# Agree to disagree?



## Robert Bennie

G'day forum

Whenever people are unable to resolve a dispute why do they say


> We will agree to disagree


 
Why do they not say


> We will agree not to disagree


 
Life is what you make of it
take a great big bight and chew for all you are worth

Robert


----------



## Benjy

i would have thought that the logic is obvious


----------



## ScotsLoon

Benjy,

I agree to agree with you.

Robert,

You have answered your own question.

Whenever people are unable to resolve a dispute why do they say

Quote:
We will agree to disagree  

they do this because as you say, they are unable to resolve the dispute, ie they can't agree.


----------



## Agnès E.

Then then agree at least on ONE point!
Thus they don't disagree.
Logical !


----------



## Robert Bennie

G'day Benjy
You did not help me by telling me that it is obvious to you.  Wonderful for you if it is obvious to you but aren't we supposed to be helping and sharing and not disparaging

Who do you think is embarrassed because you think the answer to my question is an unstated obvious?

I know I am therefore I think

Robert


----------



## Benjy

the mere fact that you formulated the question shows that you understand the words and their meaning. i am suprised that you asked the question and fail to see the point you are trying to make. hence my statement. surprise not disparagement


----------



## Robert Bennie

G'day Benjy
I am becoming bored that you are bored that I bothered to ask the question and that you have been so bored by the question that you have bored me twice by pointing out twice that my question is boring.

You are apparently in possession of more knowledge than me but you don't share it and you just disparage the question.

You could be just as easily bored by something else couldn't you?

Robert


----------



## Benjy

eh?
i said i didnt understand. where did you get bored from? in fact, don't answer that. i don't want a confrontation. thats not what i was looking for when i said i thought the logic was obvious. i don't play word games. 

i'm bowing out of this thread.
respectfully
ben


----------



## Robert Bennie

G'day Benjy
Were we just playing cricket?  I thought that a significant purpose of this site was to play with words.

Robert


----------



## cuchuflete

A cricket just reminded me of this fascinating remark, made in reply to a question that was answered with a question:



> How can you answer a question with a question


----------



## cuchuflete

Afterthought--

"Shall we agree to disagree?"

"Why not?"


----------



## Artrella

Is there a problem without a solution?  No there is not a problem, then.

I agree to disagree. I don't like to agree when I don't agree.  Why should I?

Oh, I don't understand your question Robert!  Is that a question?  Is there an answer to it?


----------



## Agnès E.

Is there a point to argue, then? 
Or can we see debates from another point of view?


----------



## mzsweeett

If I am reading all of this right.......I am thinking that the question here is not about agreeing or disagreeing. I think it is based on _how_ we are agreeing or disagreeing. Meaning our tones, our wording etc. I am not sure if I read it correctly, but I think the thought train is questioning why the phrase is used when the two parties don't agree on whatever topic.
My thoughts would be that they say it in order to end the conversation, and evade further debate/argument.
Did I get it right Robert? Was that the prupose of the thread?? I am not trying to be pointed, but sometimes the way you write is difficult to follow. I had to read through these posts a few times. I still am not quite sure.

Sweet T.


----------



## Artrella

Agnes E. said:
			
		

> Is there a point to argue, then?
> Or can we see debates from another point of view?




A debate for me should be discussion, not argument, as long as we take into account that having a different point of view, is only that...and not a kick-off for fighting.... But... can we do this??


----------



## Agnès E.

Et hop, retour à la case départ...
Back to the start, heehee!!
I see that you understood the whole thing, Artrella!!


----------



## te gato

Artrella said:
			
		

> A debate for me should be discussion, not argument, as long as we take into account that having a different point of view, is only that...and not a kick-off for fighting.... But... can we do this??


Hey Art GF;
I think we can..
Is not agreeing to disagree...what makes us all unique?..
Just think if we all agree on everything how utterly boring conversations would be..how dull life would be..
I love a good conversation...discussion..but a.... free-for-all..drag-um-out fight..I have no time nor the patiences for...

te gato


----------



## Artrella

te gato said:
			
		

> Just think if we all agree on everything how utterly boring conversations would be..how dull life would be..
> I love a good conversation...discussion..but a.... free-for-all..drag-um-out fight..I have no time nor the patiences for...
> 
> te gato




I agree with you my dear friend!!!  I don't like boredom... I am hyperactive!!
To disagree in a civilized way... I welcome that... to argue...to fight... I'm not a supporter of that...  in any context, in any situation would I feel comfortable is respect were lost!!!
I may be wrong, or not.  You may be wrong or not.  But as far as we are respectful with each other, the debate can last years!!


