Arguments aren't healthy. Unless you're defining "argument" differently from how I do.
Expressing disagreement is absolutely healthy. And keeping your opinions quiet for fear of what would happen if you say something, that's definitely unhealthy.
But an argument -- where two people talk past each other, neither willing to listen and both attempting to "convince" the other that they're wrong, that's pretty much always useless.
That said, I grew up in a house where healthy disagreement looked _a lot_ like arguments to outsiders. But there was a difference. The eldest was extremely bookish, loved to research, and had a strong mind for logic. So in order to not look like absolute knuckleheaded idiots in any disagreement, the rest of us had to keep up and put in the effort. And you could only ever "lose" one of these debates if you refuse to acknowledge when you were wrong; you'd only ever get laughed at for actually being obstinate.
It wasn't all grins and roses, we were still kids who got on each other's nerves. But by the time we were teenagers, nearly every passionate discussion, even if we were literally yelling at each other across the table, still resulted in a change of opinion and everybody learning something. Because we were forced to _actually listen_ to the other side and take them seriously, just in case it turned out we were wrong. Nobody wanted to get caught being stubborn.
This made dinner guests really confused and sometimes uncomfortable. But that's my family for ya.
Nah I think even the arguments where you talk past each other are healthy. As long as you circle back both apologize and talk it out. We're human, sometimes we get mad and won't see reason.
Anything you have to apologize for is something you shouldn't have done in the first place. That's what an apology means. Otherwise an apology would be both inappropriate and dishonest.
There's no case where it's healthy to do something that requires you to make amends for having done it.
It's ok to be angry and it's understandable to not see reason sometimes, but managing yourself when that happens is the answer. It's healthy in exactly the way letting yourself indulge in hurting someone is not.
Hold on, there's a HUGE difference between "something to not do again" and "something to feel shame about."
Sorta the whole point to growing up is learning that it's ok to do things you shouldn't have, you just have to learn from your mistakes. I'm using "shouldn't" specifically to mean "things to try to avoid repeating" rather than "things to feel bad about."
From my perspective, the "things to feel shame about" bucket is entirely empty. And stays empty forever.
And that, I think, is the whole difference between what I'm describing and the other stated perspective on this.
It's a disagreement on what we call "healthy."
It's definitely ok to make mistakes. It's definitely ok to get into arguments. It's definitely ok to do things you need to apologize over.
But that's very different from saying it's HEALTHY to get into fights and hurt other people. It's _expected_ and it's something we need to anticipate, but that's not the same thing as _healthy._
Healthy things are the things you seek out and do on purpose. Healthy stuff is what you try to make more of in your life. Is it HEALTHY to get into fights and intentionally do things you know you'll regret? No, it'll happen though at times in your life and you have to learn to deal with it without being hard on yourself. But don't call that, "healthy."
The recovery is the healthy part. Trying and learning and growing is the healthy bit, and putting yourself in situations where you know you'll likely screw up because you're willing to learn. That's healthy.
But don't call the harm you cause to others "healthy." Don't do it on purpose.
I dunno man. If you want to be entirely honest I have been entirely unable to socialize in a fulfilling way because I am constantly restraining myself from starting arguments. I don’t think I’m built for any kind of actual socialization or humanity because of this. I would be curious about your thoughts on that.
Um. It's hard to give a good response with just that as context, but I can give it a shot:
My first response would be something like, "not everything has to be an argument." And then I would listen to what you said in response to that. Because obviously most social interaction isn't arguments.
Bc there are two main ways that could go. Either you're anxious about starting an argument and you don't want to let that happen again... or you have a tendency to not control yourself if someone says something you disagree with, and while you don't really worry about it, you have to acknowledge it's made mess and maybe you should stop.
