Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6707577" data-attributes="member: 177">Nope.&nbsp; You brought up tone when you referred to &quot;bludgeoning&quot;.&nbsp; You said, &quot;I've just never really seen it help anything. It is either a bludgeon to bang people over the head with ...&quot;&nbsp; This is very much trying to discount the concept based not upon its content, but upon how it is used.&nbsp; That, right there, is the Tone Argument.&nbsp; The Tone Argument comes up a lot in other areas of social equality - the &quot;Not All Men&quot; argument is really underneath a tone argument.&nbsp; &nbsp;I don't think the *utility* of shame and guilt are in question.&nbsp; Broadly speaking, they *work*, they are effective.&nbsp; We are primates, and our psyches are built with these elements precisely to help control our behavior.&nbsp; They are a natural part of our social behavior.When use of these things is appropriate is a separate question from their effectiveness <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> 'I don't care if my argument is actually valid&quot;?&nbsp; Really?It is... and it isn't.&nbsp; It is only relevant if the other party already views you as an ally, and is looking to you for guidance on how to reach others.&nbsp; Before you are recognized as an ally, attempting the Tone Argument is basically telling them, &quot;You shouldn't tell me that, because it makes me feel bad.&quot;&nbsp; In that statement, you take what they feel is a real problem, and you redirect discussion to be one about *your* feelings, rather than their problem.&nbsp; That's at best disrespectful, at worst darned manipulative - do you realize that abusive relationships are often based on the same dynamic?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6707577, member: 177"] Nope. You brought up tone when you referred to "bludgeoning". You said, "I've just never really seen it help anything. It is either a bludgeon to bang people over the head with ..." This is very much trying to discount the concept based not upon its content, but upon how it is used. That, right there, is the Tone Argument. The Tone Argument comes up a lot in other areas of social equality - the "Not All Men" argument is really underneath a tone argument. I don't think the *utility* of shame and guilt are in question. Broadly speaking, they *work*, they are effective. We are primates, and our psyches are built with these elements precisely to help control our behavior. They are a natural part of our social behavior. When use of these things is appropriate is a separate question from their effectiveness :) 'I don't care if my argument is actually valid"? Really? It is... and it isn't. It is only relevant if the other party already views you as an ally, and is looking to you for guidance on how to reach others. Before you are recognized as an ally, attempting the Tone Argument is basically telling them, "You shouldn't tell me that, because it makes me feel bad." In that statement, you take what they feel is a real problem, and you redirect discussion to be one about *your* feelings, rather than their problem. That's at best disrespectful, at worst darned manipulative - do you realize that abusive relationships are often based on the same dynamic? [/QUOTE]

Verification