Contrarian Thought As Compulsion

[Annapurna]

A Compulsive Contrarian is one who is compelled to offer a contrary arguement to that of the majority in a given setting.
This becomes a knee jerk response apparently not fully in the control of those who exhibit contrarian behaviour.
The symptoms of Compulsive Contrarianism in a cyber world context include;
An inability to agree with or even see any merit in, the views of others .
An apparent need to disagree with all and any any view, except with those views which support the Contrarian agenda.
An apparent holding of opposite views in different in different thread discussions, not due to a honing or refinement of those views, but due to its better serving the Contrarian agenda.
A sense that a resolution or consensus is not the aim, rather debate is about debate for its own sake..and that this aim is best served by the Contrarian agenda..agreement and commonality is anathema to that agenda..

Its a difficult condition ..not least because of the inability of most Contrarians to become aware of their own Contrarian behaviour.

Oh sh*t, I hope you're not inspired to this by me.

I asked for advice yesterday only to declare today I would do something else than what was recommended.

I already changed my mind again! At least 10 times today! And will probably be stuck in groundhog day til X mas...!!!

*Sigh*

Help me outta there, if I am a controverserial....

Metta,

Anna

[PeterB]

I was a joke Anna...the bit implying that it was a recognised syndrome.
What is not a joke is that there are some people, and you are not one of them, who feel compelled to put the contrary view on every thread. Even to the point of contradicting what they have said.on other threads.
It would appear that for such people Buddhadhamma is a continuation of their triumphs at their school debating society.
It has nothing to do with clarity, empathy, or goodwill.
It is about point scoring.
Fortunately such people are rare,one or two on most forums, although they abounded on the old Grey Forum.

P.

[Clueless Git]

A Compulsive Contrarian is one who is compelled to offer a contrary arguement to that of the majority in a given setting.
This becomes a knee jerk response apparently not fully in the control of those who exhibit contrarian behaviour.
The symptoms of Compulsive Contrarianism in a cyber world context include;
An inability to agree with or even see any merit in, the views of others .
An apparent need to disagree with all and any any view, except with those views which support the Contrarian agenda.
An apparent holding of opposite views in different in different thread discussions, not due to a honing or refinement of those views, but due to its better serving the Contrarian agenda.
A sense that a resolution or consensus is not the aim, rather debate is about debate for its own sake..and that this aim is best served by the Contrarian agenda..agreement and commonality is anathema to that agenda..

Its a difficult condition ..not least because of the inability of most Contrarians to become aware of their own Contrarian behaviour.

I love compulsive contrarians myself. Even the blatantly cussid ones have the value of making sure that no one gets to preach exclusively to the choir.

[PeterB]

There is of course always the alternative of not preaching at all.
Of discounting the choir and instead engaging in a genuine exchange of views in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Peter,

There is of course always the alternative of not preaching at all.
Of discounting the choir and instead engaging in a genuine exchange of views in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

Aye.

Metta,
Retro.

[sukhamanveti]

What is not a joke is that there are some people, and you are not one of them, who feel compelled to put the contrary view on every thread. Even to the point of contradicting what they have said.on other threads.
It would appear that for such people Buddhadhamma is a continuation of their triumphs at their school debating society.
It has nothing to do with clarity, empathy, or goodwill.
It is about point scoring.
Fortunately such people are rare,one or two on most forums, although they abounded on the old Grey Forum.

P.

This is so true, PeterB! I would much rather engage in a sincere, respectful discussion or dialogue than an internet "debate." I can remember more than one occasion several years ago (not in a Buddhist forum) when I found myself defining and defending a position carefully or so I thought, only to have my opponent attack a series of views that I obviously did not hold in order to "score points," as you say. For some reason I wasted hours and hours of my life clarifying my point of view, too polite to ask my adversary to play fairly and make some attempt to understand and address what I was actually saying before attempting to "annihilate" me. (Yes, I was crazy.) These so-called "debates" were never-ending and (as far as I can tell) accomplished nothing. Finally, I decided that I had better things to do with my time.

But a genuine dialogue involves two or more people actually listening to each other and attempting to understand each other, maybe even willing to learn from each other. There is no scorekeeping in a real dialogue. A willingness to understand each other's thoughts implies a measure of humility and respect or kindness at the very least. In my experience, it is also more rewarding.

[Annapurna]

I was a joke Anna...the bit implying that it was a recognised syndrome.
What is not a joke is that there are some people, and you are not one of them, who feel compelled to put the contrary view on every thread. Even to the point of contradicting what they have said.on other threads.
It would appear that for such people Buddhadhamma is a continuation of their triumphs at their school debating society.
It has nothing to do with clarity, empathy, or goodwill.
It is about point scoring.
Fortunately such people are rare,one or two on most forums, although they abounded on the old Grey Forum.

P.

Peter.

Can you tell us a possible root of such behaviour?

A

[Annapurna]

What is not a joke is that there are some people, and you are not one of them, who feel compelled to put the contrary view on every thread. Even to the point of contradicting what they have said.on other threads.
It would appear that for such people Buddhadhamma is a continuation of their triumphs at their school debating society.
It has nothing to do with clarity, empathy, or goodwill.
It is about point scoring.
Fortunately such people are rare,one or two on most forums, although they abounded on the old Grey Forum.

P.

I found myself defining and defending a position carefully or so I thought, only to have my opponent attack a series of views that I obviously did not hold in order to "score points," as you say. For some reason I wasted hours and hours of my life clarifying my point of view, too polite to ask my adversary to play fairly and make some attempt to understand and address what I was actually saying before attempting to "annihilate" me. (Yes, I was crazy.) These so-called "debates" were never-ending and (as far as I can tell) accomplished nothing. Finally, I decided that I had better things to do with my time.

I found myself there too. They won't rest before you haven't lost the debate, and if you win it, beware of the retaliation once they've recovered from the defeat.

How do you react to such folks?

[PeterB]

Personally I "ignore user" them Anna..but I know that not everyone is happy with that solution..

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Anna,

Can you tell us a possible root of such behaviour?

MN 18: Madhupindika Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro.

[PeterB]

Buddhadhamma ..the anti- Papanca meme..

[altar]

This reminds me of a "fault-finding mentality" in buddhism. "Without abandoning three things, one is unable to abandon lack of interest in seeing noble ones, disinterest in their teachings, and a fault-finding mentality. They are: restlessness, lack of restraint, and immorality." From 199. Birth, Old Age, and Death, AN anthology of Nyanaponika Thera.
http://books.google.com/books?id=N7zCNa ... 22&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sukhamanveti]

Greetings Anna,

Can you tell us a possible root of such behaviour?

MN 18: Madhupindika Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro.

[sukhamanveti]

How do you react to such folks?

Hi, Anna. My last response was something like, "There seems to be some kind of miscommunication going on here. Also, this discussion is taking up too much time for me. You may have the last word. Best regards." I don't know if it was the best thing to say, but it gave me a way out of an unpleasant situation.

[Annapurna]

Personally I "ignore user" them Anna..but I know that not everyone is happy with that solution..

In the particular forum I am thinking of, they don't have this option...but I've used it in e sangha...