Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/index.php)
-   Off the Court Lounge (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"? (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=207399)

bladefd 02-01-2011 07:54 PM

How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
I had an argument with somebody over crime.

I was trying to say that crime is not as bad as the media portrays it, the other guy is "only petty crime like kiddnapping is not as bad as media portrays it but robbery is as bad as the media portrays it and happens just as much as the media says it does."

I was very frustrated, I mean one of my professors is an active sergeant cop for 25 years and even he says that no crime is as present as the media makes it out, and he showed us numbers and stats to back up his own experience.

The other guy I was arguing with kept arguing that one cop's experience in one small area is irrelevant because the media says otherwise for other crimes in other areas. Finally I was like "Okay, we can agree to disagree then" in frustration. The other guy is like "No, we will not agree to disagree because you are wrong." I was like "WTF??"

Am I arguing with the wrong people here? Am I better off not saying anything outside of "hello, bye" and not starting any discussions or am I right in saying "We can agree to disagree"? How would you react to somebody that says "we can agree to disagree" in a debate over politics or something where you both have diff views? Will you say "No, we will not agree to disagree because you are completely wrong and you're liberal"?? I was stunned when I heard that we won't agree to disagree because I'm liberal.. Dunno what being liberal has anything to do with not agreeing to disagree.. He might be wrong or I might be wrong or both of us are somewhat wrong; what's this business of not agreeing to disagreeing? :confusedshrug:

Do you just stop talking completely if the opposing party says "we will not agree to disagree because you are wrong" and just let him talk with himself or do you continue the argument? I always though that 'agreeing to disagree' is neutral way to end a conversation. I never really used that phrase before to bring an argument to an end.

NuggetsFan 02-01-2011 08:12 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
I've always looked at it as basically accepting that your not going to agree on anything regardless of who's right or wrong. I'll use it if me and the person have been arguing for like 5 minutes and it's clear were both concrete on our views. Eventually both people just end up repeating themselves.

Nachooo 02-01-2011 08:50 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
"We can agree to disagree" = God Damn your an idiot. I'm done talking to you about this

Jasper 02-01-2011 09:13 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
If a person respects another person , and are friends in particular and state after a lengthy argument or discussion " We can agree to disagree" isn't a cop out , but respecting the other persons thoughts and viewpoints.

To many people do use it , to 'cut the bridge of a conversation' , because sometimes they don't have the balls to argue their viewpoint.
And actually it's those individuals IMO that are weak in an arguement and can not debate an issue to educate whoever is listening.

But the majority of the time , I consider it respectful , and sometimes it keeps friendships and marriages.
------------
"only petty crime like kiddnapping is not as bad as media portrays it but robbery is as bad as the media portrays it and happens just as much as the media says it does."

Any crime is BAD NEWS ... so the young boys that were kidnapped in Missouri last year and probably abused sexually is considered petty :banghead:
Any kidnapping or forcing a person without their will is 100% a violation...
Bottom line literally no crime is petty.

bladefd 02-01-2011 09:40 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper
If a person respects another person , and are friends in particular and state after a lengthy argument or discussion " We can agree to disagree" isn't a cop out , but respecting the other persons thoughts and viewpoints.

To many people do use it , to 'cut the bridge of a conversation' , because sometimes they don't have the balls to argue their viewpoint.
And actually it's those individuals IMO that are weak in an arguement and can not debate an issue to educate whoever is listening.

But the majority of the time , I consider it respectful , and sometimes it keeps friendships and marriages.
------------
"only petty crime like kiddnapping is not as bad as media portrays it but robbery is as bad as the media portrays it and happens just as much as the media says it does."

Any crime is BAD NEWS ... so the young boys that were kidnapped in Missouri last year and probably abused sexually is considered petty :banghead:

Any kidnapping or forcing a person without their will is 100% a violation...
Bottom line literally no crime is petty.


by bad, he meant 'widespread'. We were talking about how widespread crime is - he agreed that crimes like kidnapping are not as widespread crimes but robbery is. I told him that all crimes are exaggerated by the media to spread fear regardless of the crime and it is nowhere as badly widespread as media says. He says only some are exaggerated but not all, and I utterly disagreed. He used a couple single examples of 2 nearby places that were robbed in the last few months to try to 'show' me that robbery happens everywhere a lot. Then he kept talking after i told him "we will agree to disagree" because supposedly I was wrong since I'm liberal.

I dunno why somebody would say "we will not agree to disagree because you are wrong".. I am admitting that we will never agree or at least reach a point of agreement so I pretty much have to say 'we will agree to disagree' before it becomes hostile. I was just struck aback when he said he will never agree to disagree. I always thought it is a very neutral phrase to end a debate about to turn into yelling. It did end up close to yelling, but I just started talking less. I said multiple times "we will agree to disagree" but it fell on deaf ears.

