site banner
gog  6mo ago (text post)   1652 thread views

Advice for disagreeable people

I am disagreeable IRL. Like, everyone I get to know well eventually starts avoiding me. I can find lots of advice for how to deal with other disagreeable people, but not much for people who are themselves disagreeable. Surely some of you lot are the same. Have any of you overcome this? If so, how?

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Is there any need to fix this? Some of the most successful people alive today, like elon musk, are also disagreeable. although there is survivorship bias.

I've gotten into the habit of temporarily leaving the room or shifting to another conversation if people start talking about the kind of stuff that gets me heated.

Finally getting covid recently crystallized some of my thoughts on disagreeability. Small tasks feel like huge endeavors, what tasted good before now tastes weird, small shocks take forever to recover from, nausea is the new neutral, everyday has its own signature of shittiness, and I have absolutely no patience to humor or indulge anybody. I used to be able to volunteer and do the high energy positive wholesome thing when working with kids. Now you might as well ask me to do a triple back flip. It wasn't acute sickness that took away that ability though, it was more like an accumulation of chronic illness symptoms that never disappeared completely. I am in utter awe of spritely middle aged men, who bounce back like rubber balls, but if you don't have that golden retriever personality, contorting yourself into a poor imitation is just too tiring, man. I have my hands full just managing myself here.

Yes. Put simply, I developed the habit of asking more questions than making statements. I started practicing this after reading The Charisma Myth, but it’s really that simple. Just challenge yourself to start all interactions with questions. Who really benefits from the quotidian disagreement anyway? Save the truth seeking and debate for a rationality meet up or close friends.

I guess you might come to believe that you have something that approaches a moral duty to not offend people or to not do so inadvertently, and to be graceful and socially skilled. How you'd get there, IDK.

I wonder if you are in my boat. There a lot of issues now you can lose friends over having the wrong opinion on. I found that I could think for myself, building myself a patchwork set of opinions on various things from first principles, up until around 2017 or so. People would engage me and we had some spicy discussions but we could agree to disagree and move on realizing we still had common ground.

It has all gone downhill from there. It seems all social groups have an unwritten process where you need to check in as being on a right side of a bunch of selected issues. And if you aren't, the best you'll get is the cold shoulder and being treated distantly as an outsider.

I guess, for some people it's always been like this? Or harder times are bringing out tighter collective behaviors in those around us? Or something? I don't know what to do about it either, other than putting on a mask in all social situations and not having close friends or even acquaintances anymore outside my wife and kid.

And so, I suppose this is the way it has to be now, for a free radical sort of mind who sometimes veers on its own to places deemed too naughty by the current groupthink?

interesting idea re: time frame / right side of issues.

I felt freer to argue before 2017, but I was also much younger and people around me did not usually seem to have strong opinions

-Think about it and figure out that 'free will' is actually a spook and people are really just mostly defective automatons stumbling through the maze of reality.

-This helps with 2nd point: Not being angry too often helps.

Why are people avoiding you? Are you constantly angry or constantly critical or constantly very in their face about something ?

I'm very disagreeable. Rationality can be your friend as it is a force for you to be truthful not disagreeable. Try and find true nice things to say to the people around you, take it up as a challenge. Sincerely thank people who help you, even if the help is small.

You can't control a process if you can't measure its parameters and outcomes. Record yourself during interactions and review later, if you have warning. Maybe jot down notes about encounters that you feel went especially well or poorly?

Your problem isn't disagreeableness, it's status. If you're low status and haven't accepted it, you'll be ranked as "disagreeable", because a large part of "disagreeable" is contradicting your betters. So your choices are to accept your low status, and at least behave as if you have no thoughts of your own. Or to obtain higher status somehow (damned if I know how, I suspect it's usually not possible after childhood). Or to just keep grinding yourself against the world until one or the other gives.

Money will buy you plenty of status. My own status shot way up when I put my money where my mouth was and made mid-five figures in the stock market while my friends and I were all working minimum wage jobs.

I can't imagine ..how one could 'contradict' one's "betters". About what ? Like, you risk getting fired if you tell your boss he's doing things wrong, but who else is a 'better' ?

All sorts of people can think themselves your "betters". Doctors. Psychologists. Lawyers. A civil servant with the modicum of power to make your life difficult. Any old rich man or woman who thinks they deserve reverence from lower SES people or any younger person. Anyone who thinks highly of themselves and/or has some power imbalance they want to use.

