Debating online

Over HERE

There is a statement opposing my position, that in an ideal world no-body would feel uncomfortable discussing differences of opinion. The poster disagrees "A lot of people ... don't like being made to think about their position and to justify it (even internally to themselves) however a discussion that forces that is almost always a good thing .."

I don't disagree that being made to think about your position is good - but I maintain this shouldn't be done by making people feel uncomfortable.

In a less than ideal world that we live in, it may of course occur. What is the best way to try and mitigate this? should we even try? Is LT not really intended for debate and argument, should we avoid it altogether?

State your views please!

Perhaps the person who feels uncomfortable should make a choice to have a different reaction. We only control our own responses and attitudes. If one is too sensitive to feel comfortable in a heated debate, and they can not persuade themselves to feel unthreatened, then they should, as Morphidae did, exit the conversation. Although, frankly, I find it silly how people take so much fizzle-fazzle to heart in these threads. Words and ideas, though powerful, should not move us emotionally to a level where we lose control of our mental self-control.

LT is a Web site for people who enjoy books ... not the place to purposely make someone uncomfortable in any way.

In the fascinating book The metaphysical club by Louis Menand, someone mentioned the point of view that all human conflict is caused by people intransigence, pride, etc., because all rational, open-minded people should have the same goal: discovering the truth ... oh those perfect worlds ...

On the other hand, while someone may not intentionally make someone feel uncomfortable, it is inevitable that people will regardless sometimes feel uncomfortable. Reading books has to do with education, and part of education is the exchange of views, similar or not. I love the ability to debate about books. Note that debate doesn't mean argue or insult, but heated discussion is a major part of the exchange of ideas. If everyone agreed with everyone else I can't imagine how boring things would be, and how dangerous it is for many ideas to go unchallenged. Think back to different times in history where large groups of people unquestionably agreed with each others ideas...those were the most frightening times in history. I guess my point is that while we should never attack each others views, challenge and debate is a healthy way to learn and exchange views. If someone feels like a thread is getting too heated, then it's best just to ignore it. No one is required to post to or read a thread here!

So how do you challenge without attacking?

You can start with A believes this, B believes that - but there's not much discussion in a bland statement of positions. The next obvious question: Why do you believe A is or seems to be percieved as very aggressive.

I certainly agree that if we all agreed all the time it would be very dull.

Thanks reading_fox.

My point was that just being made to think about your position can be uncomfortable to some people. Should we not question their position just in case? I don't think people set out (generally) to make people feel uncomfortable but that it just happens.

Even the existence of some books make some people uncomfortable (and I'm sure we can all come up with examples). Making people uncomfortable is one of the aims of some books.

The portrayal of same-sex couples on TV make some people uncomfortable.

The possibility of making someone uncomfortable seems to be too lower a bar as a self-limiter on conversation so I'm with bookishbunny. I don't think it is abuse according to the Terms Of Service as it nearly always comes from the expression of ideas and when ideas and people's preconceptions are challenged.

Of course once someone has said that they are feeling uncomfortable with how a thread has developed - there are two choices. Firstly, they could leave and let the others continue. Secondly, everyone could try and move the topic back into comfortable territory - which may not be possible and the first option will have to taken anyway. Of course, people should not be vilified or even criticised for withdrawing from a conversation.

In terms of insults, name-calling, and ad-hominem attacks LT is a remarkably polite collection of individuals. These, along with repeated monomaniacal posts, are the key pointers to abusive individuals.

Message 6: andyl -- My feeling is that once someone has said that they are feeling uncomfortable with how a thread has developed , they should leave but not necessarily with a discussion as to why. I am not criticizing any particular poster here and i deeply respect people's feelings and opinions, but when someone tries to defend his or her position as she is leaving, it encourages the rest of the people to either agree and plead for restraint or to agree with the person leaving. My suggestion is to just leave and go where one is more comfortable.

Additionally, what attracts people to threads that discuss provocative issues in the first place if any disagreement causes them discomfort?