I found myself repeating over and over because he refused to listen and kept going on and on. WHY do I get into arguments with people like these? 3rd or 4th time that I got into an argument with him where he starts talking and just keeps talking. Covers both ears and speaks about how how i'm a certain way since i'm liberal (i don't even consider myself a liberal, to me not every idea/belief is liberal or conservative). Basically, anything that comes against his own beliefs is liberal.. even if it is something that has nothing to do with being liberal/conservative.

PHX_Phan 02-01-2011 09:42 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Depends. I can respectively disagree with someone who articulates their point well and provides at least some reasoning behind their assertions, even if I just don't come to the same conclusion as them. When people hold strong ideals based on a cursory glean of a subject and just believe what they want to it annoys me. I usually end a discussion quick if I sense that the person is unreasonable or just ill-informed on the subject.

The worst people to debate with are the ones who generally form their opinion through listening to pundit rhetoric. I hate when I have to argue through a bunch of sideline arguments just to get back to the original subject. Or when someone figures they are 'winning' because they prevent you from stating a point by blurting out question after question that stray away from the real issue itself.

niko 02-01-2011 09:44 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Depends on what they say. At work, we had a project that the other group made us do over specifically because they wanted us to do it with variables that made no sense, because that's how they were looking at the data. So i tossed out my logical analysis, and did there stupid analysis since it was for then. The next week, they wanted it done my way and asked why we didn't do it. I reminded them they made us do it that way. They said, "well we agree to disagree". I pretty much reamed them after that, and said no, and that unless they agreed i was right i wasn't doing shit for them any more. They gave in.

So it depends. If i say you are Hitler and you say no and i say "well we agree to disagree", that won't work i think...

PHX_Phan 02-01-2011 09:48 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bladefd
because supposedly I was wrong since I'm liberal.

:oldlol:

Those are the types of people I usually disassociate with and make it perfectly clear that I have no time for their partisan bullshit. Anymore and I just get a kick out of pissing them off. At the end of the day, they'll figure they have your personality pegged, so you might as well have fun with it.

iamgine 02-01-2011 09:51 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
If he say, "No, we will not agree to disagree because you are wrong."

Then you say, "And I know you are wrong so that means we agree to disagree."


But yeah, argument never lead anywhere. If it comes to "We'll agree to disagree", that just means you both lose. What you need to do is persuade. Just like a salesman, you can't win if you argue with your customer. You have to persuade them to think like how you want them to think.

sh0wtime 02-01-2011 10:08 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
You must never agree to disagree if you are 100% sure you are right, you must work toward respectful consensus by presenting only the facts/truth, even if you have different information its the facts and consensus that matters.

The ones who end it all with "We agree to disagree" do it most of the time to avoid you, simply stubborness, them realising suddenly they actually are or could be wrong and not wanting to admit it. If he knows he is wrong and you have proven him wrong then those words are his best friend afterall if he doesnt want to embarass himself by saying that you are right and there are still ways to counteract those words (see at the bottom).

But if both of you just throw out different opinions and information (with neither part knowing the actual facts/truth to 100%) then its simply best to "Agree to Disagree" when both of you recognise that further conflict is unnecessary, ineffective or otherwise undesirable.

If you know you are 100% right and you prove it to him and he still says nothing but "We agree to disagree", thats disrespectful according to me at least, a good response would then be something like this: (choose one)

"Yes we do, but you disagree to facts/truth, i only disagree to your irrational opinion".

"No we dont, because i am only working toward consensus by presenting real facts which you disagree with. Its no different than you refusing to believe that this entirely blue shirt is actually blue."

Either you respond like that or simply "Agree to Disagree" to not hurt his feelings because deep down he will still know that you are right and he is wrong, you simply just dont want to talk about it. So basically him saying "We agree to disagree" can often be just as simple as: "You are right and i am wrong" and its very obvious to notice especially when he says it directly after you just finished presenting him very thoroughly with facts/truth.

bladefd 02-01-2011 10:22 PM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iamgine
If he say, "No, we will not agree to disagree because you are wrong."

Then you say, "And I know you are wrong so that means we agree to disagree."


But yeah, argument never lead anywhere. If it comes to "We'll agree to disagree", that just means you both lose. What you need to do is persuade. Just like a salesman, you can't win if you argue with your customer. You have to persuade them to think like how you want them to think.


You're right.

Here's the thing though, since he considers me liberal and he is a conservative, everything I say is biased and wrong. Here's the back-and-forth (it is almost word-for-word except for later).