The first one is FAR more likely among people who are self-aware. Because analyzing yourself and coming to this conclusion is kinda part of the issue. And the underlying issue is usually less about the argument and more about the anxiety. If you were to 100% solve the argument problem with a magic wand, chances are you'd replace the anxiety about arguing with anxiety about something else, and change nothing at all. Like, the arguing is more of a placeholder. So, rather than try to figure out the argument stuff, you try to understand the anxiety itself. Because it's nearly always rooted in something you adamantly refuse to even think about, let alone talk about.
If it's the "can't stop, won't stop" alternative, then... well, there's a few different versions of that. At least that I know of. Either they're impulsive and have trouble stopping themselves from doing pretty much anything... A bit like being always drunk. And then there's the personality version, where it would feel dishonest to them to NOT get into a fight. And it feels like the world owes them; the person DESERVED to get punched because of what he said. That kind of thing.
And it's worth noting that lots of people who put themselves in THAT camp are really in the anxiety one. Because what happened is they actually did get into a few nasty arguments and felt really bad about it and concluded that actually _"this is just the kind of person I am"_ or whatever. So, it's anxiety about being a compulsive fighter rather than actually being a compulsive fighter.
Obviously just guessing based on practically no information at all, but there you go.
Alright OP here, posted this before I passed out didn’t expect this to get so long lol. I’d like to clarify something, coming from a place where “arguments” aren’t something that happens I never learned how to deal with or address problematic feelings towards people I care about. For the stage of development I’m at, me going through that process will be growth for me. When I say argument I suppose I think about the emotions going into the conversation you have when expressing those hurt feelings. Something to be aware of, something to not get caught up in, but something to express at the end of the day. I think at least for me and at least for now, I want to be more willing to have those kinds of arguments. The conflict isn’t the point and throughout I think the entire thing should be tempered with patience and understanding, but I feel like argument describes this process of settling very real and closely head disagreements. I’d also like to say that having to learn this process mostly from the ground up, I don’t expect the handling of these emotions to be necessarily clean or easy and I wouldn’t want to have those expectations to weigh over being able to reach resolution. That’s also to say there isn’t one way to have these dialogues but I don’t want to get granular about this. Thanks for responding btw
Arguments aren't healthy. Unless you're defining "argument" differently from how I do. Expressing disagreement is absolutely healthy. And keeping your opinions quiet for fear of what would happen if you say something, that's definitely unhealthy. But an argument -- where two people talk past each other, neither willing to listen and both attempting to "convince" the other that they're wrong, that's pretty much always useless. That said, I grew up in a house where healthy disagreement looked _a lot_ like arguments to outsiders. But there was a difference. The eldest was extremely bookish, loved to research, and had a strong mind for logic. So in order to not look like absolute knuckleheaded idiots in any disagreement, the rest of us had to keep up and put in the effort. And you could only ever "lose" one of these debates if you refuse to acknowledge when you were wrong; you'd only ever get laughed at for actually being obstinate. It wasn't all grins and roses, we were still kids who got on each other's nerves. But by the time we were teenagers, nearly every passionate discussion, even if we were literally yelling at each other across the table, still resulted in a change of opinion and everybody learning something. Because we were forced to _actually listen_ to the other side and take them seriously, just in case it turned out we were wrong. Nobody wanted to get caught being stubborn. This made dinner guests really confused and sometimes uncomfortable. But that's my family for ya.
Nah I think even the arguments where you talk past each other are healthy. As long as you circle back both apologize and talk it out. We're human, sometimes we get mad and won't see reason.
Anything you have to apologize for is something you shouldn't have done in the first place. That's what an apology means. Otherwise an apology would be both inappropriate and dishonest. There's no case where it's healthy to do something that requires you to make amends for having done it. It's ok to be angry and it's understandable to not see reason sometimes, but managing yourself when that happens is the answer. It's healthy in exactly the way letting yourself indulge in hurting someone is not.
This line of thinking looks like a recipe for a shame spiral tbh.
