Argument is war; thus forum becomes battle ground. It seems to me that the forum members who participate in a thread approach the experience invigorated with much the same attitude as does a boxer entering the ring or a soldier going into battle. Metaphor entailments (to transmit or to accompany) we live by: He attacked my argument. I have never beaten this guy in an argument. If you do not agree with my statement then take your best shot. I shot down each of his arguments. We approach a forum response much like we approach a physical contest. We have a gut feeling about some things because our sense of correctness comes from our bodies. Our “gut feeling” often informs us as to the ‘correctness’ of some phenomenon. This gut feeling is an attitude; it is one of many types of attitudes. What can we say about this attitude, this gut feeling? “Metaphors we live by”, a book about cognitive science coauthored by Lakoff and Johnson, says a great deal about this attitude. Conceptual metaphor theory, the underlying theory of cognitive science contained in this book, explains how our knowledge is ‘grounded’ in the precise manner in which we optimally interact with the world. “The essence of metaphor is understanding one kind of thing in terms of another…The metaphor is not merely in the words we use—it is in the very concept of an argument. The language of argument is not poetic, fanciful, or rhetorical: it is literal. We talk about arguments that way because we conceive of them in that way—and we act according to the way we conceive of things.”—Lakoff and Johnson Let us say that in early childhood I had my first fight with my brother. There was hitting, shoving, crying, screaming, and anger. Neural structure was placed in a mental space that contained the characteristics of this first combat, this was combat #1. Six months later I have a fight with the neighbor kid and we do all the routine thing kids do when fighting. This is where metaphor theory does its thing. This theory proposes that the characteristics contained in the mental space, combat #1, are automatically mapped into the mental space that is becoming combat #2. The contents of combat #1 become a primary metaphor and the characteristics form the fundamental structure of mental space combat #2. This example applies to all the experiences a person has. The primary experience is structured into a mental space and thereafter when a similar experience is happening the primary experience becomes the primary metaphor for the next like experience. This primary metaphor becomes the foundation for a concept whether the concept is concrete experience or abstract experience. What I am saying is that for some reason the Internet discussion forum member considers engaging in a forum thread is a competition, it is a combat, and the primary combat metaphor is mapped into the mental space of this forum experience and thus the forum experience takes on the combat type experience. It seems to that is why lots of forum activity gets very combative. Is it any wonder that the adrenalin starts pumping as soon as we start reading the responses to our post? Do you feel like you are in a battle with me after reading my claims? Is this why most replies are negative?
Some forum activities are certainly very competitive, but in more than just one sense. Sometimes, it indeed is a person against person competition. But other times, I feel spurned to find the best argument for something - before someone else does. And again other times, posters cooperate. I also get excited when I see a poster whom I respect has posted something. Sometimes.
No. Questioning things is a natural tendency in humans. And it's odd that you don't admit that here, because in several of your own posts you've made that same exact comment. It's not "battle", it's seeking answers to questions that one may have. When you or anyone "...makes a claim", most people will question that claim. No. And mainly it's 'no' because most replies are NOT negative - they're forms of enquiry, of questioning the claims made. But tell me, would you rather that people just accept everything that's posted on the forums ...without questioning it or trying to understand it better? Baron Max
Battling people with words is like trolling, you say things just to upset everyone and then see what happens. If you have a comment about something just say it but don't goad people into a fight just for something to do. I think dialog is much better than arguments for at least no one can get upset if we rationally express whatever our thoughts are about something. Anyone can have a reasonable conversation about anything IF the words are kept anti inflammatory way.
And anyone who asks questions too difficult for you to answer, you just term them "hecklers", then you don't have to answer, huh? That's just how some of my old teachers used to do. It's good tactics for ....teachers or preachers! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
It was your responses to my responses that generally put me off. The lecturing was irritating, but the whole was what made me avoid you for a while. I sometimes put a lot of energy into responding, putting forward my ideas to have them rebuffed - or ignored - since they were coming from someone you did not consider worthy of respect by definition. That hardly left me in a receptive mood to the next lecture. The phenomenon of discussion as battle is certainly present here. But in no way do I see that you have taken seriously the possibility that the form of your communication is problematic. You are angry that people are suggesting there is a problem and you start a new thread explaining their behavior in terms of Lakoff's theories. This is you participating in the battle. It is your weapon to dismiss our criticism. It is pretty rough in here. But I experience a variety of interactions with people. Why is it that you are only experiencing battle? Also, consider this. If we are right and there is a condescending tone in your approach here, that is going to add to your experience of their being a battle, because it is not respectful. It does actually matter whether your writing style has an implicit problem. If it helps you take it seriously, I used to teach writing at University. I've even had classes in voice in writing.
