|
Author
|
Topic: Being Offended
|
Ouroboros
 |
posted 08-11-2001 01:51 PM PT (US)  
For the sake of clarity, I should say that what follows is not directed at any particular person - it's simply my thoughts with regard to any person being offended (angered, hurt, etc., by what someone says). It is a response to all those people whom I've seen express feelings of being offended by others on this board, other boards, and "in real life". So, without further ado...SOAP BOX MODE: On I have a friend - on the Internet, actually - who once said to me, "We can discuss anything. Just say what you honestly think. I won't be offended unless that is your intent." This sounds very good, I think, and it's certainly better than the attitudes of most people, however I consider it to be the second-to-the-most skillful way of dealing with people - on the internet, or "in real life". The MOST skillful way is to never be offended by anything anyone says, ever, period, end of conversation. People are entitled to what they think - that's true with whether they think you're inferior, whether they think you're a jerk, or whether they think you're a volkswagon. The only thing that a person needs to concern themselves about with regard to what someone else thinks about them is are they correct or incorrect in their judgment of you. If they're not, then it's no different from them being wrong on any other subject - it's no different from a student getting the wrong answer on a math test (would you be offended or angry at someone who got an answer wrong on a math test?). Being offended at someone is, among other things, an intimidation tactic. It's saying, "If you say what you think and I don't like it, I'll be angry at you - and you'll have to deal with the consequences of my anger." And, there is a word for that - it's called "extortion". It is under no circumstances a socially acceptable way of behaving and it is certainly not an effective method of engaging in an inquiry. A legitimate inquiry requires that people are willing to disclose what they think - without feeling the need to babysit the feelings of others. Part of being a "grown up" is taking responsibility for our own emotions. A truly mature individual says, "If I feel offended, pissed, or any other negative emotion - it is my problem and I should not burden other people with my emotional issues - it's not their issue, it's mine." (I have noticed, incidentally, that a person's level of education is probably the most decisive factor in this; university professors, in my experience, nearly never demonstrate negative emotions even in highly debatable issues - like abortion, politics, or religion. Poorly educated people, on the other hand, join gangs and become angry if you wear the wrong color of shirt.) On many occasions I give in to this intimidation tactic and apologize for whatever I've said that the person chose to be offended by - and whenever I have done that, I have belittled them (tacitly) by suggesting (acknowledging!) that they lack the capacity for a rational conversation (which is something they've demonstrated through their tantrum). SOAP BOX MODE: Off Glad to get that off my chest.  If there is a sub-issue to my thread, it's this: Someone recently said to me, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it." Well, if it isn't what I say, then it must be that they are reading between the lines - that is, reading into my words something I did not say. This is yet another pet-peeve of mine - attributing one's own thoughts to the minds of other people - and when a person is offended by something that they just made up and inserted into my words, that just multiplies their error. This is what I like about math, logic, and computers - the degree to which you're successful in these enterprises is the degree to which you are able to make no assumptions whatsoever; the math, the logic, and the computer programs mean what they say and they say what they mean - they are not subject to individual intepretation. "I am not one who believes that it is any necessary virtue in the philosopher to spend his life defending a consistent position. It is surely a kind of spiritual pride to refrain from 'thinking out loud,' and to be unwilling to let a thesis appear in print until you are prepared to champion it to the death. Philosophy, like science, is a social function, for a man cannot think rightly alone, and the philosopher must publish his thought as much to learn from criticism as to contribute to the sum of wisdom. If, then, I sometimes make statements in an authoritative and dogmatic manner, it is for the sake of clarity rather than from the desire to pose as an oracle."
--Alan Watts
|
|
Froggy
|
posted 08-11-2001 11:46 PM PT (US)
being defensive and offensive happens to be primal instict. Though some people have the ability to control this more so than others (Kudos). It's a natural competitive raw emotion that's just in our genetics. Now, some circumstances occur to cause conflict; such as two people who believe so strongly in what they are defending that things can escalate into a heated discussion. I'm guessing this is not what you're talking about here. You can't necessarily say that 'college proffessors' or anyone of higher education is exempt from these types of reactions at some point in thier lives. it just so happens that the particular example you've used of scholastic acheivers have to maintain a professional image when in the presence of work (where you've encountered them mostly). You don't know thier personal lives. Hmmmm...wasn't the Uni-bomber a professor??? My point is, in no way does a higher education make any person less/more aggressive. that is a personality issue. Incidently, competition (verbally) happens to drive me. I can thrive on a good debate if the other party has the knowledge to back up what they defend (logically- of course). It really has nothing to do with thier extent or lack of an education. Just the maturity level of the individual really. But back to your main point. If you truely believe that people shouldn't care what others say to you in a demeaning manner... why the need to 'clarify' your actions? Personally, I don't believe in EVER demeaning someone when not provoked. That is just a bias behavior in my eyes to make oneself feel superior over another. If someone wants constructive critisism, they will ask for it. "The sage does not distinguish between himself and the world;
The needs of other people are as his own. He is good to those who are good;
He is also good to those who are not good,
Thereby he is good.