I told him to not trust any media you see on tv or pundits on tv. He responds by saying that Fox is the least biased channel and they show both sides of every viewpoint, and channels like NBC/CNN are all liberal/show only one point. I was like "Hold on, I am not even talking about FOX, talking about media in general. and yes, fox is biased just like NBC or CNN or BBC or any of them." He is like "Nope, you are wrong. FOX is neutral. The other reason why you say otherwise is because you are a liberal and watch NBC/CNN."

My response: "I don't watch NBC or FOX or BBC. Might put on CNN once a week. Besides, I told you that NBC is just as bad as fox; I also put NBC in the same category as FOX. Why would I condemn my own channel if I am out to trash FOX?"

Next, he is like "Well, you don't stay up to date with news then if you don't watch any of them." My response: "I get my news every day off of yahoo news section, a lot of it from associated press so I stay up to date on the days." He responds "Associated Press is liberal." Then rant starts up without letting me say anything else. I don't even remember what he said after "Associated Press is liberal". Something about how bad Anderson Cooper is and biased he is, etc. I kept trying to ask him "Did you ever watch CNN?" Asked him multiple times "may I ask you a question? You are not letting me speak a single word", finally he says "Yes, I used to watch CNN very long ago when I was young. When you get older, you will also realize how much our community is dumbing down because of liberal channels like CNN."

I respond by saying "Hold on. People have been complaining that USA is dumbing down for the past 150-200 years. The concept of "dumbing down" is nothing new." He says "Says who? It is only dumbing down the last 10 years. Everything was free and good in the 1960's without the president forcing you to buy healthcare."

He somehow jumps to healthcare when I didn't even mention healthcare. I didn't even mention Obama anywhere. Then he says that I am changing topic because I say "we can agree to disagree."

Then conversation somehow turned to crime about how the law looks at the difference in crime between kidnapping/robbery. I told him that there is a possibility that somebody that kidnapped could serve the same jail sentence as somebody that did robbery. I told him that the law doesn't care if something is right or wrong; we might agree that kidnapping is worse but somebody with robbery can serve similar times in prison or more in some cases. In the eyes of law, the punishment could be the same between robbery or kidnapping even though we might not like it.

He tries to argue that i'm wrong and the law punishes kidnappers much worse than robbers. Jesus, not everything is right and wrong, one way or another, somebody that robs 2 million could possibly serve the same amount as a kidnapper. Then the argument was close to yelling before i stopped talking. :banghead:

Myth 02-02-2011 01:11 AM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
**Waits for argument followed by poster stating "We'll have to agree to disagree."**

Timmy D for MVP 02-02-2011 01:19 AM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bladefd
You're right.

Here's the thing though, since he considers me liberal and he is a conservative, everything I say is biased and wrong. Here's the back-and-forth (it is almost word-for-word except for later).

I told him to not trust any media you see on tv or pundits on tv. He responds by saying that Fox is the least biased channel and they show both sides of every viewpoint, and channels like NBC/CNN are all liberal/show only one point. I was like "Hold on, I am not even talking about FOX, talking about media in general. and yes, fox is biased just like NBC or CNN or BBC or any of them." He is like "Nope, you are wrong. FOX is neutral. The other reason why you say otherwise is because you are a liberal and watch NBC/CNN."

My response: "I don't watch NBC or FOX or BBC. Might put on CNN once a week. Besides, I told you that NBC is just as bad as fox; I also put NBC in the same category as FOX. Why would I condemn my own channel if I am out to trash FOX?"

Next, he is like "Well, you don't stay up to date with news then if you don't watch any of them." My response: "I get my news every day off of yahoo news section, a lot of it from associated press so I stay up to date on the days." He responds "Associated Press is liberal." Then rant starts up without letting me say anything else. I don't even remember what he said after "Associated Press is liberal". Something about how bad Anderson Cooper is and biased he is, etc. I kept trying to ask him "Did you ever watch CNN?" Asked him multiple times "may I ask you a question? You are not letting me speak a single word", finally he says "Yes, I used to watch CNN very long ago when I was young. When you get older, you will also realize how much our community is dumbing down because of liberal channels like CNN."

I respond by saying "Hold on. People have been complaining that USA is dumbing down for the past 150-200 years. The concept of "dumbing down" is nothing new." He says "Says who? It is only dumbing down the last 10 years. Everything was free and good in the 1960's without the president forcing you to buy healthcare."

He somehow jumps to healthcare when I didn't even mention healthcare. I didn't even mention Obama anywhere. Then he says that I am changing topic because I say "we can agree to disagree."

