|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
1+1 = 2. A positive number plus a positive number is a greater, positive number. This seems indisputable in mathematics [1]. But is this the case with people and our characteristics? Could two personal traits, both positive when in isolation, combine to become a negative behavior? I think it's possible, and perhaps even common. Here is a personal example. I am, according to friends, unusually honest and forthright. But put a different way, I am simply blunt. It's a product of my upbringing, both my family and my friends I had and still have. Taken alone, honesty is a trait that is certainly accepted as positive. I am also, by my own measure, fairly social. I am quick to accept people I just met as friends, and interact with them as if I've known them for some time. Again, friendliness and trust are widely accepted as positive values in our society. But what happens when these two values are combined and used together? Some of the effects can, as I've found, in fact be quite negative to the recipient. Here's John , a fellow I've "befriended" just a few months ago [2]. Because I have the propensity to rapidly uptake someone as a good friend, and because I speak my mind (even acknowledging the fact that some remarks are critical and could offend), believing in its (supposedly) inherent virtues, the two traits combined can spur me to behave in a way which irritates, offends, or even embarrasses John. If I were more judious in my forthrightness, or more careful in my trustfulness, then this effect would not occur. The blunt truths would only be directed at the closest of confidantes. As a result of having this particular combination of positive traits, I spawn a propensity to offend. I can imagine that there are many other combinations of traits that can result in negative consequences. What is the proper response to these possibilities? The only lesson I've been given, is to understand and acknowledge who we are, and to think ahead, considering the consequences of our words and actions before they are acted upon.
[1] Though I suppose that this could perhaps not be the case in higher mathematics?[2] A pseudonym, of course.
Crossposted from my main blog
  
|
Here's John , a fellow I've "befriended" just a few months ago [2]. Because I have the propensity to rapidly uptake someone as a good friend, and because I speak my mind (even acknowledging the fact that some remarks are critical and could offend), believing in its (supposedly) inherent virtues, the two traits combined can spur me to behave in a way which irritates, offends, or even embarrasses John.
I identified myself sooo much from this '-'
I think what is happening here is the wrong analogy. You are using maths, when what you have to use is Physics. Two Positives or Two Negatives repel each other, but a positive and a negative are attracted.
In the same sense, a good characteristic(sociability/friendliness) and a bad characteristic(lack of honesty) fit well together. Sure the honesty part can come, but then the "friendliness" bit wouldn't be all that true, would it?
Also your last sentence is golden.
|
Truth hurts, its a sad truth. Usually its good to censor yourself early on so that you don't say anything mean. I'm not truthful to your extent in front of new friends, but my humor, though most find me fairly funny and a fun guy to talk to, can get out of hand slightly. I've had time where I use terms that I didn't know were offensive, such as Plus Sized (in regards to women, Not just, "Bitches in dove commercials" - a girl who is a close friend of mine) or using different wording that people may not like / having an opinion that is less popular, but I keep it because I will not betray myself for almost anyone. Really its all about guaging what the other person can take.
|
In my experience, I have found that there is certainly a place for being blunt. Many of my friends and family appreciate me exactly for that reason. If I don't agree with something, I tell them. They don't have to worry about me mincing my words or misleading them.
Being blunt often looks like being tactless. In my experience, tactlessness is more often than not determined by the other person. Knowing wether you are being one or the other is a matter of understanding the other person. In my experience, it's better to err on the side of caution, and aim for being agreeable when you don't know how the other person will respond.
As far as 1 + 1, if we're talking about the Real number 1, then 1 + 1 is always 2. If 1 isn't a number, but rather an element in a set, all hell breaks loose, and there's no telling what's going to happen.
|
Heh, that sounds like me most of the time. Although I tend to just call myself an asshole, because that's usually how it comes out.
The question, however, is whether being blunt is ACTUALLY a negative trait, or if the negative effect is a result of an unaccounted variable in other people, be it "thin skin", a self-deprecating desire to avoid offense, or some effect of societal conditioning.
In other words, is your directness actually a negative, or is the negative outcome a result of a negative you aren't accounting for in the other people involved? After all, their personality is part of the equation too.
|
|
|
You're either horrendous at reading, or a rather pitiful troll.
|
On April 19 2012 01:56 JingleHell wrote:You're either horrendous at reading, or a rather pitiful troll.
There was a footnote?
edit: I mean, I know it wasn't the profoundest of comments. TDJ I beg your forgiveness 
|
He never said he doubts, he was just making it clear that if there's some screwy circumstance involving bizarre high level math that he doesn't understand, it's not relevant to his point.
Or that was my read. But I guess from that perspective, it was just worded poorly. See my above post where I mention that I'm actually just an asshole.
|
Ok, big man, you win. Really showed me.
|
1. Regarding 1+1, of course your statement is always true of 1 and 1 as real numbers (members of the real number line). However, there are some sets (for instance the integers mod 2), where it will be not true. Technicality, but as long as you were referring to them as real integers, your statement should always be true.
