Framing Questions, Conversations, and Debates

[Ernie]

It seems that many people interpret life through black and white lenses. Others see nearly everything as polar opposites.

e.g.
If a person does not believe A, then it is assumed that they must believe the opposite, Z.
If a person does not think that we can know B for sure, and does not think we should be making assumptions that we don't know for sure, then they must certainly believe Y.

I think these are unhelpful in conversation. I think they are false dichotomies.

What if a person believes neither A nor Z? Neither B nor Y? What if they believe K or 6 or * ?

[Ernie]

It seems that many people interpret life through black and white lenses. Others see nearly everything as polar opposites.

e.g.
If a person does not believe A, then it is assumed that they must believe the opposite, Z.
If a person does not think that we can know B for sure, and does not think we should be making assumptions that we don't know for sure, then they must certainly believe Y.

None of my friends that I interact with and discuss things with face to face ever converse this way. (I have met people in real life that do this, but the conversation doesn't last long. The conversation soon peters out because I don't know how to reply or respond to such interpretations of life.)

So people with this sort of conversational style really have close friends that they can share meaningfully with?

What about the rest of you? Do you have friends that you can have long and meaningful conversations with who think and function this way?

[ohio jones]

[D]o people with this sort of conversational style really have close friends that they can share meaningfully with?

I suspect the conversation soon peters out, so they post on MennoNet instead. Here they can find enough unalike minded polar opposites to bear the conversation along.

And here I thought this was going to be a thread on carpentry.

[Wesleyb]

What about the rest of you? Do you have friends that you can have long and meaningful conversations with who think and function this way?

No.

There was a time when I would have been more likely to dig in and argue with that type of person. Now I either smile politely and move on or if my mind is working quickly enough ask a question that doesn’t have an easy black or white answer and will settle in their brain and make them think.

[JohnL]

None of my friends that I interact with and discuss things with face to face ever converse this way. (I have met people in real life that do this, but the conversation doesn't last long. The conversation soon peters out because I don't know how to reply or respond to such interpretations of life.)

So people with this sort of conversational style really have close friends that they can share meaningfully with?

What about the rest of you? Do you have friends that you can have long and meaningful conversations with who think and function this way?

In a funny sort of way you sidled up to your question with an answer. I see it as a part of personality differences.
In general we tend to be friends with folks who share common ground with us such as communication styles, thinking styles and other what have yous. People who love to hash out all the nuances can go for hours doing just that.
There’s folks who try to impress others with how smart they think they are. They might have friends among the naive for awhile but once those friends figure out the person isn’t all that smart they either walk away or start to try to bring the “know-it-all” back to earth.
There’s people who get tired of all the back and forth. Or who’ve already BTDT and have developed their perspective on the topic. They're ready to move on to other topics.
Then there’s the folks who make popcorn and watch the circus together for entertainment. They’ll do a running commentary with each other about monkeys, the elephants, the acrobats and the clowns.
There’s other types of personalities who have friends that share commonalities and as that old saying goes ‘birds of a feather flock together’.
At least that’s been my experiences working in academic settings run by bureaucracies. The faculty lounge or staff lunchroom can be more educational than all the textbooks combined.

[Bootstrap]

It seems that many people interpret life through black and white lenses. Others see nearly everything as polar opposites.

e.g.
If a person does not believe A, then it is assumed that they must believe the opposite, Z.
If a person does not think that we can know B for sure, and does not think we should be making assumptions that we don't know for sure, then they must certainly believe Y.

I think these are unhelpful in conversation. I think they are false dichotomies.

I agree. But often, we seem to assume we know the assumptions others are making. Here's one thing that happens a lot on MN: two different people each think the other person is thinking this way, neither thinks they themselves are thinking this way. I think you and I had a little of this on the Early Writings thread. Part of the problem is that we often assume we know a lot more about what the other person is thinking than we do. Especially on an Internet forum, where we are limited to the kind of communication that can happen here.

None of my friends that I interact with and discuss things with face to face ever converse this way. (I have met people in real life that do this, but the conversation doesn't last long. The conversation soon peters out because I don't know how to reply or respond to such interpretations of life.)

So people with this sort of conversational style really have close friends that they can share meaningfully with?

Nobody I know talks like an Internet forum. Just imagine what that would be like! Suppose you were at church discussing, say, what humility means, and as one person is talking, everyone else wants to evaluate the person's motives and character, calling him legalistic, a black-and-white thinker, liberal, controlling, full of himself, or perhaps lauding him as a true Anabaptist or Mennonite, biblically informed, hitting imaginary like buttons and forming factions instead of listening to what he is saying.

I assume we don't do that in our churches and friendships. And I assume some of this has happened largely because it is normal for American politics, I hope it will diminish now that the politics forum does not dominate MN. I also assume that most of us really know very little about what goes on inside others here unless we know them very well.