I agree more with #4, I love open debate because I learn so much more than in threads where everyone seems to agree with each other or only mildly disagrees. I actively seek out people who disagree with me; maybe they have something to say that sharpens my opinion or causes me to relent a bit. I live for that kind of education!

I have really mixed feelings about online debating, mainly because you have two types of people taking part, those who sincerely want to discuss the matter with an open mind, and those who don't. Even those with open minds occasionally step on each others toes, and feelings get hurt, and sometimes things turn ugly. LibraryThingers have been, in my experience, uncommonly civil, for the most part. But there are a few regulars who hop around Library Thing, dropping snarky comments here and there just to rile things up. I always try to keep in mind that none of these people actually know me, and so their attacks aren't 'really' aimed at me. But yeah, it still bothers me. I'm like morphidae in that I don't relish confrontation, but unlike her I rarely back down, especially if I know someone has deliberately misconstrued what I said in order to cause dissension.

You can choose to ignore the snarky comments. Just scroll it on down. Once upon a time, an LTer would make these ridiculously long, aggressive posts. I would see their name, and just scrooooooll it on down.

And you don't have to respond to them. You can, for example, respond to post #13 without acknowledging #7 first.

#9 - I try, bookishbunny. I really do. But I'm half Irish. Need I say more? ;o)

In fact, I'm trying right now to ignore the fact that several of the most snarky posters on LT, who I know for a fact have taken multiple swipes at my friend morphidae, had the nerve to reply in the thread that she (morphy) started to explain about how she doesn't respond well to exactly their kind of intimidation. It's actually rather humorous when you think about it. :o)

#5
With tact and respect. For example, don't say "you're wrong", ask "why do you think that" or say "I have always seen it this way because...". Exactly how you would exchange ideas with people in real life, right?!?

#10 - really? Of the one or two posters who are on my "Snark and scroll by" list, none have responded on that thread. Unless of course you meant me?! I know I've crossed one or two people occasionally - through misinterpretation of my or their posts. PM if it is more appropriate to do so.

#11 - but online is very different to RL. In RL one mostly moves in circles of people with similar views - direct counter views are very uncommon - you mostly know the personality quirks of those you are talking to, and share similar cultural references, conversations happen without multiday breaks, where unfortunate post phrasings can fester.
"Why do you believe" implies there is evidence for the belief, not quite a contradiction but close to it, often taken badly by those online.

#12
- Nope, I didn't mean either of you. I'm laughing here, because now I'm realizing that the people I was referring to will most likely be the only ones who won't be worried that I was referring them.

I like that though, reading_fox..."snark and scroll by." Or how about a "scroll-by snarking" instead? We must have different lists! We should share. ;o)

I suspect Morphy would feel terrible that she may have instigated this entire discussion. I think she is a very private person with a strong continuing desire to learn new things and that's how she got involved in the first place. But she's skittish and has to take herself away when discussions get too involved. That's her perogative and I hope I have not been one to offend her -- or anyone else here. Those of us who are not wary of properly handled dissension will stay (I hope) and others will merely lurk silently or move on.

Part of the problem may be this group's official description:

Description: Is that thread getting heated? Are people unhappy about what is being said? Have you wandered off topic. are pointed remarks being made. Feel that you can't say what you want in the group. Take it outside.

The Group where you can say what you want.

The first part of the description makes this group appear to be a safe haven for people who feel intimidated when discussions in other forums get too intense. Yet it ends with saying this is the place where you can say what you want. So -- is this a group where heated discussions can continue without frightening those who want less intensity? Or is this the group where the frightened can hide out for awhile? It's not clear from the group description.

Well Morphy's problems must have been in the Book Talk group, because that is where she made her statement. And no it wasn't you I was refering to either, Kageeh.

But the truth is I don't even know what triggered her recent episode, because I don't read that forum at all.

The thing I see is - everyone owns their own reaction to things. Especially online, which is (relatively) safe. People can say, think what they what, but how each person reacts to that is their business.

I think if you enter a debate thread, you have to expect that some will disagree. And some will disagree in mature ways, others will disagree in stupid ways.