----------



## abc

Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> G'day Benjy
> I am becoming bored that you are bored that I bothered to ask the question and that you have been so bored by the question that you have bored me twice by pointing out twice that my question is boring.
> 
> You are apparently in possession of more knowledge than me but you don't share it and you just disparage the question.
> 
> You could be just as easily bored by something else couldn't you?
> 
> Robert


 
Robert, I don't think Benjy was disparaging your question. You'll get to know Benjy soon enough.

---

Why do people say, "We will agree to disagree" and not "We will agree to not disagree"?

Because they just want to be smart.

Time for confession: I truly don't know the answer to your question.


----------



## lsp

Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> I thought that a significant purpose of this site was to play with words.
> 
> Robert


The purpose of the site is obviously different for different people. At 40 posts a day I do wonder what yours is. Anyway..............we can agree to disagree, by accepting that we will not have a meeting of the minds on this topic, or we can agree not to disagree by dropping the subject, regardless of the sameness or disparity of our opinions at the agreed upon "dropping" time. Net results are equal.


----------



## Edwin

We will agree to disagree.

We will agree not to disagree.


These two statements to me mean different things.  If I say the first to somebody, I mean,''We are never going to change each others minds by arguing (about that).  So, let's just avoid that topic altogether--that way we won't  argue anymore.''  This, I might say, for example, to a rare Republican acquaintance.

The second statement is problematic.  It is saying that we are not going to disagree with each other.  But if we really disagree how can we agree not to disagree. We can agree not to argue, but the disagreement will still be in our minds.  Disagree means to have a different opinion. Can one voluntarily change one's opinion?

It would make sense to say "We agree not to disagree in public.''---but that's something altogether different.


----------



## Robert Bennie

G'day forum

I have friends and relatives who hold views and opinions that I do not and while I think I am right I don't know that they are wrong.

It is possible for two people to hold conflicting views and for them both to not be wrong.

If I think I am right and you think you are right and we respect each other we agree to not disagree.

If I think I am right and you think you are right but I don't respect you I will probably agree to disagree.

Robert


----------



## cuchuflete

Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> If I think I am right and you think you are right and we respect each other we agree to not disagree.



Interesting use of the word 'disagree'.  I disagree with it.

We may agree not to discuss our point of disagreement. We continue to disagree.

I think you are wrong. I've said so. There is no disrespect, overt or implicit or hidden, in that. We may agree to 'let it ride', or not to debate it. That is an agreement to disagree.

To agree to not disagree would mean that either we turn our minds to the off position, or pepetuate a falsehood. Both those options hold no appeal.
Don't you agree?


----------



## Edwin

Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> If I think I am right and you think you are right and we respect each other we agree to not disagree.



Robert, apparently we hold antipodal views on this issue. (I guess that is too old of a joke in Australia.  )  Anyhow:

Suppose I hold the opinion that  X = 11 and you hold the opinion that X=71. 
So we disagree about the value of X. 

Say we agree not to disagree (about the value of X). 

What does that mean?  

Doesn't it mean that we agree not to hold different opinions? So we must change our opinions so that we will both agree that, say, X = 107 (or whatever), or that one of us changes his opinion to agree with the other person's opinion? If the latter, which of us will change his opinion?  Shall we arm wrestle to determine who changes?


----------



## Robert Bennie

Yeah G'day again Cuchuflete
Down here we usually refer to it as a antipodean but I got your drift.  Cute - you made a joke.

Allright you got me 1 plus 1 equals 2.  Brilliant.  Now what.

If I think that 1 plus 1 equals 3 and you think 1 plus 1 equals the cube root of 10 plus six and we can not agree why do you need to be cross with me because you hold more knowledge than me.

Are you not judgeing me by doing that and if the mute who can't write is also unable to count will they come into the equation.  I'm too scared to judge on those levels.  I think that I know how to count and spell and such but I don't think that people who can not do that are bad or wrong just different.

I am very different to you cuchoflete and you could say that I am not too deeply depressed about that realisation

If a bloke disagrees with me I do not feel that the use physical force is justified to win the argument.  If I can't win with logic I just give up and I don't use convoluted examples and spurious asides or threats of physical violence.

We are no more than what we say and you and I are perfect examples

Robert


----------



## Agnès E.

Robert, are you sure you replied to Cuchu and not to Edwin?


----------



## Robert Bennie

Hello Edwin

My embarrassment is complete.  I am too tired and will go to bed.

Sorry Edwin your point is valid and I accept that.  I meant you no offence.

I am becoming a little weary of snips and snides from others and I blew it and mixed you in with a group that you obviously do not belong in.

Looking at it again yours is a wonderful post and thank you very much for the humour.  I'm so sorry I appeared to slap you but I seem to be the butt of too many ignorant jokes and now I have had a go at a good joke.  What a mug I am.