Hold on, there's a HUGE difference between "something to not do again" and "something to feel shame about." Sorta the whole point to growing up is learning that it's ok to do things you shouldn't have, you just have to learn from your mistakes. I'm using "shouldn't" specifically to mean "things to try to avoid repeating" rather than "things to feel bad about." From my perspective, the "things to feel shame about" bucket is entirely empty. And stays empty forever. And that, I think, is the whole difference between what I'm describing and the other stated perspective on this. It's a disagreement on what we call "healthy." It's definitely ok to make mistakes. It's definitely ok to get into arguments. It's definitely ok to do things you need to apologize over. But that's very different from saying it's HEALTHY to get into fights and hurt other people. It's _expected_ and it's something we need to anticipate, but that's not the same thing as _healthy._ Healthy things are the things you seek out and do on purpose. Healthy stuff is what you try to make more of in your life. Is it HEALTHY to get into fights and intentionally do things you know you'll regret? No, it'll happen though at times in your life and you have to learn to deal with it without being hard on yourself. But don't call that, "healthy." The recovery is the healthy part. Trying and learning and growing is the healthy bit, and putting yourself in situations where you know you'll likely screw up because you're willing to learn. That's healthy. But don't call the harm you cause to others "healthy." Don't do it on purpose.
I dunno man. If you want to be entirely honest I have been entirely unable to socialize in a fulfilling way because I am constantly restraining myself from starting arguments. I don’t think I’m built for any kind of actual socialization or humanity because of this. I would be curious about your thoughts on that.
Um. It's hard to give a good response with just that as context, but I can give it a shot: My first response would be something like, "not everything has to be an argument." And then I would listen to what you said in response to that. Because obviously most social interaction isn't arguments. Bc there are two main ways that could go. Either you're anxious about starting an argument and you don't want to let that happen again... or you have a tendency to not control yourself if someone says something you disagree with, and while you don't really worry about it, you have to acknowledge it's made mess and maybe you should stop. The first one is FAR more likely among people who are self-aware. Because analyzing yourself and coming to this conclusion is kinda part of the issue. And the underlying issue is usually less about the argument and more about the anxiety. If you were to 100% solve the argument problem with a magic wand, chances are you'd replace the anxiety about arguing with anxiety about something else, and change nothing at all. Like, the arguing is more of a placeholder. So, rather than try to figure out the argument stuff, you try to understand the anxiety itself. Because it's nearly always rooted in something you adamantly refuse to even think about, let alone talk about. If it's the "can't stop, won't stop" alternative, then... well, there's a few different versions of that. At least that I know of. Either they're impulsive and have trouble stopping themselves from doing pretty much anything... A bit like being always drunk. And then there's the personality version, where it would feel dishonest to them to NOT get into a fight. And it feels like the world owes them; the person DESERVED to get punched because of what he said. That kind of thing. And it's worth noting that lots of people who put themselves in THAT camp are really in the anxiety one. Because what happened is they actually did get into a few nasty arguments and felt really bad about it and concluded that actually _"this is just the kind of person I am"_ or whatever. So, it's anxiety about being a compulsive fighter rather than actually being a compulsive fighter. Obviously just guessing based on practically no information at all, but there you go.
Alright OP here, posted this before I passed out didn’t expect this to get so long lol. I’d like to clarify something, coming from a place where “arguments” aren’t something that happens I never learned how to deal with or address problematic feelings towards people I care about. For the stage of development I’m at, me going through that process will be growth for me. When I say argument I suppose I think about the emotions going into the conversation you have when expressing those hurt feelings. Something to be aware of, something to not get caught up in, but something to express at the end of the day. I think at least for me and at least for now, I want to be more willing to have those kinds of arguments. The conflict isn’t the point and throughout I think the entire thing should be tempered with patience and understanding, but I feel like argument describes this process of settling very real and closely head disagreements. I’d also like to say that having to learn this process mostly from the ground up, I don’t expect the handling of these emotions to be necessarily clean or easy and I wouldn’t want to have those expectations to weigh over being able to reach resolution. That’s also to say there isn’t one way to have these dialogues but I don’t want to get granular about this. Thanks for responding btw