But you have to know what you are signing up for when you enter a debate, and not act surprised or hurt when it happens, and especially, not make people feel badly because you now reveal yourself to be someone who is hyper-sensitive about such things.

It's like someone allergic to cranberries taking themselves to Ocean Spray's Cranberry World and sighing and suffering out loud because they 'can't enjoy the juice'. Everyone feels badly, until someone finally asks "Well, what in the heck are you doing here?"

At the same time, I do believe that folks also use the online world to attack at will - perhaps because their real life is powerless. And so debates here and anywhere online are over the top hostile. Ask yourself when you post: would I be that vitrolic in a discussion in a library in the real world?

Okay, vital question (#18): Is there really an Ocean Spray Cranberry World?

Yes, there is #19! It's near Plymouth, MA. And you can drink as much cranberry juice as your tummy can take!

I love the stuff, so when out visiting Cape Cod with my wife's family a few years ago, I insisted we visit.

I got to try all varieties. Cranberry. Cranapple. Crangrape. Crantastic. White Cranberry.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I swear my pH dropped to 2.7 or so ;).

Well, it got started when a discussion at the Green Dragon on religion got too heated and too personal for the majority of the regulars.

It is very difficult not to incidentally insult or disturb a fellow person now and then, regardless of the measures you take to aviod it. Belief and experience are VERY personal matters, and thus some things goes straight for the heart even if it wasn't intended that way.

Our cultural etc differencies makes this even more difficult as things that are OK to say in one sphere may not be viewed as OK in another... and added upon this we have a lot of people on LT - including myself - who is not a native english language speaker; we lack some of the nuances in wording, and sometimes idiomas vary widely between languages. And a lot of us non-natives think in our own language > translates to english (in the brain) > write.
The result should surprise no one.

Personally I watch discussion as a method as an ongoing process of education and enlightning. BUT there are views I disagree with to the extent that they make my stomach turn - those groups or places I ignore. Also there are threads & groups here that I'm not interested in. "Ignore" functions well there too ;-)
To me this "ignore" is a mental manouver - I just close my brain. Making topics, groups, and threads vanish is not my style, so I use non of the functions available to do this.

Sorry if my straightgforwardness, or my willingness to discuss in order to find out what I think about something, makes you people uncomfortable.

I have no "snark and scroll" list... but of course there are people I've grown to like, wheter we share views on certain issues or not. And those of you I try to keep on track with :-)

You know, it IS possible to LIKE people who think DIFFERENTLY from you!

(Edit: posts 17-21 was posted when I was busy writing up this post)

So the big question, Busifer: Do you like cranberries?

Thing is, we've all got our own philosophies. The Socratic method of examining someone's assumptions is supposed to be a gentle nudging into wisdom, not a sarcastic appraisal of sincerely-held beliefs.

I love debates. It's taken me years to take the heat out of my discussions and now I enjoy listening to other people's opinions more than airing my own: that's age, I suppose and a dose of courtesy and respect for others. I got reprimanded at university for an off-the-cuff remark I made at lunch with a very sensitive student, regarding D H Lawrence's abilities as a writer and as a lover. What I thought was ripe banter SHE found offensive and complained to the Head of Faculty. I guess I spoiled her cheese pasty and baked bean meal - *rollseyes. Since then I've been damn careful how I approach literature - it's SERIOUS business - !

#23 - Yes, I do!
Does that make me a better person?!
;-)

Just internally cleaner. ;)

#24 - I've learnt too... or so I hope!

When 18 I aired the opinion that the plague years during the middle ages was a plant - i.e. a conceived bluff.
Not that I believed my statement to be true but because I thought the evidence was lacking. I can tell both teachers and co-students was VERY angry at me! Who was I to question historical facts?

When I was younger I still believed that my opinion in some way was superior to the opinion of others, and I tried to win them over. VERY childish, stupid... etc whatever derogatives you choose to use.
Now I listen to others and wonder how their views can/could inform mine, wheter contrary or not.