2. If anything, the effect you've described here shows us only that numerical (and even boolean) values describe social traits quite poorly, which shouldn't be at all surprising. Instead of looking for positives within ourselves, then, sometimes the best course of action is to look for positives in the context of the social situation you find yourself in, and go with those. This doesn't mean being a social chameleon (though some people choose this route anyway), it just means letting certain parts of yourself be more or less inhibited depending on where you are.
|
On topic, I find that very difficult. I've spent a lot of my life not saying things in public, which mostly just makes being in social situations awkward and I find I have nothing to say. Recently I've decided that the best course is just to speak my mind (politeness must be cultivated of course) and if the person is offended we probably weren't cut out to be friends.
There is an art in speaking truth in a way that is not blunt, however. I would give tips but I'm not very good at it.
|
1+1 = 3 is true for higher values of 1. Your idea seems more like 1+1 = 0, as in, they nullify each other actually 
On topic: honesty is valued, rudeness is not. I think you need to understand the difference
There's a truth behind the idea of "if I have nothing nice to say I would rather say nothing at all".
It's called tact.
|
Actually...
1+1=2 is not really proven yet. At least not completely. The proof is currently based upon a few assumption in arithmetics (as far as I know). I think for example Bertrand Russell tried to complete this proof (but didn't succeed entirely).
People might sometimes think that they have proven something, but they have simply used the accepted system for mathematics to prove the system itself. In this way you can prove almost anything you want.
|
Never, ever make a mathematical statement, however benign, on the internet. You'll soon have a hundred people who think they know better and will come to try to help the masses or correct the last one who tried, and suddenly, nobody will care about the bulk of what you wrote.
I think the problem here does not lie with your virtues. A quality in a context might be a handicap in another, and here your problem might just be a lack of tact, or of understanding of your new friend (after all, if you've known him for only a month, it's pretty normal that you are not able to predict all his reactions).
|
On April 19 2012 02:10 aebriol wrote:1+1 = 3 is true for higher values of 1. Your idea seems more like 1+1 = 0, as in, they nullify each other actually On topic: honesty is valued, rudeness is not. I think you need to understand the difference There's a truth behind the idea of "if I have nothing nice to say I would rather say nothing at all". It's called tact.
That sounds like you're calling an opinion a truth. Tact isn't something everybody desires. In fact, it offends me when people try to avoid offending me, therefore, when dealing with me (as tact is based on reception and perception, thus making it subjective), the only way to show tact is to not try too hard to play nice.
Also, saying nothing isn't always showing tact. For example, if someone asks "Isn't this the most beautiful baby you've ever seen?", the appropriate response to show tact is to lie like a rug. Saying nothing is a blatant tell that you're thinking "Did she get pregnant at Chernobyl?"
|
Sometimes the truth hurts T.T
|
There's a running math joke that 1+1=3 for exceptionally large values of 1, which exploits "rounding" numbers...
For example, you round 1.3 down to 1, and you round 2.6 up to 3. So while 1.3 + 1.3 = 2.6, if you round each of those three values separately, it appears that you're rounding a value of 1 plus a value of 1 to obtain a value of 3. It's obviously silly though.
And then there's other mathematical systems like binary... 1+1=10
But anyways... I definitely agree with the idea that sometimes you need to consider social norms and feelings before bluntly stating the truth. I feel that Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory epitomizes the problem here: He's as straightforward as possible, and simply doesn't understand when he oversteps a boundary, or when withholding a comment is in the party's best interest. (Granted, you're surely more social than Sheldon, but he's often forced into social situations anyway.) Sometimes, it's vital to tell the truth. In other cases, telling white lies or just nodding and smiling is the best idea. There are often shades of gray when engaging in social circles.
|
Try and equalize any negativity by saying something positive afterwards. If you've offended John by being honest, either come up with a lie or another truth to counter the first statement.
|
On April 19 2012 02:25 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2012 02:10 aebriol wrote:1+1 = 3 is true for higher values of 1. Your idea seems more like 1+1 = 0, as in, they nullify each other actually On topic: honesty is valued, rudeness is not. I think you need to understand the difference There's a truth behind the idea of "if I have nothing nice to say I would rather say nothing at all". It's called tact. That sounds like you're calling an opinion a truth. Tact isn't something everybody desires. In fact, it offends me when people try to avoid offending me, therefore, when dealing with me (as tact is based on reception and perception, thus making it subjective), the only way to show tact is to not try too hard to play nice. Also, saying nothing isn't always showing tact. For example, if someone asks "Isn't this the most beautiful baby you've ever seen?", the appropriate response to show tact is to lie like a rug. Saying nothing is a blatant tell that you're thinking "Did she get pregnant at Chernobyl?"
The statement "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing" doesn't indicate that 'having something to say" should "always be 100% true and exactly what you feel".
I think you are dumb to draw that conclusion.
We friends now? Blunt and rude but truthful
Tact changes depending on the situation. You might say a really crude joke to friends you've known for a while where you know that it's accepted, you'd be a moron to say that same joke at a political campaign speech or in your average job interview.
Tact in the sense I used it means "a keen sense of what to do or say in order to maintain good relations with others or avoid offense ". It's not 'being PC no matter the situation or stfu up if you have nothing nice to say you mean 100%". It's the ability to get along with others, without offending them - specifically referring to what you choose to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