He trusts those who are trustworthy;
He also trusts those who are not trustworthy,
Thereby he is trustworthy. The sage lives in harmony with the world,
And his mind is the world's mind.
So he nurtures the worlds of others
As a mother does her children."
-from the Tao te Ching
|
|
Froggy
|
posted 08-11-2001 11:51 PM PT (US)
another from Tao Te Ching that's relevent:Compassion is the finest weapon and best defence.
If you would establish harmony,
Compassion must surround you like a fortress. Therefore,
A good soldier does not inspire fear;
A good fighter does not display aggression;
A good conqueror does not engage in battle;
A good leader does not exercise authority. This is the value of unimportance;
This is how to win the cooperation of others;
This to how to build the same harmony that is in nature.
|
|
Ouroboros
|
posted 08-12-2001 05:51 AM PT (US)
I agree that all of that from the Tao Te Ching is relevant - and in complete support of my own point.Incidentally, I was referring to "being offended" as the emotional state - it goes on within one's consciousness. I was not referring to any behavorial results of being in that state, such as getting into heated arguments, etc. My post, above, was actually written months ago and was posted on Metalflakes. Someone on Flakes read one of my posts, chose to be offended by it, and then spouted off about how abrasive my post was, or arrogant, or...something like that. (Responses which I typically receive.) At that point in time, I'd just about had enough of people being judgmental about how I say things, rather than focusing on what I was saying, I decided that I was sick of babysitting people's feelings, and coddling them at the expense of being clear about what I had to say. No human is a slave to his or her emotions. What makes a human uniquely human is his/her ability to think past their emotions. The normal emotial response to standing on an airplane wing from a mile above the Earth, is pure panic and a need to get back into the plane. However, the thinking human realizes that s/he's wearing a parachute, and that it's perfectly safe - the emotion is discarded or ignored, and the skydiver jumps. This is one defining characteristic of "smart" vs. "stupid". A grasshopper has exceedingly small intellect - it acts on pure emotion. Fear = jump, complacent = stay, hungry = move toward that plant over there and bite it. Cats are a bit more intelligent, they have available the same emotional knee jerk reactions available that humans and grasshoppers have, but unlike grasshoppers, they are able to thihk past what is immediately in front of them (your hamburger), and base their behavior on the likely consequences of their actions (i.e., if they act on emotion and dive for the hamburger, they're likely to be thrown overhand through the nearest wall - well, not really, but you get my point, I think). So, if you're speaking to a grasshopper, and you're letting him off of the hook with "being defensive and offensive happens to be primal instict", then fine. If you're saying it to a human, you've just created the most significant insult to that human that any human can ever endure: you've suggested that the human's biology, and not the person him/herself, is responsible for his or her thoughts and behavior. |
|
Froggy
|
posted 08-14-2001 03:41 AM PT (US)
but aren't you being offended simply by the fact that you're 'defending' your intentions and/or actions? I can agree with some of what you're saying, but the whole education thing didn't fly with me. And as far as grammatically, I can pick apart all of your posts on this issue and point out all of the faults as far as that goes (if I were to be so critical). You did't address any of the other strong points I've made (that I could comprehend) for me to go any further on this issue though. |
|
Doozy
|
posted 08-14-2001 10:17 AM PT (US)
Ouro, all that you say regarding how people SHOULD think and behave appears logical and makes sense when presented in the manner in which you've done here. But in working practice, in the reality of our social world, the usefulness of this way of thinking can surely be called to question.For example, if your goal is to be an effective communicator, vital to carrying on successful long term relationships with others, then your concept is flawed. A simple reality is that the vast majority of humans living and interacting on this planet are still (at this stage of evolution LOL) subject to their emotions. There are pros and cons to this reality. Although emotion may be at the root of many of the ills in society, life without it would be nearly pointless for us all.
