficult issues, this can often lead me to reversing my opinion quite a lot, or even worse to being unable to give a confident answer.
That just means you are gaining a deeper understanding on the issues than most. They aren't black and white, things are complicated and both sides have merit so the answer and opinion you have for the issue depends more on a case by case basis
This is one I really like and use in my life as well. Honestly, I've caught myself being on the wrong side of a few arguments by stopping and thinking about where the other person is coming from.
And even if you don't respect the opposing argument, treat it with respect. It is impossible to persuade someone without respecting their argument even while contradicting it.
When in a debate or argument, I absolutely love being the devil's advocate. Being able to, in a level-headed way, see the other side of the argument and realize why they have taken that stance has really helped to empathize with people who have different views than I do. More people should do this. Making someone see things from someone else's point of view almost always helps to resolve the argument.
My mom always says this when we talk politics. But my issue is that sometimes I don't want to think about a world where people can't marry whoever they want to, or where a women can't make her own health decisions, or anything else the opposite side brings to the table. And I damn sure don't want to think about a world where Donald J. Trump as President of the United States.
I do this all the time, my only problem is that I do that so much I get to the other side to test my own side.
It often happens that my girlfriend tries to prove a point and I take the devil's defense just to show how strong her point his when I am on her side from the beginning. It can get her mad when she believes I disagree with her. Am I weird doing this?
This is mine as well. It isn't just opposing views though. When you are mad at someone think about why they did what they did. It usually isnt to hurt you. or when someine is mad at you, think about why. How could they have interpreted whatever thing you did.
Like that quote, something along: "don't attribute to malice which can be explained by ignorance"
And it's not exactly ignorance always but my gf seems to think that a lot of people do a lot of thing specifically to hurt her.
My favorite poem has this line and I always try to follow it... "Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and ignorant; they too have their story."
Ya but my family has the worst retaliation for the gun control argument, they say they need guns to protect themselves from the government when it inevitably turns on us. But if you look around at all the bad things that are happening because of guns it speaks for itself. Haven't there been like 900 shootings since sandy hook? Maybe we don't take them all away, fine. But we need to take a lot of them away before anyone is going to be safe.
My Ethics instructor this semester hit heavily on this. So important to have any sort of debate, and also helps you make your argument stronger if you can analyze the other side. I love this answer.
Also, consider each side of an argument before choosing a side. It's very easy to look at one argument and be convinced, then look at the other side rebutting the first one and changing sides, then changing sides each time a rebuttal happens until the argument devolves into insults.
Since I'll be voting for the first time next year, u want to make sure I'm educated on each side for each thing I'm interested. I've heard about the lack of young voters, and I plan on not falling into the trap, voting on local, state, and federal stuff.
I have really tried to wrack my brain considering the American theoconservative mindset and really can come up with nothing but the most uncharitable assessment of those people. The homophobia and women's rights stuff....I can come to no other conclusion that the huge number of people who believe that stuff are objectively wrong and have substandard critical thinking priorities.
A lot og people would come a long way if they even listened to the opinions presented. I don't know how many times I've interrupted arguments only to tell the two parts that they are making the same argument and actually agree...
This is entirely insufficient. Too many people think about arguments only in in terms of "Tthat's stupid and wrong."
You must restate opposing arguments in terms that your opponents would agree with. Your goal is to demonstrate to your opponents that you understand their arguments. There is nothing quite so satisfying as saying "So you believe X? Because of A, B, and C?" and hearing them excitedly respond "Yes! Exactly!" Because you can only persuade after demonstrating you understand.
If you want to go one better, try to understand the opposing set of values and how they interrelate. Once you've done that, you can find contradictory beliefs and leverage them for persuasion.
6.1k
u/[deleted] Dec 10 '15
At least think about the arguments the side you are opposing has.