Tonight, oddly enough, I was in a discussion about anger. In that discussion I was remembering my fighting style. Let's say you are in an argument with me but you don't escalate with me. All of a sudden you have the "high ground" because you are still at peace. I will pick and pick and will continue at you until finally you explode so you are as distraught as I am. Then we will go a few rounds. I will of course be certain I have won because I knew all along I was right. I will depart at this point because I always have a retreat possible and I will be sure of myself until the chemistry in me eases up. Then I will be in remorse. I will feel horrible and while of course I am still right I will be in a hurry also to return and try for peace because I had no right to pick at you like that. I will be careful to skirt the topic of our contention because it is not polite to point out that you are so wrong. Isn't it just a really difficult life for those of us who are right?
I was taught a while back that I might want to consider if this is the particular hill I want to die on.
Also, here are three questions: is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? If an opinion passes all three, then sharing might keep the peace.
So here is a poem written a couple years back...
Round Three
We argue, land blows
get knocked down, stand up again,
crying bitter tears,
and try again, just
demanding our rights again,
wishing this closure
that feels essential
to it all, some monument
to mean crazy pain.
April 9, 2010 5:46 AM
Ability to discuss opposing views while remaining calm, is indeed an art form, and only in such circumstances are opinions likely to be changed, and learning achieved... by all parties...
ReplyDeleteInteresting post and apt illustration.