CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Spirituality › How to respond spiritually to rude or aggressive behavior

How to respond spiritually to rude or aggressive behavior

Started by rustymaker5 · · 👁 6 views · 41 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants rustymaker5redtinker36Sean CruzMichael Castilloferalrangerlonegardenervividdrifter79casualtiger2Anthony Hayes2mistygull16swifttiger75Ryan Wilson2Casey GomezDana Brooks3Edward Fisher86bluemason3Jeremy Brooks6Benjamin Taylor6
Jeremy Brooks6 Jeremy Brooks6 Member
34 messages
joined Feb 2015
#41 ·
Sean Cruz said:I honestly have no idea why people feel the need to lash out at others. I've always been on the "other" side of that dynamic.

The assumption behind arguing with someone who holds completely different views is usually that the topic itself is interesting, not necessarily the person you're debating.

But we're human. Sometimes there's this undeniable urge to push back against something that feels intuitively wrong. It doesn't always mean you dislike the individual; it just means their core stances hit a nerve that you find fundamentally unacceptable.

I wouldn't be quite so certain about that, though—even when everyone involved has the best intentions.
There are certain things that just shouldn't be up for debate—for instance, my inner self has always felt perfectly at peace in an Episcopal church, but let's say I had a bad experience somewhere—like if someone crude forced me out of a place of worship.
Do I have the right to turn that into a massive public discussion? Not really, because even with the best motives, opening up a thread like that tends to lead toward unfair generalizations.
Or, if you’ve written a really well-reasoned post, and it happens to be your 500,000th contribution to the community—do I have any right to belittle your argument just because you're such a frequent poster? Of course not.
The same goes if it’s your 500th post—if I try to make a point by suggesting you rarely show up because you don't subscribe to some specific "internet clique" mentality.
Do I have the right to poke into your private business if I can't predict your stance, or just blindly attack you—sort of like popping a balloon to deflate an oversized ego?—well, those are just words, not a real assessment of someone's character, especially since we don't actually know these people...
And so on.
We all learn how to navigate these discussions as we go, and we all trip up occasionally—it's not like anyone sets out to mess up—but boundaries have to exist for a reason.
I won't even get started on the various cliques, groupthink, or the little sub-cultures that form online...
But I truly believe it's almost always better—just like in real life—to simply not react. To distance yourself whenever possible, whether that's through physical space or just giving it time. You only really need to fire back when someone is trying to make a public statement. The internet is filled with this massive, silent, and sometimes hypocritical audience; so, don't be surprised if you try to prove a point publicly and someone hits back just as hard—or harder—as a sort of lesson learned.
Benjamin Taylor6 Benjamin Taylor6 Regular
577 messages
joined Apr 2017
#42 ·
rustymaker5 said:Since you all seem to be such brilliant minds on here, I was wondering if anyone would care to weigh in on a little thought of mine... personally, when it comes to communicating in this digital space, using ad hominem attacks is basically the online equivalent of getting slapped in the face in real life, and we all know people resort to that kind of low blow the second they run out of actual arguments and just want to force their own narrow perspective on everyone else as the absolute truth.
So, what does that actually say about those kinds of users? Does it mean they lack basic social etiquette, or are they just aggressive types, or maybe—and this is my guess—they’re just deeply insecure people? Because it seems incredibly easy to sidestep that whole mess by just ignoring them, yet so many people refuse to take the high road. I get it, not everyone is going to click with everyone else, but I truly don't grasp the desperate need to turn everything into a violent confrontation...🤷

The Tang Prime Minister was a true folk hero, just as legendary as a statesman as he was a military commander. Yet, despite his fame, his power, and his immense wealth, he viewed himself as a humble and devoted Buddhist. He would frequently visit his favorite Zen Master to seek guidance, and the two shared a genuine bond. In fact, the fact that he was the Prime Minister didn't seem to touch their relationship at all; it looked like nothing more than the connection between a respected Master and a profoundly respectful student.
One day, during one of his usual visits, the Prime Minister asked the Master:
"Most venerable, what exactly defines egoism according to Buddhism?"
Suddenly, the Master's face flushed red, and he snapped back in an angry, insulted, and downright condescending tone, shouting:
"What kind of stupid, idiotic question is that?!"
This unexpected outburst from the Master left the Prime Minister so stunned that he immediately turned sullen and furious.
Then, the Zen Master laughed and said:
- There, Your Excellency, is exactly what egoism looks like.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads