why do we try to kill the messenger?
 

I notice a general trend on message boards to attack the poster rather than the argument. Why can't people stick to debating if the topic is a discussion? You can make comments like, "Belief in God isn't well thought out" rather than "Stupid people like you believe in God because you don't know any better." there is a huge difference between debate and crucifying the herald of the idea.
Is it that people can't seem to separate a man and his words? Maybe you think it's the way it should be. I'm curious if anyone even cares it goes on.

Insulting the concept can be as insulting to the believer too.

True, true. I do think it's not quite as bad. It can be awful hard to avoid putting down the argument, depending on the subject matter. You almost can't do it without applying some negative qualifier while disagreeing. I try to do it sparingly. I spend a lot of time rephrasing posts to keep them neutral.

Well to answer your question, let's look at psychology. The first rule of psychology states that humans are driven by, first and foremost, the need to be right. Add to that possible self-esteem issues, which all humans suffer from, and you now have the need to demean others mixed in with your need to be right.

Yep we care about it all the time.
It's one of the parameters we use to moderate and guide discussions. Arguments ad hominem are monitored closely. Personally attacking other members gets you in trouble - usually sonner rather than later.

It's funny because this is done in politics all the time. IN FACT -some people believe that attacking the person is sound. And the irony is that when this same methodology is used against thier belief du jour then they squeal like a stuck pig.

There's a long history of moderator warnings and other actions that engage exactly this type of thing. Many of them occur in the Tilted Politics forum.

I think we as a people find that in an arguement, it is more often easier to attck an object such as the person one is having the arguement with other than attacking the entity such as the topic or disscussion.
The perfect example is receiving bad news. The messanger also get's the first blame regardless. In situations like that, the defendent/ receiver of bad news, feels their position is compromised thus retaliating with an attack. Hence the killing of the messanger.
As much as I disagree with attacking the messanger, it's more like the nature of self preservation and self defence that causes these actions when ones position is compromised.
:D

I'm not talking about the politics forum I'm talking about politics in general.

yep, I figured that out after I posted.

I agree with you regarding the way political rhetoric too often incorporates ad hominem arguments. I think we can make the biggest difference by pointing it out - as you've done here - and also staying away from using them ourselves.
Thanks.

I just wish people didn't get pissed off at me when I don't have the shoe they want in stock.

Telling them that I just looked for half an hour for them and that it sucks for me too because I'm on commission isn't enough. It's not my fault, bitch! I don't order it!

i don't want to always be right... if I was always right then i'd be perfect and not have any need to learn anything.

i relish being wrong even more than i do being right.

Great comments. I think we have seen a general break down in ettiquette in society that permeates all aspects of life: the way children act up in school, road rage, shoving in line, talking in movie theatres, etc. The anonymity of much of our interactions with other people encourages dehumanization.

one thing that people have to remember though is that when you read comments someone makes in a forum, it is often difficult to read the words of the poster as the poster had intended them. when talking over a phone, or face to face, people can pick up little nuances and other things so that they more clearly understand the speakers point. when reading text, it is way too common to misread what was originaly written. this has happened to me on several occasions, and as a result, people started attacking things that i said because they misinterpreted my words.

because this is such a large community, i think it is important for readers and posters to be a little more patient and understanding with their replies. make sure you understand exactly what is being discussed before you post a comment that could possibly be offensive or hurtful.

and also, as i have learned the hard way (several times), THINK, before you post. i have gotten reprimanded a couple of times for just jotting down a quick post without thinking too much about it, which can lead to more problems and misunderstanding. as a community, we need to treat one another with respect, and if you don't have anything useful to say, then don't say anything.

that's just my two cents.

C'mon now!!!
I accept being wrong and even appreciate being set straight on matters. But relish being wrong?!
Hmm...you must not be wrong very often. Perhaps it is a novelty for you.
:)
and again
:)

I think this is a part of a larger problem. As a society today we don't want to do any more than neccessary. People get upset when thier views are challenged becuase they don't want to have to think about their position. They know what they think and don't want additional information that may not fit with their views. I think another thing people are afraid of is too much information and they may not be able to form an opinion. I find it interesting that so many people need to be on one side or another at all times, what ever happened to the thirst for more knowledge and the continual testing of our own opinions. Isn't that half the fun, seeing someone else's view point. When I don't understand someone's stance on something I find it a challenge to try and fiquire out WHY that person feels the way they do, heck maybe I don't have all the info.(I hate it when that happens). Often you can discover why they have formed the opinions they have, doesn't mean they are right or wrong but different. We all have different experiences in life and see things in a different way, we are what has happened to us and we all need to realize different experiences in our past and we could have had the same opinions as others we challenge.

I'm wrong plenty of times, especially as I move from a subject that I know plenty about into one that I know very little to nothing about.

People often ask me how I got to be so knowledgeable with computers and networks, and my answer is simple,"I made more mistakes and errors than you, and then figured out how to fix them."

Going to school, I did well on exams, but I did not learn anything because the answers I put down were right. It was the wrong answers that made me think and challenge me to find the correct answer.

To me being wrong is a process of discovering and learning. I relish the discovering and learning process.

There's another aspect to this that has been overlooked in this thread. The anonymity of the internet has a tendency to make people more belligerent and agressive than they would otherwise be in face to face discourse. In general, the worse thing that is likely to happen to someone on an internet message board is to be banned. But guess what, there are hundreds, thousands more forums out there. As opposed to real life, in which one might get his ass kicked for being insulting or demeaning in a discussion. Thus, the whole "internet tough guy" thing.

But basically, it comes down the simple fact that people are generally lazy and stupid. And since it's so much easier to attack the messenger than to refute an argument logically, that's what people tend to do. Its rather sad, actually.

very good point Sion. i totally forgot about that aspect. we just get so used to our everyday actions that many times we don't realize the uniqueness of some stuff. i am a totally different person on the Internet than i am in person, just like most people i know. this is definitely something people have to keep in mind when having discussions over the Internet.