If you talk to me again I will promise to be good.

Sorry mate

Robert


----------



## zebedee

Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> Hello Edwin
> 
> My embarrassment is complete.  I am too tired and will go to bed.
> 
> Sorry Edwin your point is valid and I accept that.  I meant you no offence.
> 
> I am becoming a little weary of snips and snides from others and I blew it and mixed you in with a group that you obviously do not belong in.
> 
> Looking at it again yours is a wonderful post and thank you very much for the humour.  I'm so sorry I appeared to slap you but I seem to be the butt of too many ignorant jokes and now I have had a go at a good joke.  What a mug I am.
> 
> If you talk to me again I will promise to be good.
> 
> Sorry mate
> 
> Robert



So why coming from Edwin was it a wonderful post and a good joke yet when you thought it came from Cuchu it was a snip and snide? 
Surely you've just proved by your reaction that, contrary to what you say, you really think that we _are _ more than what we say.


			
				 Robert Bennie said:
			
		

> We are no more than what we say



zeb


----------



## Axl

Looking over some of Robert Bennie's posts over the last few weeks, and this one in particular, I wonder how close they come to spamming?  
No beating around the bush.  May I just ask, Robert, merely out of curiosity, whether you knew/know the answer to your original question?

Axl.


----------



## Edwin

Axl said:
			
		

> Looking over some of Robert Bennie's posts over the last few weeks, and this one in particular, I wonder how close they come to spamming?
> No beating around the bush. May I just ask, Robert, merely out of curiosity, whether you knew/know the answer to your original question?
> 
> Axl.




Perhaps you mean ''trolling '' instead of ''spamming''. This link is actually a good discussion of trolling and if you read it all you will see that there are some subtle aspects. For example, I quote just a part of the discussion below:



> Calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's motives that are impossible to determine, whereas using the verb (calling a post "trolling") describes the reception of a post without making assumptions about motives. Such assumptions would generally be an example of the fundamental attribution error; i.e. inferring that behavior results from a person's nature or personality rather than examining behavior in the context of events surrounding the behavior. In other words, trolling may have more to do with context than with personality. Also, it may be possible to troll unintentionally. . SOURCE OF QUOTE AND MORE DETAILS



A portion of the quote was removed to bring this into accord with Forum rules...Moderator

No web pages or copyrighted or plagiarized content may be inserted into WordReference posts. Minor fair use excerpts from dictionaries such as a definition/translation or two is permitted. Other *quotes of less than one paragraph (4 sentences) are permitted* as well. All other forms of inserted content from press releases, newsletters, web pages, or any other copyrighted content placed into messages will be removed without exception. A link to the content is acceptable and appropriate.




Note to Moderator: I am not complaining, but to clear myself of plagiarizism or copyright infringement charges, please note that the source of the quote was clearly labeled with the source link. Moreover Wikipedia (the source) contains only copylefted material --not copyrighted material.  But I acknowledge that my quote was too long.--Edwin


> Wikipedia:Copyrights
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
> The license Wikipedia uses grants free access to our content in the same sense as free software is licensed freely. This principle is known as copyleft. That is to say, Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed so long as the new version grants the same freedoms to others and acknowledges the authors of the Wikipedia article used (a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement). Wikipedia articles therefore will remain free forever and can be used by anybody subject to certain restrictions, most of which serve to ensure that freedom Source of Quote


----------



## lsp

Axl said:
			
		

> Looking over some of Robert Bennie's posts over *the last few weeks*, and this one in particular, I wonder how close they come to spamming?
> No beating around the bush.  May I just ask, Robert, merely out of curiosity, whether you knew/know the answer to your original question?
> 
> Axl.


Seems like it, but post frequency and total word count aside, he's been a member all of 7 days.


----------



## Artrella

Edwin said:
			
		

> Perhaps you mean ''trolling '' instead of ''spamming''. This link is actually a good discussion of trolling and if you read it all you will see that there are some subtle aspects. For example, I quote just a part of the discussion below:
> 
> 
> 
> A portion of the quote was removed to bring this into accord with Forum rules...Moderator




Edwin, this is really interesting! wow!! I've never heard about this kind of people!!  Do you know what is the psychological reason for a person to be a trolling?  I have to re-read this article... I really like to know the psychological side of this problem.


----------



## Edwin

Artrella said:
			
		

> Edwin, this is really interesting! wow!! I've never heard about this kind of people!!  Do you know what is the psychological reason for a person to be a trolling?  I have to re-read this article... I really like to know the psychological side of this problem.



Art, see the section titled *Motivation* in the link I gave.  That is a very good article. 

