As I said, I’m totally in favour of collaborative discussions, i.e. this stuff
they don’t raise their voices, go ad hominem, tear apart one aspect of an argument to dismiss the rest, or downvote comments that signal an identity that theirs is constructed in opposition to
(except possibly raised voices), but I wanted to argue that sometimes things that look like combative discussion aren’t. Imagine:
A:
B: I think that’s a pretty bad argument because . seems much better.
A: No, you didn’t understand what I’m saying, I said .
This could be a snippet of a tense combative argument, or just a vigorous collaborative brainstorming session. A might feel unfairly dismissed by B, or might not even notice it. If we were trying to combat combtiveness by calling out people abruptly shooting down other people’s ideas, then we might prevent people from doing this particular style of rapid brainstorming.
(Sorry, this stuff is hard to talk about because it’s very contextual. I should probably have picked a better example :))
What I’m trying to say is that we just need to be a little bit careful how we shoot for our goals.
As I said, I’m totally in favour of collaborative discussions, i.e. this stuff
(except possibly raised voices), but I wanted to argue that sometimes things that look like combative discussion aren’t. Imagine:
A:
B: I think that’s a pretty bad argument because . seems much better.
A: No, you didn’t understand what I’m saying, I said .
This could be a snippet of a tense combative argument, or just a vigorous collaborative brainstorming session. A might feel unfairly dismissed by B, or might not even notice it. If we were trying to combat combtiveness by calling out people abruptly shooting down other people’s ideas, then we might prevent people from doing this particular style of rapid brainstorming.
(Sorry, this stuff is hard to talk about because it’s very contextual. I should probably have picked a better example :))
What I’m trying to say is that we just need to be a little bit careful how we shoot for our goals.
I see, we’re just thinking of “combative” differently.