Yes. Whether *all* antagonistic stances can be transformed into agonistic cooperation is some sort of personality commitment. At some point, some participants will acquiesce temporarily, or simply give in, or overpower and dominate, etc. For me, it's akin to a [refractory period](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11146/). I almost never get tired during a [ahem] lively discussion. Most of my friends quit before me. But I do choose who I hang out with. And I choose to hang out with people who are willing to maintain the dialectic until we reach some form of closure consent. So once you get your energy back and find yourself in the right circumstances, you continue the disagreement. That also allows for a kind of annealing where stances shift, evolve, and harden during the periods of rest.
There are some people I choose *not* to butt against, though, unless/until they irritate me so badly I can't help it. E.g. there was a Daddy that used to frequent the pub I've now adopted as home. He insisted on using the N-word (as well as others, but he was particularly fond of that one). Now, 99% of the people who go to this pub are "white". So the guy's really just a posturing buffoon. So none of the kids pushed back or responded the way Daddy wanted them to respond. ... I finally couldn't help myself. I explained, in some colorful language and with a 1000 yard stare, that he could continue using the word all he wants. But he should realize he's proving how stupid he is. ... turns out my calling him stupid to his face was way more offensive to him than the N-word was to any of us. >8^D Sometimes I miss Texas. The people up/over here are just too nice ... it's like pulling teeth to get them to talk in plain language. On 4/7/26 1:43 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
Mary (who did not attend this shindiggery) still carries a childhood phrase: "I know you are, but what am I?" which (for me) rhymes with "im rubber, you are glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you". They both offer (IMO) an invitation to shift from antagonistic to agonistic engagement? Ad Hominem seems to reinforce the antagonistic, though I've know a few who can receive and own and blend an ad-hominem attack in a way which is transformative of the discussion. My daughters did this a few times with the tu quoques thrown at them but the ad hominem is usually harder to aikido (tenkan or mai mai?). Parental authority roles suppressed most even vague attempts at ad-hominem... but I had my grand-daughters favorite one queued up to hand back. Around age 5 she thought she could throw "you stink!" at almost anyone to disrupt the conversation... i still have that one to offer her at the drop of a hat... when delivered with a smirk it always gets an "et tu" look in response. I try to use it less than once each time we spend much time together... don't wanna wear it out. Perhaps a Zen Keisaku?
-- ¡sıɹƎ ןıɐH ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