But sometimes cranberries it is - certain opinions or facts are not to be argued with. The plague existed. Period.
And in these cases I either won't back down OR judge the discussion not worth the effort.

Hehe, one of my favourites are untainted grape tonic - talk about clean inside!

I think we also have misunderstandings because humans don't just communicate with words. When we have a face-to-face conversation with someone, we use different tones to connote joking or sarcasm, for example. We also use facial expressions and gestures to get a point across. Emoticons help, I guess, but even those can be misconstrued.

#16 - Outside is an off-topic group, where arguments from one thread can be carried on, without disturbing the original thread too badly.

ie not a place for the timid to hide. Probably based on the bar-phrase "take it outside!"

I was/am interested in the different views people have about online discussions, but the instigating thread certainly wasn't the place to conduct it, so I moved it here.

My finest / most ludicrous moment as a violent champion of feminism came at a seminar I held on Marat/Sade as an undergraduate. Everyone else looked incredibly bored, with a handful of exceptions and I argued vehemently about de Sade's crimes versus Marat's. At some point in the tirade my lecturer gently said 'I think someone else should say something now' to which there was deafening silence and I rejoined 'THEY don't care, they're all stuffed' with righteous disgust. Yes, I was wearing dungarees and had just finished 'Pornography' by Dworkin.

Looking back I cringe at how hot-headed and RUDE I was and never wonder why I wasn't exactly popular on my course. *blush. Although that was also the exact moment my husband fell in love with me: he admired my passion and actually clapped. :D

Can I cringe with you?
I have done a few such things myself... how embarrassing!

It's a nice thing we live and learn.

Edit: WHEN am I going to learn to spell embarrass?! Three tries now...

>I think she is a very private person with a strong continuing desire to learn new things and that's how she got involved in the first place. But she's skittish and has to take herself away when discussions get too involved.

BINGO!!!

#32 - spelling is the bane of my life. The only book I have on my desktop is the Concise Oxford English dictionary - I consult it so often I have exceptionally strong wrists. (lol)

I think if you're willing to enter a debate, you can't then run away, tell people your debating partner is being mean and complain about their debating online. It's only in Real Life that we can see all the emotions of those we're debating with, can spot little ironies and nuances that lessen any ostensibly harsh words. As such, people sometimes take offence when none's intended - or is that just what I do?!

Or, as the kids infuriatingly say when I'm getting heated about something in class 'take a chill pill, miss'. Which invariably makes me even more irritated - !

#34 - I have thought about investing in a COE. Maybe it's about time I did!

#35 - the best c.£20 I ever spent. I need a new one, this one's ten years old. It's my favourite dictionary, I just wish it wasn't so heavy! It's also an excellent doorstop.

There is ieSpell add-on (google it) for Internet explorer or Firefox comes with its own add-on. These both provide instant online spell checks, about as annoying as the default WOrd one.

Or as english is not your native language, just have a stab at it, and leave it - we'll work out what you meant, no moaning.

You can tell from my posts though that I can seldom be bothered. I do try, I'm better than I was, the edit feature helps, but essentially I'm too lazy to spell correctly. - Often a cause of internet arguments all by itself.

:-)
I have two different online dictionaries at hand, plus a creative mind, but sometimes I could do with an accurate paper version - my old one is from 1982 and there is certain words and expressions lacking!

For synonyms I sometimes use http://www.ninjawords.com/...

Oh, now I went off topic again! I could label myself "professional derailer" ;-)

I cannot abide spellcheckers. I love technology but along with voice-recognition software I think spell/grammar checkers will be in the ninth circle of Hell if it indeed exists.

For my Greek studies, the English dictionary is often more helpful than my (pitiful) Greek dictionary. It's also brilliant on slang, correct grammatical usage and has so many excellent features that I'll take the book over the programme any day. When I was a secretary, I carried it everywhere, as I do when I teach. Given what I do, words sometimes fail me - I literally can't remember some nouns and grammatical terms can evade my grasp for days at a stretch - so the COD is brilliant for those 'senior' moments.

