Dealing with Disagreements

Disagreements, arguments, quarrels, squabbles, bickering and fighting... we all have them in our lives one way or another. Hopefully not all the time and not regularly. It is however inevitable that we will be put into one of these situations at one stage or another.

Because it is inevitable, what are our goals then when we go into an argument? I have seen some very stubborn people in a disagreement. Sometimes these people's need to be right is so strong that they will not let go of their statement and why they think that they are correct.

Often these kinds of people have a problem with their ego's and this may be caused by a lack of self-esteem. Like I noted under Thought Identity and Open Mindset, there are people who hold on to an idea so hard because they have based their reputation on it.

However, it is not necessary that we lose face because of a disagreement. To have a difference of opinion is natural and inevitable so why not learn how to turn a potentially catastrophic situation into a positive one?

After all, we have to admit that we can not always be correct. If that is the case then in some of these disagreements there will be some people who can give us better information or methods on how to do things. If we are open to correction and learning then we can improve our lives.

Let us first have a look at what makes up various types of arguments and then how to possibly solve them. For now the focus is on arguments and disagreements that involve two people.

The Logical Argument

The logical argument is the type of discussion that is had by two people going over factual things, or two people that have a very level headed and methodical approach to ding things.

This usually helps if both of them are stress free and that the subject does not include anything that we usually get too emotional about.

This type of disagreement is the most likely to turn out to be solved peacefully and without lasting grudges. An example of this is a discussion about what about the best method to repair a broken window. The subject is physical, the result is finite. When the task is approached then the two parties can weigh up a range of factors such as cost, safety, time till completion and availability.

One person might argue that they will repair the glass themselves. It would be cheaper and they could do it same day. The other person might argue that then they would be responsible for the warranty on the job and they would be physically in danger.

By adding the comparison on the table and considering time availability or material/service availability the disagreement can come to a logical conclusion.

The Emotional Argument

This type of argument has a high chance to be full of anger, fear and mistrust. It is normal for these kinds of arguments to escalate and include things that are not even the subject of the disagreement. From something small it can lead on to something big and ugly.

Emotional disagreements are usually about people. I am not about to address right here and now all the reasons for why people have these arguments, that can be a subject for another day. So I will keep it general. Emotional arguments has something to do with people and what they do, say and what you think is going on.

It is often a lot less logical and it is a lot more difficult to mediate to a happy conclusion. Usually, the only way to get this type of disagreement to a conclusion is for both parties to become vulnerable. If not, then the fight is likely to run until someone gets frustrated and leaves.

The Displaced Argument

This is the most nefarious of all the types of disagreement that you could be having. This is because the origin of the anger and resentment that the person is experiencing is apart from the current conversation.

This is a case where there is inferred blame, either subconsciously or knowingly. Usually the people that you are arguing with are not those who were responsible for your anger and mood. Or inversely, the person arguing with you is doing so without you being the direct blame for their stress/worry/work.

Generalization gets used here a lot because you will end up identifying all people of a type that is part of what you identify yourself as.

We never represent the entirety of a certain group, we only belong to it. We cannot hope to completely be represented by, or to represent a certain group. Yet, when we get offended or wronged by someone and we find another person that is similar then we might feel that we can “get something back” by running out mouth off at someone who looks like our adversary.

Perhaps this person is no longer available for argument so they act as a kind of surrogate.

In a way, it is stupid. I can also understand a partial therapeutic value to it, but you can take it too far and then it is likely going to become unpleasant. I would rather focus on internal coping methods to deal with these kinds of situations.

Conclusion

Disagreements are common and happen for many different reasons. Knowing what the origin is of a certain disagreement is key in figuring out how to solve the problem. In order to do this, you will need to study your “Adversary” closely.

Are they bringing across a calm and collected point? That would be great news.

Are they teary and emotional? Is their anger somewhat over-sensitive? Then start looking at the solution on how to deal with an emotional person and a sensitive inferred anger person.

This is a base line for understanding and dealing with the arguments and the aggro.

The last line to remember is that you can control the tune of the discussion by remaining calm. Even during the other person's anger, you need to be in control. If you are calm, they will copy you. If they lose their cool and you remain calm, then you have already won.

A clear head will give you the clarity needed to handle any of those situations.

All Image credits to pexels.com

Part of my 60-day article challenge

Follow / Upvote / Share

Steemit Blog
Whaleshares Blog
Weku Blog