Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

"How to disagree"

fivebellsfivebells Veteran Veteran
edited November 2010 in NewBuddhist.com
I found this essay on online disagreements, today. Seems pertinent.

Comments

  • edited December 2009
    fivebells wrote: »
    I found this essay on online disagreements, today. Seems pertinent.
    agreed.
  • edited December 2009
    That was an interesting read, thanks for posting it.
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited December 2009
    Found this, and thought it would be a useful adenda to the subject... I think it's covered by Right Speech...

    In ancient Greece (469 - 399 BC), Socrates was widely lauded for his wisdom. One day the great philosopher came upon an acquaintance that ran up to him excitedly and said, "Socrates, do you know what I just heard about one of your students?"

    "Wait a moment," Socrates replied. "Before you tell me, I'd like you to pass a little test. It's called the Test of Three."

    "Test of Three?"

    "That's correct," Socrates continued. "Before you talk to me about my student, let's take a moment to test what you're going to say. The first test is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what you are about to tell me is true?"

    "No," the man replied, "actually I just heard about it."

    "All right," said Socrates. "So you don't really know if it's true or not. Now let's try the second test, the test of goodness. Is what you are about to tell me about my student something good?"

    "No, to the contrary..."

    "So," Socrates continued, "you want to tell me something bad about him even though you're not certain it's true?"

    The man shrugged, a little embarrassed. Socrates continued, "You may still pass though because there is a third test, the filter of Usefulness.

    Is what you want to tell me about my student going to be useful to me?"

    "Er....No, not really."

    "Well," concluded Socrates, "if what you want to tell me is neither True nor Good nor even Useful, why tell it to me at all?"

    :)
  • Quiet_witnessQuiet_witness Veteran Veteran
    edited December 2009
    I simply disagree with you Fivebells, afterall you are a wolf in sheep's clothing, this article has no relevance to Buddhism. ;)

    Good article! Thanks
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran Veteran
    edited December 2009
    I simply disagree with you Fivebells, afterall you are a wolf in sheep's clothing, this article has no relevance to Buddhism. ;)
    Why should I take such a half-assed rebuttal from a whinging pom seriously? :)
  • Quiet_witnessQuiet_witness Veteran Veteran
    edited December 2009
    I had to look up whinging pom on urban dictionary and I got a great laugh. My anglophilia runs deep and I will use this in the future.
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran Veteran
    edited December 2009
    I always laugh when I hear that expression.
  • sndymornsndymorn Veteran Veteran
    edited November 2010
    Thank you for story.
  • edited November 2010
    How dare people disagree with me?!!!!
  • NirvanaNirvana aka BUBBA   `     `   South Carolina, USA Veteran
    edited November 2010
    Ch'an_noob wrote: »
    How dare people disagree with me?!!!!
    That's our first gut feeling exactly if we're too attached to our own opinions or our outrage at not being understood. "I have the right not to be misunderstood!"

    The link that fivebells supplies in the opening post is good. However, I'd like to add a few more. There is probably an infinite number of questions one might ask oneself, but hey, I'd like this thread to continue on...

    Before you voice your dissenting point, please take three steps:

    1) Ask yourself what the post is actually saying. That is, what elements in it raise "red flags" or seem just wrong or overly dogmatic —or whatever? Reread the post at least once. You may have missed the point entirely. Some people really react too quickly with a hasty post.

    2) Next ask yourself why these things bother you and go back and home in on the actual words the other person(s) used. This may stop your taking an argumentative posture in the first place and may make for a more profitable discussion of the ideas. From there, the fountain of real understanding may very well be unstopped. The three considerations of Truth, Goodness, and Usefulness that Fede points out in Post #4 above are good guides at this stage. Don't forget to look at the actual words, though, being careful of possible ambiguities and even a good-natured remark being taken out of context.

    3) Please try to be as good natured as possible. I know we all forget this at times. Perhaps popping in the occasional word(s) like "sincere" or "interesting take" or "refreshingly original perspective that confuses me." Anyway, the thing is, not to be the unfriendly person like I find myself sometimes to be. Unfortunately, we sometimes come online when we're stressed by something and lose sight of how foolish we can get.

    Whatever the Truth is, it doesn't need us. However, to come closer to It, we need to keep the channels of communication open by not venting on each other.
Sign In or Register to comment.