If you read many  Usenet newsgroups you will see examples of trolling sooner or later. In most usenet groups there are no moderators so you see the full blown phenomena. There are some long time masterful trolls and cranks of many types on the very active newsgroup sci.math 

Felizmente no los hemos visto mucho aquí en WR.


----------



## Artrella

Edwin said:
			
		

> Art, see the section titled *Motivation* in the link I gave.  That is a very good article.
> 
> If you read many  Usenet newsgroups you will see examples of trolling sooner or later. In most usenet groups there are no moderators so you see the full blown phenomena. There are some long time masterful trolls and cranks of many types on the very active newsgroup sci.math
> 
> Felizmente no los hemos visto mucho aquí en WR.




Thank you Edwin for the info!  Yes, I have to re read the whole article, I am really interested in knowing why a person becomes  a trolling, what is wrong with him.

Saludos, Art


----------



## Edwin

Artrella said:
			
		

> Thank you Edwin for the info!  Yes, I have to re read the whole article, I am really interested in knowing why a person becomes  a trolling, what is wrong with him.
> 
> Saludos, Art



Small correction:  
a person become a troll (noun).
a person trolls (verb).


----------



## Axl

Edwin said:
			
		

> Perhaps you mean ''trolling '' instead of ''spamming''. This link is actually a good discussion of trolling and if you read it all you will see that there are some subtle aspects. For example, I quote just a part of the discussion below:



I did actually mean spamming - i.e. pointlessly taking up space on the server. I wasn't aware of the term trolling though, so you've taught me something there!  
I was going to say *gadfly*, but thought that might be a little slanderous!

Axl.


----------



## Artrella

Edwin said:
			
		

> Small correction:
> a person become a troll (noun).
> a person trolls (verb).




Graciaaaaaassss


----------



## Benjy

about this whole "coversation" about mr bennie. i don't think i would appreciate it if my motivation/the quality of my posts were just being discussed openly as such. in fact i'd consider it rather rude.

ben


----------



## lsp

Benjy said:
			
		

> about this whole "coversation" about mr bennie. i don't think i would appreciate it if my motivation/the quality of my posts were just being discussed openly as such. in fact i'd consider it rather rude.
> 
> ben


Isn't that what you've just done effectively by publicly judging those posts rude? Robert has proven quite able to speak for himself, I'd add.


----------



## Edwin

lsp said:
			
		

> Isn't that what you've just done effectively by publicly judging those posts rude? He has proven quite able to speak for himself, I'd add.



Hey, lsp, maybe Benjy is just trolling.


----------



## Cath.S.

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Benjy
> about this whole "coversation" about mr bennie. i don't think i would appreciate it if my motivation/the quality of my posts were just being discussed openly as such. in fact i'd consider it rather rude.
> 
> ben
> 
> Isn't that what you've just done effectively by publicly judging those posts rude? He has proven quite able to speak for himself, I'd add.


I totally agree with Benjy and felt the exact same way reading through this thread, since you're a whole bunch of people, like some sort of self-appointed jury judging one single individual, and ganging up on someone is neither fair nor elegant in my opinion. Each one of you would hate it should it happen to you, because the individual feels so powerless against a group.


----------



## lsp

egueule said:
			
		

> I totally agree with Benjy and felt the exact same way reading through this thread, since you're a whole bunch of people, like some sort of self-appointed jury judging one single individual, and ganging up on someone is neither fair nor elegant in my opinion. Each one of you would hate it should it happen to you, because the individual feels so powerless against a group.


Oh, please. Robert is powerless against no one, and no one ganged up on anyone. Every member is equal. Every post has equal weight. You imply a conspiracy of PMs and emails to unify opinions by a group against a single member. Nothing of the kind was done and nothing about the questions about Robert was covert, or done behind his back or even said with the slightest rudeness. Everyone expressed one opinion, his own, as Robert is free to do and has done more than anyone in the short time he was posting so actively.

And you didn't comment on why Benjy's value judgement was in any way different than what he himself criticized.


----------



## Benjy

meh. listen. i wasn't trying to offend anyone. i was just practicing my trolling skills! in all seriousness, i was trying to give my opinion in the nicest way that i could. like i said: if this happened to me *I* would consider it rude. i'm not sticking up for robert, nor am i condemning anyone else. i wasn't trying to stir up angry responses either. it was just an invitation to consider the other person's feelings. i don't think there was any kind of conspiracy, i don't think egueule was implying there was one either. although i can see how one might arrive at such a conclusion.

now, the original topic essentially having been killed off, i'm closing this thread. should any of the participants wish to talk to me or to the other mods about it, feel free.

ben


----------



## cuchuflete

That last post is a perfect example of obligatory agreement to disagree!


----------