Message 39: Hera -- I'm really curious: is the ninth circle of hell closer to the center or the edges? And how many circles are there? My son thinks only seven. How does one move from circle to circle? or are we just assigned a circle and have to stay there?

#40 - it's been a while since I read Dante, Kageeh! I like the number nine, so it sprang to mind straight away. Although not a believer in an after life as such, I would like to think there is a place as a Hell to which crap things can be assigned when they've been very, very annoying. Things rather than people, that is!

re #16:
"is this a group where heated discussions can continue without frightening those who want less intensity?"

That would be the general meaning of "Take it outside.", which (as another poster noted) is long-standing "bar talk" for suggesting that an argument move to the street and/or parking lot so that it would be free to escalate into a brawl without inconveniencing the other patrons and trashing the bar.

So, by definition "Outside" is where heated discussions are expected to get ugly.

I'm amazed that anybody would mistake the reference ... too many people must have spent their formative years in libraries around here!

No, I don't think discussions anywhere should be expected to get ugly. Just vociferous debate. Politely. With passion.

"Just vociferous debate. Politely. With passion."

That's what makes me crazy about these L.T. boards ... you can't "take the gloves off"!

If you have to be polite after "taking it Outside", what's the rule for regular discussion???

I feel like a Klingon at a frackin' teaparty!

Everyone's ideas about this have been pretty thoughtful and generous of spirit, imho. #4 Jen, well said.

We're working only with the written word in this medium, so as #29 astutely pointed out, there are none of the verbal clues we get from tone of voice or the physical ones from facial expressions. We can post something meaning it one way but someone else might interpret the style as aggressive or an attack or anything negative. I've witnessed a few intense moments in cyber debates so my personal set of rules is to:
1. always err on the side of kindness or respectfulness;
2. take the time to write carefully - it's the throwaway lines that act like trip wires;
3. let someone having a hard time with a discussion go if they elect to and don't talk about them after they do, just carry on debating or discussing the topic;
4. never use personal insults ever, including saying someone's idea is stupid, illogical, etc. I think this should include telling someone to "chill" when they're in full flight, Hera.
5. make it clear when I'm trying to be funny so I don't get interpreted as sarcastic or mean

I love debates crackling with passion and differing opinions. It's a kind of energy which fires up my own creative juices and really gets me thinking. That said, I loathe unkindness. If a tender spirit has to leave a forum because things are too intense for them, that's one thing. But if anyone goes at them purposely simply because of their tenderness, that's quite another. That, BTRIPP, is one time when "gloves off" might be in order.

#22 Busifer, I am in awe. English isn't your mother tongue and you can write like that? I agree with your well-worded observation that some topics, like "belief and experience" can go "straight to the heart".

Tiffin, still smiling at the cranberry metaphor

tiffin, i am with you on loving "debates crackling with passion and differing opinions. It's a kind of energy which fires up my own creative juices and really gets me thinking."

i believe what i believe about any number of subjects. just pick one and i will be happy to share! lol...
now, i like to believe that i am informed about these things and have considered the issues and come to a reasonable conclusion. so if someone disagrees, i will present my own arguments. a give and take. and if they ask a question, present an idea that i can not answer..well, then i best look into the topic further or maybe even change my opinion! {{gasp}}

what i don't understand really though, is why people, online like this, take such 'arguments' personally. really...none of you people know me and i don't know you. even if we had conversed here for years, there is a huge difference between an online acquaintance and a real life friend. and quite honestly, you don't know me well enough to offend me. i may disagree with your opinion about some subject and i may disagree strongly...but attacking my ideas is not attacking me. they are only words and ideas...
even if someone is what i perceive to be 'rude' or 'angry'...they are just words coming from a place that i do not really know.

if we are afraid to discuss our differences, what hope do human beings have? should we all pretend that the differences do not exist, so as to always be 'nice'? i think that is silly and dangerous.
Free Speech, an ideal my nation was founded on, does not protect one from on occasion being offended by the free ideas of others.

my best defense is my ability to express my own ideas.