this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
520 points (98.0% liked)

Facepalm

2647 readers
586 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You can, and likely will, disagree but healthy people shouldn’t escalate into anything resembling an argument.

Isn't an argument what you are doing when going back and forth expressing any sort of disagreement? I realize that's not something everyone enjoys doing but personally I don't feel like I can get to know someone very well if I don't have opportunities to argue with them. Though I see what you mean if it's the sort of argument where you're getting upset with each other or it's a dispute about how your lives fit together like whose turn it is to do the dishes etc.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Hmm, that's given me pause, to reconsider.

I consider an "argument" when voices get raised and people get heated. Big or small is difference of how long people are upset and how loud participants get. I will concede I was unwittingly applying a definition other people may not share.

Note: it it gets physical, that escalates from "argument" to "fight".

Edit: to address your comment more directly. No, if people are being civil and tones are reasonable, a disagreement doesn't have to be an argument. It's just another discussion. Perhaps a debate. But an "argument" in my mind is oppositional.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sure, using "debate" may be more accurate, but I have never seen people use the term in their daily lives. In my experience, people just lump debates and heated arguments into a collective "arguments." There may be a finer point to be made here about linguistic prescriptivism versus descriptivism, but that's beside the point.

If we were to interpret the OOP as you have (ie, heated arguments), then I will agree that that's quite unacceptable. However, based on what I've said above and based on reading between the lines of the OOP, we can generally assume that the arguments were not heated, especially since the girlfriend was stated to have been able to simply walk away to consult ChatGPT for what I assume are non-trivial moments of time

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, I can admit my definition of argument might not widely applicable. Not to say my understanding of the word is the sole definition but people often use words wrong, so I shouldn't die on the hill that my interpretation is the correct one.

But, to your second point, I read the OOP as the supposed "gf" (I still assume the OOP is fake) being the main instigator for the argument while the writer is more passive. The gf is able to leave but is also the one who rejoins the argument later, after having ChatGPT corrall her talking points.

But that's getting more into the weeds of analysis than I csre to go.