Not ever being offended, (via disregarding/disassociating yourself with the emotions - whether you consider those emotions "right or wrong" in any given situation - that are inherent to human interaction) would bring great confidence and peace to yourself in a way, but you can't hope to have meaningful and successful relationships with others in doing so.
A relationship, if not purely acedemic or professional (and there is no such thing, really), is based on emotion. Emotion has it's drawbacks for logical thinking, but it is the single most important thing that drives us to achieve anything other than existing and procreating. It motivates us. It makes our lives what they are. People are not practicing extortion, by being offended (unless they are playing games and putting on an act). If they are truly offended, they are simply experiencing emotion, and being honest about their feelings if they let you know that they are offended. Interaction is a two way street. If you are feeling "extorted" by someone being offended by your words or actions, then you have the option of taking responsibility for your words and actions to them, the very ones that caused them to feel offended in the first place. Blaming THEM (calling them extortionists) for the response that your interaction brought forth from them, doesn't make sense, in that you'd be thinking only of your own feelings and reactions - not taking into consideration that they are completely different individuals with their own thought processes and feelings. Granted, some people are ridiculously sensitive to, and offended by everything, so in such a case, your option would be to give up on any further interactions and move on. Never feeling the hurt of being offended would make life easier, and allow for more "clear-headed" decisions, but your road to achieve such a thing would be a lonely one for me and not something I would want. |
|
Gladrial
|
posted 08-14-2001 03:35 PM PT (US)
Mark Twain once said "Noise proves nothing;often a hen who has merely laid and egg will cackle as if she has laid an asteroid."
People can say all they want and if I know they are wrong I simply give it no merit.(like if they say I am ugly or sumptin) During a debate of any kind it is important to stick to the facts and never start to attack people personally. I do have the right to change my opinion of that person based on what they have said.( that goes on inside my own mind and shouldn't offend anyone) If I am honest and tell the person that they have offended me with their moral stand that lets them learn something about me. There is no room for being offended in a debate,however. But personal honest discussions are another matter. Also, I think Froggy has a point ...are ya getting offended because someone got offended at what you said? Anyone has the right to feel the way they feel. In a professional atmosphere you cannot expose your feelings, however among friends or aquaintances other than professional you can pour out your heart. You are right that humans have choice whether or not to act on emotions and insects do not. If they are hungry they eat. If I am hungry I do NOT eat...I am dieting... hahahahahahaha You can't expect to be controversial on Moral issues and not offend someone. It just doesn't work that way. I reserve my right to offend and be offended...that is all. |
|
Kat
|
posted 08-14-2001 04:17 PM PT (US)
Wheeeeee complicated issue!I tend to agree with Ouro up to a point in that I am terrible at speaking exactly what is on my mind and people can get offended easily when it was never my intention to upset or belittle them. If you spend all your time watching what you say in the fear of what others may think of you or get upset at what you say you become severely limited in how you express yourself. It basically comes down to not caring too much what others think of you - a liberating yet hard thing to strive for. But what Doozy says has alot of merit too, humans are creatures of emotions and to survive and succeed in this world you need to learn how to deal with these fickle creatures. Much as I'd like to forge ahead saying what i think whether it hurts people or not it is simply not wise and I have learnt to bite my tongue many a time for the sake of peace and good relationships. I guess it all comes down to balance of the two, and a little common sense, you tend to realise what may offend a person and avoid those issues at all cost! |
|
Ouroboros
|
posted 08-14-2001 05:09 PM PT (US)
Hey - it's groovy to see responses! :-DDoozy: My words have never, as a matter of principle, offended anyone(and will never offend anyone). If people are offended, it is because they have chosen to offend themselves using my words as a weapon. There's an old saying that the hippies in the sixties used to say: "Try responding instead of reacting." Letting them off of the hook for a moment for attempting to give new meanings to old words, what they had in mind was quite important: people need to deliberate before taking action, to give thoughtful responses rather than acting on impulse and allowing themselves to be slaves to their knee-jerk, unrefined emotions. Emotions make poor masters, but great slaves. "No one can offend you without your consent." --Wayne Dyer "Argue for your limitations and, sure enough, they're yours." --Richard Bach |
CamChatting Message Board
