#FPQ: Disagree Agreeably?

Fandango’s using some old questions so he can do the A to Z Challenge, an activity which I highly support. Here’s today’s question:

Is it possible anymore to disagree without being disagreeable?

Sure it is. Civility in discussions about controversial topics is up to the individuals having the discussion. If all parties involved agree not to hold one another’s differing opinions against them, and if they can agree that, if the discussion starts getting heated, they’ll postpone it until everyone has a chance to cool off, and if they agree that, if the subject can’t be talked about calmly without everyone getting angry and shouting and giving each other the finger and making insinuations about someone’s mother’s sex life, then the matter will be dropped and never brought up again, then yes, people can disagree agreeably.

That’s a lot of "ifs," isn’t it?

That’s all…

Tally-ho and away we go!
See you next week with a brand new show!

14 thoughts on “#FPQ: Disagree Agreeably?

  1. It depends on the people and how the personalities are. I can talk so well with my best friend as well as some other friends but my hubby? Not so much. He raises his voice right away which gets my gander up and blammo. Not literal blammo but an argument ensues which is tiring. My niece got very angry with me a couple of years back when Gary Oldman was up for the Oscar (and won) for playing Winston Churchill. I said I loved the movie and admired Churchill for what he did at that time. She took offense (this was all through messenger not on the phone or in person) and I tried to be calm by saying that, yes, Churchill did agree with eugenics and did some horrible things in WW1. I mentioned that at that time, it was considered ok plus he was an English Aristocrat which meant he grew up thinking he was better. This was not the case bu, back then, it was the way one thought. She ended it saying she disagreed and that Churchill was an asshole. She did not speak to me for close to a year. Henry Fonda and James Stewart were the best of friends but they almost came to fisticuffs over politics since Fonda was a Democrat while Stewart was a Republican. They agreed to never speak about politics again and that was that.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Was the movie “The King’s Speech”? That was an excellent movie.

      I had friends that could have me foaming at the mouth when we discussed politics. We finally agreed not to talk about them. And you know what? It was the right thing to do.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I think it’s hard these days, especially on controversial topics like politics or religion, for people not to take disagreements personally. As a result, things can get very testy quickly. But yes, if everyone can agree to the ground rules of respectful dialogue, it may be possible to disagree agreeably.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I think it’s easier to be civil in person when you can see facial expressions and body language. In a group of family and/or friends, generally no one wants to be a jerk (generally!). Online is a whole different thing, with people simply not caring about being jerks to strangers, and this transcends political party lines and religious (or no) affiliation…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You’re right. It’s one thing to call someone an a–hole on Twitter or Facebook, it’s another thing to do it to his face. Social media has enabled a lot of antisocial behavior.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. It’s pretty hard these days. Problem is conservatives were polite, shook their heads at all this crazy crap and thought nobody would listen to them. If you disagree at all with them and stand your ground, it degenerates pretty fast because they call you names personally, threaten to hound you (which is what happened to me last night)–guy said he knew I was old and hoped I’d die pretty soon cuz nobody needed people like me. Said he was gonna look for all my posts and keep hounding me, which he did again this morning. I told him to knock himself out, I wouldn’t be replying anymore. But it gets ugly immediately and your choices are either to get at least somewhat uglier back (though I never do what this idiot is doing) or not have the conversation at all. Which is where I got to. Finally. And now I’ll have this idiot doing that. Luckily, there are other people on there who told him to fuck off. And of course I was just talking about freedom, censorship, and I was defending capitalism. On Matt Taibbi’s piece who was defending Elon Musk (pretty much) — saying it was rich how these columnists from Washington Post (owned by Jeff Bezos) were saying rich people shouldn’t own major communication venues. Zuckerberg owns facebook. what they mean is nobody who disagrees with THEM and is rich should own any. And they are actually on there making a case against freedom of speech. JOURNALISTS. It’s unreal. And of course, it’s because for years, they really controlled the media and they are melting down that cable news and now the internet is allowed to have other opinions than theirs. Orwellian. 1984 — they’ll tell us 2 plus 2 is five and until we agree, we may be on the rack. So no, it’s not really possible if you are going to have a conversation at all. It’s too bad. But if we regain freedom of speech, they will get uglier yet. (Mind you Elon Musk has no intention of censoring THEM!) It’s incredible.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m with Voltaire (or was it Jed Clampett?): I may hate what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. I don’t really care what people say, about me or anyone else. There are legal remedies against libel, slander, and defamation of character, as well as remedies and legal recourse against causing a disturbance for shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater. And I know what Teddy Roosevelt (or Barney Fife, I’m not sure which) said that “your right to swing your fist ends at my chin,” but if you can’t get out of the way of a swinging fist that you know is coming your way…

      Liked by 1 person

      1. yeah, he has a right to say what he wants and I’m with you on defending to the death. He MIGHT be over the line saying he was going to stalk me and attack my every post and wishing me dead. Matt MIGHT consider that misuse of the site. But otherwise, he can call me anything he wants. I just won’t engage with him and let him look the fool. Point is, though, it’s pretty hard to be civil these days. It’s almost always leftists or liberals attacking people personally like this. Though an occasional conservative or “anarchist” — he was doing it, too.


  5. I think it depends on what the disagreement is about. Opinions can sometimes betray another person’s values. I had a falling out with a friend not long ago when I read one of her favorite books ‘Jane Eyre.’ I said that the treatment of Bertha bothered me. She defended locking mentally ill people in windowless attic rooms. I couldn’t stay civil. I can’t calmly talk to someone who is advocating for human rights violations against the mentally ill. I lost her as a friend and I’m perfectly okay with that. Opinions aren’t just opinions: they tell you something about who the other person is and if someone else’s opinion is “I don’t think people like you deserve human rights” then I think it’s okay to be rude in response.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Dear John and tealveyre,

      The nature and dynamics of opinions and even diametrically opposite ones can be examined innovatively to give us fresh perspectives on our own stances as well as those of others. I have explained these matters in my expansive and highly analytical post entitled “The Quotation Fallacy“, which you can easily locate from the Home page of my blog. The two sections of the post that are relevant to us here are titled Classical Logic: Contradiction, Context, Scope, Validity, Generalizability and Compromise and Subjectivity: Special Pleading and Relativist Fallacy.

      For whatever reason(s), “The Quotation Fallacy” is my most popular post, for it has garnered about 240 comments and 740 likes. Although the post is very long, the navigational menus available at both the top and the bottom of the post can help you to jump to any section of the post instantly so that you can resume reading at any point of the post over multiple sessions in your own time.

      May you enjoy perusing my said post to your heart’s content, as I have John’s!

      Wishing you and your respective families a productive April and a long Easter weekend doing or enjoying whatever that satisfies you the most, whether aesthetically, physically, intellectually or spiritually!

      Yours sincerely,


Comments are closed.