Excellent analogy, ratcharmer.
Hamish MacWolf, I would like to respond.
A lot of times when you are discussing viewpoints with people, especially on the internet when you can't see their apperance, age, gender, mannerisms, etc. you tend to imagine them as someone you know who has a similar viewpoint. Of course, it is wrong to do this, but it is like a shortcut, at least I noticed I have sometimes, in communicating with people. And so when you see an argument that you have discussed several times before, you get agitated or annoyed.
To continue the analogy, it would be as if your friend has had multiple occurrences of date rape, or waking up the next day not knowing what happened, and you see her leave her drink alone in a bar only to come back and start sipping from it again. Not only are you feeling that you are trying to save her but you feel as if she is careless, ignorant, or even "asking for it". I think that is the fuel that motivates people to make the remarks they do. It is still wrong, because again the person you are speaking with is not the same person you are always speaking with, but I hope that helps you understand.
And Hamish MacWolf, I think I know of a couple of threads, by title alone, you may be responding to. Believe me there are other thread titles that have the same venomous sting to the other viewpoint. I just try to stay out of those threads.
As to your first point, I think I quite agree. One of the inherent dangers of the interwebs is the “two dimensional text” phenomena. We see someone’s words, devoid of tone, emphasis and background. We do not see the person, their age, gender, culture. We (for the most part) do not KNOW the person, or have any kind of relationship with them.
In short, we don’t know them, and have nothing to lose. This, sadly, leads to people saying things, and behaving in ways, they would never do in reality. Or if they did, they would probably be diagnosed as a sociopath.
I know for myself, because I am speaking to strangers who are not familiar with my idiosyncrasies, my sense of humour and my modus operandi, I try to take more care when speaking online than I do in reality. But it does take time and effort, and sadly, many others do not feel they wish to do the same.
To your second point, again, I feel you have simply expanded upon ratcharmer’s point. Don’t get me wrong, I both understand what you are saying, and agree with it. You are making the point that when someone makes an error willfully, or repeatedly, it can lead to frustration and even anger in those trying to help them.
I have two sisters, both in their mid 20s now, both still living at home with my mother, and neither showing an inclination to move on and mature. I regularly get frustrated with them, and have nicknamed them Patti and Selma as a consequence. But my frustration with them, just like the frustration in both your and ratcharmer’s analogy, is derived from compassion and care over their wellbeing.
Again, let me agree with you – it is wrong to get frustrated or angry with someone you are trying to help, when that same outpouring of emotion begins to hamper your own efforts. But my original point in this was that for the most part, I do not see that compassion present here (here specifically being the Elements Religion forums). More often, I see arrogance, or the condescension of the zeitgeist. And as many people enter the discussion guns blazing, I don’t see how their response can be an escalation of frustration, even if they do feel they have had a similar experience before.
We wouldn’t accept that reason from a kindergarten teacher who after 20 years, went postal on her latest class, screaming, “How many times do I have to explain the basics of the alphabet to you people?”