Social status isn't always objective. A lot of it is just about who can play the social game better. Plenty of dumb(er) people dunk on their smarter peers who also happen to be less socially savvy and thus gain status. Office politics is the same.

I agree with Nybbler that being disagreeable per se isn't really the issue here. Lots of people in high-powered positions are. It's being punished for it, which is associated with low status/low power.

You need to tell me more about how you are disagreeable for me to be able to provide decent advice.

What do you mean exactly by "disagreeable" here? Does this mean specifically that you are a contrarian and literally oppose the stated views of people around you? That you "do not suffer fools lightly" (the balm of those who pride themselves on being disagreeable in this way)? Or are you simply unpleasant to be around because you're tetchy, micromanaging, or a know-it-all? The answer to your question is going to depend largely on what you mean here. (The same is true of those websites you mention.)

If you're literally just the type who corrects people all the time or fails at most junctures to try and be pleasant, @cjet79 has good advice, and it's good advice because it involves getting inside your own head and becoming aware of your reactions moment by moment.

The suggestion/question about how you're disagreeable is also relevant (asked by @slothlikesamwise ) because maybe you're just really annoyed and made angry by people around you. Are you? If so, why? Is it because of you, or them? Are there any people you find yourself being more agreeable (here I mean consensus- or rapport-seeking) with? If so, what's going on there? Was there some point in your life where you cared more about what people thought? And finally, are you in any way autistic or otherwise non-neurotypical?

You obviously don't have to answer any of my questions. I'd disagree vehemently with those saying personality is immutable in this way.

I would give you a different take to consider. Why do you think there's something wrong with being disagreeable? I'm personally very agreeable and I can assure you it really sucks. I have many problems trying to seriously disagree with someone or winning an important argument. Maybe you can mellow out a bit about insignificant disagreements, but I consider being disagreeable a strong card in your deck. All executives, lawyers, politicians have to be able to argue fiercely in favor of their position. Maybe you should find a company of people who are strong enough to accept your opinions. Just consider trying to find a more nuanced approach to your issue.

I too need this advice because I'm currently being disagreeable with a perfectly reasonable person online.

(Seriously, every time I think about maybe vegetarian/veganism, I get reminded by one of the militant vegans that "oh yeah, they're batshit insane and actually hate their fellow humans").

What are your purposes for being disagreeable and why does it turn people off?

You can have your first instinct to every question be to answer "no" and still not be a dick, what it took for me is to approach the conversation differently.

I'd tell you but you'd just disagree with me.

At any rate, personality is usually not amenable to such modification in the long run, but if you're really desperate try psychedelics I guess.

I agree that personality is not super modifiable, but we then have to ask whether particular behavioral or thought patterns are actually central to one's personality.

I think you can absolutely train yourself into and out of certain patterns, based on feedback mechanisms. People can certainly practice their way into better interpersonal skills.

For example, there are people who like to talk a lot, and are on some level wired to be loquacious and never going to become a tacitern hermit. But these people may progressively talk more and more, somewhat out of fear of getting interrputed or losing another chance at the attention of their interloqutor. Thus people are more drained by their talking, and interrupt or ignore them more often, and the cycle deepens.

I've literally observed people acknowledge and break that cycle through practice. Understanding that turn taking and swallowing urges to jump in can actually produce more pleasant interactions, folks can adjust their interaction behaviors and settle into new patterns.

Of course, on a meta-level, it requires a pre-existing disposition for that kind of reflection and desire for improvement. You can't probably get someone to reflect their way into being a more reflective person. And drugs may well be a hack for that.

personality is usually not amenable to such modification in the long run

Strong disagree on this. I'd say its hard for other people to change your personality. But you can change your own personality if you work at it long enough and want the change enough.

I think the standard advice is "don't be disagreeable".

You might have to stop yourself and think before speaking in conversations. Before you disagree make sure of these three things:

  1. Do you really care? If its over something stupid, just drop it.
  2. Will disagreeing accomplish anything? If no, then you probably should stop caring about it.
  3. If I will accomplish something by disagreeing, will it be better than this person potentially not liking me temporarily?

You should also learn how to disagree without being disagreeable. Don't say "That fact is wrong, because I know counter-factual X to be true". Instead say "Huh, I didn't know that, I'd always heard counter-fact X".

Finally, stop hanging around other disagreeable people, it rubs off. If its your family, seek therapy, and possibly lessen contact.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats