5 Reasons We Argue When We Agree
Have you ever argued with someone only to discover you agreed?
One partner said to his other partners – who were in heated discussion – “You’re both arguing for the same thing.” I thought his observation intriguing. I started watching my conversations to see if I have “unnecessary” arguments. I do!
I argue – say debate if you prefer the more noble term – with people even when I agree with them.
Arguments when we agree are useless, draining time-wasters. There’s no need for winners or losers.
5 reasons we argue when we agree:
- The way something is said is offensive. It isn’t the content of a comment that sets us off; it’s the tone of voice, facial expression, or body language that gets us going. We bring emotional baggage to the table.
- Their emphasis doesn’t fully align with ours.
- Something is left out. Everything being said is accurate but we feel there’s a bigger picture.
- We need affirmation, appreciation, and respect.
- We don’t feel heard.
Bonus: History closes our minds. We argued about this before and you were wrong then.
My story:
A leadership colleague and I were discussion the merits of focusing internally on the people in our organization or externally on customers. I said, “It’s an ‘and’ conversation not an ‘or’.” He agreed. But, he continued talking about one side of the issue.
In the past I would have disagreed even though I agreed with everything he said. This time I just agreed. Is there more to the issue? Yes. We already agreed it was an “and” conversation. Did we make policy decisions? No. His points were useful, accurate, and applicable.
Agree quickly. Don’t add to. Don’t give the “full” picture. One conversation can’t address every facet of important issues.
Note: This short post isn’t the full picture. Go ahead …
Do you argue when you agree?
When should we stick to our guns and when should we let it go?
Out of the five reasons, the top reason I’ve seen arguments is because of tone of voice. The WAY someones says something. Did they really say what they mean, or did they mean something else? I personally appreciate straight forward people who aren’t shy to say what they mean.
Donation-Can.com
Hi Donationcan,
I hear you. Learning the way people like to receive and share information is important to managing office relationships.
The WAY we communicate is as important as WHAT we communicate…. if we want to be heard and influence the conversation.
Best,
Dan
Dear Dan,
I agree that there are occasions when we argue even after agreement. Today, I had discussion with my superior about structure and strategy. He told the structure is based on strategy. I surprisingly questioned- is it true? I think structure defines strategy. Finally, we reached on the same conclusion that structure defines strategy. I found that we had same ideas but in different ways. It means, we may argue when we try to listen the way we know it. It also means that our rigidity and stereotyping thought process may also lead us to argue even after agreement. The most important part why do we argue when we agree is that we do not understand or share the feelings and sentiments of others. When perspective is missing we tend to argue even after agreement. I think sticking to guns and letting it go depends upon persons and situations. When the person is rigid, we should let it go. When argument leads to better solutions and understand, we should stick to our guns. When it strengthen relations and trust, we should stick to our guns.
Dear Ajay,
As always, thank you for joining in and sharing your thoughts.
I like to grab something from you comments and take it with me. This time I’m taking..”when there is rigidity let it go” That makes so much sense. Find another time/place/situation when it’s a better to communicate. “Lets talk another time”
Best,
Dan
Good post. There is also a preferable way to make a point that you think is important to add. Instead of just adding the point, you show agreement first. Positively reinforce first. Then, add your point. People will enjoy being in your company more.
Hi Peter,
Affirm first..add after. Thank you sir.
BTW, I want people to enjoy my company. 🙂
Best,
Dan
Great post .. well, really good post .. there’s that one syntax issue..
🙂
Hi Ken,
Hmm what does “great” mean… what is “really good?” Maybe it’s “greatly good” 🙂
You can usually tell when an argument isn’t going anywhere when we start defining the words of others for them…
I think you meant “great” 😉
Best,
Dan
Not surprisingly this is my favorite topic!
I have come to see in my work that people argue even when they agree for many reasons including those you name and generally, when they perceive that the other person is directly or indirectly undermining one or more of their values or needs.
Over the years, I have also identified 6 of those most common challenges that leaders react to – that may preclude straightforward resolution of an issue even when they agree or agree to disagree. These are:
Voice (not feeling fully heard -as you already said), Identity (a ‘threat’ to their status and role-who they are and how they see themselves), Stability (security, certainty and/or predictability do not remain intact), Acknowledgement (and appreciation-again – one you have identified) and Connection (concern about a loss of the realtionship, belonging etc.)
Hi Cinnie,
I wondered if you might pop in on this one. Thank you and thanks for your support on twitter.
You comment is a post within my post. The last of the six things you add sticks with me. In particular the issue of belonging. When I feel on the outside I tend to argue more. It’s a way to fight my way into belonging again. Not necessarily a good way.
Thank you again for adding value.
Best,
Dan
Hi Dan,
I hope you don’t mind if I bring up personality type here. There are personality types that can argue or debate just because it is fun and stimulating to do so, and because it is a natural part of their “wiring” to explore all sides (including the insides) of a particular issue. They may even argue against what they already believe, because the interaction at hand gives the chance to do so, and to possibly get a new perspective or idea out of the exchange.
One such type, in the Jungian-Meyers typing approach, is an ENTP. We ENTPs will dialog about practically anything, and we take particular delight in illuminating the bits and parts of of thinking (or own or someone else’s) that haven’t yet seen light. We also enjoy pushing the limits of current thinking, and challenging the status quo. Sometimes useful, sometimes not.
There’s a time and place for this kind of approach to interaction, and I’ve learned, for the most part, to use this talent/affinity with extreme discretion, and mostly in small doses, unless I’m across from another like me.
If you are one of the types that almost reflexively goes into what others might see as an “argument,” you’ve probably realized the hazards of this practice when it is out of place, or with someone who doesn’t take the same interest or pleasure from jousting about a topic.
Dan, you’ve done well in pointing out a good approach to short-circuiting a reflexive argument, when one isn’t appropriate. Agree quickly, if that’s what you feel! That’s an approach I use often, for I’m usually aware of my tendencies, as well at the personality of the person across from me.
On the other side, If you’re a leader with an inventive, spontaneous, reflexive argument-maker on your team, try seeing them as more of an explorer/idea generator than a debater, and put that talent to use when and where appropriate. You might schedule a 1:1, apart from a meeting where extended discussion might burn the time of others, and leverage the skills of your “debater” towards exploring unusual, but useful perspectives.
~M
That’s funny – I am the proud owner of a “inventive, spontaneous, reflexive argument-maker” on my team. This individual is extremely intelligent, and it makes his personality. I often agree, agree, agree to the point of rediculousness – he quickly realizes what I’m doing, and it progresses into humor which everyone seems to enjoy (gotta have my humor). It’s actually helped to nurture and develop a friendship. I’m laughing to myself now, as I’m reminded that this is what we do, probably daily.
Ha, what I love about your reply Ryan, is the combination of wisdom and obvious goodwill. We need more leaders like you, who seem to naturally appreciate what I call “psychological diversity,” and make the most of it. 🙂 And yeah, I gotta have my humor too! 😀
Hi Mark,
Wonderful addition to this conversation!
I’m with you. I LOVE exploring ideas. Frequently it comes of as being argumentative. Small doses works for me too.
The other issue with my affinity is it slows progress and decision-making. I hate to think of myself as a roadblock but my affinity for debate prolongs things.
I’ve learned to bringing out the debate early in the process so long as it doesn’t create more confusion than it’s worth. Obviously there’s a place for exploration… but, for me, I need to pursue the “pull the trigger” moment.
I also admire how you see the goodwill in Ryan’s comment.
Thank you for adding value,
Dan
I think you just described me. Although I think my love of “discussion” is based on training and genetics. My father taught us a few things about arguments.
1. No one ever wins an argument. Eventually one person just gives in or gives up but very seldom is it possible to change someone’s mind during a conversation.
2. If you can’t argue both sides of topic you probably don’t have all the information. Most people won’t argue a point they don’t believe so if you don’t agree find out what they know that you don’t.
3. Arguing is fun if you don’t take it too seriously. It is intellectual exercise and was encouraged in our household.
As you pointed out, Mark, it is important to recognize the appropriate time to engage in this pastime and when you are arguing with someone for whom the topic is very serious.
I also agree that listening is the reason that most people argue. Many people don’t listen well when arguing and only by listening can you come to the conclusion that you are actually on the same side.