Then conversation somehow turned to crime about how the law looks at the difference in crime between kidnapping/robbery. I told him that there is a possibility that somebody that kidnapped could serve the same jail sentence as somebody that did robbery. I told him that the law doesn't care if something is right or wrong; we might agree that kidnapping is worse but somebody with robbery can serve similar times in prison or more in some cases. In the eyes of law, the punishment could be the same between robbery or kidnapping even though we might not like it.

He tries to argue that i'm wrong and the law punishes kidnappers much worse than robbers. Jesus, not everything is right and wrong, one way or another, somebody that robs 2 million could possibly serve the same amount as a kidnapper. Then the argument was close to yelling before i stopped talking. :banghead:


He just sounds like an idiot. You run into them from time to time and it's best to just leave the convo. Someone who enters an argument and then doesn't hear the other side is just an idiot. And if they shut you down because of party lines? Double idiot.

The term Agree to Disagree is an acknowledgment that neither of you are going to bend on your stance. It just basically means I give up trying to persuade you because neither of us are going to change our opinions.

kentatm 02-02-2011 01:24 AM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
I usually take that as the other person will never agree with me and knows I wont agree with them and simply doesnt want to argue anymore so I stop b/c I also see that its pointless to keep going.


that said your friend is wrong and is an idiot.

iamgine 02-02-2011 02:20 AM

Re: How do you react to "We can agree to disagree"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bladefd
You're right.

Here's the thing though, since he considers me liberal and he is a conservative, everything I say is biased and wrong. Here's the back-and-forth (it is almost word-for-word except for later).

I told him to not trust any media you see on tv or pundits on tv. He responds by saying that Fox is the least biased channel and they show both sides of every viewpoint, and channels like NBC/CNN are all liberal/show only one point. I was like "Hold on, I am not even talking about FOX, talking about media in general. and yes, fox is biased just like NBC or CNN or BBC or any of them." He is like "Nope, you are wrong. FOX is neutral. The other reason why you say otherwise is because you are a liberal and watch NBC/CNN."

My response: "I don't watch NBC or FOX or BBC. Might put on CNN once a week. Besides, I told you that NBC is just as bad as fox; I also put NBC in the same category as FOX. Why would I condemn my own channel if I am out to trash FOX?"

Next, he is like "Well, you don't stay up to date with news then if you don't watch any of them." My response: "I get my news every day off of yahoo news section, a lot of it from associated press so I stay up to date on the days." He responds "Associated Press is liberal." Then rant starts up without letting me say anything else. I don't even remember what he said after "Associated Press is liberal". Something about how bad Anderson Cooper is and biased he is, etc. I kept trying to ask him "Did you ever watch CNN?" Asked him multiple times "may I ask you a question? You are not letting me speak a single word", finally he says "Yes, I used to watch CNN very long ago when I was young. When you get older, you will also realize how much our community is dumbing down because of liberal channels like CNN."

I respond by saying "Hold on. People have been complaining that USA is dumbing down for the past 150-200 years. The concept of "dumbing down" is nothing new." He says "Says who? It is only dumbing down the last 10 years. Everything was free and good in the 1960's without the president forcing you to buy healthcare."

He somehow jumps to healthcare when I didn't even mention healthcare. I didn't even mention Obama anywhere. Then he says that I am changing topic because I say "we can agree to disagree."

Then conversation somehow turned to crime about how the law looks at the difference in crime between kidnapping/robbery. I told him that there is a possibility that somebody that kidnapped could serve the same jail sentence as somebody that did robbery. I told him that the law doesn't care if something is right or wrong; we might agree that kidnapping is worse but somebody with robbery can serve similar times in prison or more in some cases. In the eyes of law, the punishment could be the same between robbery or kidnapping even though we might not like it.

He tries to argue that i'm wrong and the law punishes kidnappers much worse than robbers. Jesus, not everything is right and wrong, one way or another, somebody that robs 2 million could possibly serve the same amount as a kidnapper. Then the argument was close to yelling before i stopped talking. :banghead:

Here's a story i read in John Maxwell's book:

A tennis professional was giving a lesson to a new student of the game. After watching the student take several swings at the tennis ball, he began to suggest ways in which the strokes might be improved.

But each time a suggestion was made, the student would interrupt with his own version of what was wrong and how to correct it. After several such interruptions, the "Pro" began to nod his head in agreement.

When the lesson ended, a woman who had been watching said to the Pro: “Why did you go along with that arrogant man’s stupid suggestions?” The old “Pro” smilingly replied, “I learned a long time ago that it is a waste of time to try to sell answers to a person who just wants to buy echoes.”


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy