4 ms·

Agreed, but if you don't get that, you shouldn't take it personally. Which I hope is what the OP is trying to say.

by blazespin 11y ago

danharaj 11y ago
Honestly, if we shouldn't take personal interactions personally, then what exactly should be taken personally?
- afandian 11y ago
  Intention.
  - danharaj 11y ago
    Intentions don't change how an interaction affects me. Your definition of what to take personally is exactly that part of an interaction that is not me. That's absurd.
    - afandian 11y ago
      I try to balance my gut instinct and my empathy and theory of mind. If someone does something that offends me, but I know after a few seconds' thought that they didn't intend to, for example they were busy or look upset for some reason, then it would be foolish to take offence. If someone does something that is extra polite and friendly and massages my ego, but I know that they hate me and are being two-faced (for whatever reason) I might take offence. Of course, everyone's different, but most people's theory of mind is developed to this point past past a certain age. I don't think it's absurd to take some responsibility for your own thoughts. I think it's how society hangs together.
- pluma 11y ago
  I hope you recognize that your argument is a strawman. It's absurd to never take any personal interactions personally. It's equally absurd to take every personal interaction personally. Your argument is basically the twitter problem: stop judging people by individual statements or interactions, understand that there's an entire separate being on the other end of every conversation with concerns and experiences of their own.
  - danharaj 11y ago
    Yeah, and on this end is me. Therefore a conversation is personal. This is flabbergasting. Under what conditions am I allowed to judge a personal interaction based on how it affects me? > It's equally absurd to take every personal interaction personally. Ok, which personal interactions should not be taken personally? Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds definitionally?
    - dwaltrip 11y ago
      You can't delineate a set of criteria for when to take a statement said to you "personally". For one thing, taking something personally isn't a binary attribute, it is far more complicated than that. Use your best judgment and try to give people the benefit of the doubt (this requires practicing empathy, which is difficult). Realize most people are usually not thinking about you, because they are too busy thinking about themselves. I find it beneficial to try to act in a way that leaves the most people feeling positively (including myself).
      - danharaj 11y ago
        This is still ridiculous. Because someone else is being inconsiderate of how their actions affect me, i should ignore how their actions affect me. I have to admit i am being somewhat coy by taking issue with the post i replied to, which, by the way, makes a general prescription of what not to take personally without knowing any context. I understand the attitude of ignoring things that cause personal discomfort or harm based on intended effect. I think it's ridiculous, and more often than not people prescribe such behavior for others but are quite comfortable taking personally that which... personally affects them. Silent forgiveness for the inconsiderate instead of numerous means of improving one's relationship with them. Telling someone that they are treating you in an unacceptable manner is, by definition, taking it personally. And being passive and avoiding such conversations is exactly how unpleasant social interactions persist and grow into a climate of alienation and dysfunction. > You can't delineate a set of criteria for when to take a statement said to you "personally". Sure i can. When it affects you, personally. People who disagree with me can't come up with a set of criteria. Without such a criteria, there is no justification of the attitude. > For one thing, taking something personally isn't a binary attribute, it is far more complicated than that. Taking something personally is binary in this way: you either ignore the personal effects a relationship has on you or you signal/take action based on those personal effects. All of the complication lies in how one proceeds based on their feelings. Mediation and conflict resolution are complicated yes. But you can't resolve a conflict without signaling that it exists and that you have a personal stake in it. That is exactly what taking something personally means. There are large-scale social implications. People who are lower in status are told to not take it personally more often than people of higher status. When a boss is emotionally abusive, people are far more likely to excuse such behavior than if an underling is being emotionally abusive. In other words, prescribing to people to passively accept uncomfortable or harmful social interactions without protest becomes a mechanism of power. The effects are alienation, depersonalization, stress, and social dysfunction. That shit infests our society.

Agreed, but if you don't get that, you shouldn't take it personally. Which I hope is what the OP is trying to say.

danharaj 11y ago

Honestly, if we shouldn't take personal interactions personally, then what exactly should be taken personally?

afandian 11y ago
Intention.
- danharaj 11y ago
  Intentions don't change how an interaction affects me. Your definition of what to take personally is exactly that part of an interaction that is not me. That's absurd.
  - afandian 11y ago
    I try to balance my gut instinct and my empathy and theory of mind. If someone does something that offends me, but I know after a few seconds' thought that they didn't intend to, for example they were busy or look upset for some reason, then it would be foolish to take offence. If someone does something that is extra polite and friendly and massages my ego, but I know that they hate me and are being two-faced (for whatever reason) I might take offence. Of course, everyone's different, but most people's theory of mind is developed to this point past past a certain age. I don't think it's absurd to take some responsibility for your own thoughts. I think it's how society hangs together.
pluma 11y ago
I hope you recognize that your argument is a strawman. It's absurd to never take any personal interactions personally. It's equally absurd to take every personal interaction personally. Your argument is basically the twitter problem: stop judging people by individual statements or interactions, understand that there's an entire separate being on the other end of every conversation with concerns and experiences of their own.
- danharaj 11y ago
  Yeah, and on this end is me. Therefore a conversation is personal. This is flabbergasting. Under what conditions am I allowed to judge a personal interaction based on how it affects me? > It's equally absurd to take every personal interaction personally. Ok, which personal interactions should not be taken personally? Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds definitionally?
  - dwaltrip 11y ago
    You can't delineate a set of criteria for when to take a statement said to you "personally". For one thing, taking something personally isn't a binary attribute, it is far more complicated than that. Use your best judgment and try to give people the benefit of the doubt (this requires practicing empathy, which is difficult). Realize most people are usually not thinking about you, because they are too busy thinking about themselves. I find it beneficial to try to act in a way that leaves the most people feeling positively (including myself).
    - danharaj 11y ago
      This is still ridiculous. Because someone else is being inconsiderate of how their actions affect me, i should ignore how their actions affect me. I have to admit i am being somewhat coy by taking issue with the post i replied to, which, by the way, makes a general prescription of what not to take personally without knowing any context. I understand the attitude of ignoring things that cause personal discomfort or harm based on intended effect. I think it's ridiculous, and more often than not people prescribe such behavior for others but are quite comfortable taking personally that which... personally affects them. Silent forgiveness for the inconsiderate instead of numerous means of improving one's relationship with them. Telling someone that they are treating you in an unacceptable manner is, by definition, taking it personally. And being passive and avoiding such conversations is exactly how unpleasant social interactions persist and grow into a climate of alienation and dysfunction. > You can't delineate a set of criteria for when to take a statement said to you "personally". Sure i can. When it affects you, personally. People who disagree with me can't come up with a set of criteria. Without such a criteria, there is no justification of the attitude. > For one thing, taking something personally isn't a binary attribute, it is far more complicated than that. Taking something personally is binary in this way: you either ignore the personal effects a relationship has on you or you signal/take action based on those personal effects. All of the complication lies in how one proceeds based on their feelings. Mediation and conflict resolution are complicated yes. But you can't resolve a conflict without signaling that it exists and that you have a personal stake in it. That is exactly what taking something personally means. There are large-scale social implications. People who are lower in status are told to not take it personally more often than people of higher status. When a boss is emotionally abusive, people are far more likely to excuse such behavior than if an underling is being emotionally abusive. In other words, prescribing to people to passively accept uncomfortable or harmful social interactions without protest becomes a mechanism of power. The effects are alienation, depersonalization, stress, and social dysfunction. That shit infests our society.