Really enjoyed this post. I see it happen in my office a lot. In fact, I am guilty of doing it for this reason — * “You think you’re smart? Well, I’m going to say what you said but 10 times better than you said it! That gives me the last word and the win.”
Small. Very small.
Hi Katrina,
I’m tempted to rephrase your comment – something I’m good at too – but I better just agree with you. 🙂
Thanks for being transparent.
Best,
Dan
‘Argue’ and ‘debate’ both strike me as using up too much emotional energy. I am aware, however, that some of my client meetings and social exchanges take a long time because we indulge in an enjoyable, animated conversation that threads in and out and round and round as we explore ideas and each other’s differing perceptions in fine detail. It is this point that we are probably on – ‘Something is left out. Everything being said is accurate but we feel there’s a bigger picture.’
I agree with Mark, personality type underpins these particular interactions – in my case it is when ENTP meets fellow NT.
I agree, as an ENTP I love to explore ideas and my fellow NT’s are the perfect counterpoint. Others listening to us might think we are “arguing”, but these intense conversations are energizing and very productive as we throw ideas around, find flaws and finally common ground, usually a better place than we started from.
Hello, everyone!
To piggyback on Katrina’s point about “winning”, in addition to the 5 reasons you list Dan, I think sometimes people engage in this behavior because it’s extremely important that they be “right” or that their view is seen as the correct one. Perhaps it’s a need driven by your point #4– to be affirmed.
I’m taking this article in my heart today when I meet with a colleague I have spent too much time arguing with to get to the same place. Love the permission not to add! Thanks again for the morning wisdom!
All your great thoughts put me to shame of my bad augment for thinking I am fairly good yet not reasonably good in comparison.
You argue when others don’t listen and/or understand your view points easily. It’s more of a habit and the egoist nature of a person to make others agree at times. Nothing wrong if you
are right and you need convincing support of others. Healthy arguments lead to a better conclusion and on a mutual agreement would lead to a greater success.
However, heated arguments are always dangerous since these may result into bitterness or a break in relations. Arguments for the sake of it can certainly be avoided.
It’s not easy to digest as how you argue when both are in agreement! This is nothing but a time waster with immaturity.
Agreed… but… but… I want to say more but you have effectively silenced me… 😉
Just a quick thought — I have seen and felt the need to disagree due to not wanting to face the truth of the issue, wanting to justify and keep status quo, not wanting to do what the change would require, and frankly, being embarrassed about how it is. However, these “excuses” or coverups are probably not obvious in the heat of the argument. Furthermore, the fact that two are really in agreement may not even be obvious!
Thank you Dan for this article!
Nails were hit on the head here.
I often see that I already have my defenses up regarding the topic or past views with the person/organization/etc.
I will be sharing this article.
Thank you again sir.
K, bye
Thanks for the mirror, can relate as someone it’s been done to…and (sadly) that I’ve done it to others. Great read, thanks.
A colleague of mine and I always get into heated debates when we agree on a point. It seems to solidify our thinking and definitely builds a stronger basis for our opinions when they are finally published. Somtimes argument in agreement isn’t a bad thing. We recognize it as part of what makes us a great team. Though after “vociferously agreeing” in front of a client once, we now warn people who aren’t used to our method of hashing out our final statements about our tendency to sound somewhat argumentative while discussing points of agreement.
Weird thing is, we never get into such heated conversation when we disagree. Then it’s a much more logical, level sounding discussion.
Nice article and well spotted
Part of this is the “one up man ship” battle, continuously raging in the background. It’s a bit like animal instinct, who might get the larger portion of the kill…….. Or who is going to get ahead, the next promotion.
It’s about putting up a fight and finding the cause later.
“I thought you were going to hit me, so I hit you back, first”…….
Great post. It reminds me of the occasional comment I’ll hear or say during discussion at a meeting: “I think you’re both saying the same thing.” Or the more reflective approach: “Are you both saying the same thing?”
When we argue, we can discover what we have in common. The trick is to argue in order to create understanding, not just to debate about who is right and who’s wrong.
Actually, one conversation CAN address every facet of an important issue if we CHOOSE to address every facet. You are literally giving us advice on how to STOP addressing every facet and focus only on the key components. You’re contradicting yourself.