Why Do People Do This In Discussion?

Post Reply New Topic

Someone will make a comment or ask a question about one specific aspect of the discussion. I will respond, clearly talking ONLY about the specific point this person mentioned and making that even clearer by quoting precisely that part of the comment to which I am responding. The person responds to me (even quoting me!) with commentary that is completely irrelevant to my response. It will be related to the broader discussion, but the entire point of quoting someone is to signal that one's comment is specifically related to the quote.

It's like they abandon the one specific point which THEY INITIATED, and suddenly just start brain-dumping (posting any random thought) on the topic in general without signalling a conversational transition, but it is ostensibly directed at me, and I don't understand why.

For example, someone will comment "I don't think this is true because X." X is some reason.
I will respond, "that is not a valid reason, because..." and then I explain why, talking ONLY about X.
Then the person will respond directly to me, "I still don't think this is true because Y and Z." Y and Z are two totally different reasons that have nothing to do with X.

But Y and Z have nothing to do with my comment, so why bring it up to ME, rather than in the discussion in general? Why quote me if the response has nothing to do with my quote? Why tell me that they still don't believe something, if I haven't addressed whether or not they believe in general, only that the ONE specific reason they stated makes no sense?

I don't know why, but that does sound irritating.

i assume you mean people not on the spectrum if so it seems that in much the same way they say we are unable to see the "big picture" they in turn can't see the details within the conversation as they are looking at the "big picture" of it

Last edited by kazma on 19 Jan 2014, 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

If I only knew...all I know is that I am sick to death of that. So, the only thing I do is just my best to avoid those scatterbrained characters.

I hate seafood. Shrimp and lobsters look like bugs.

I used to call it "the secret language of idiots." The conversation rolls randomly and makes no sense,
and if one individual did it I would think he was psychotic. But they all seem to understand each other.
Then I realized that it's the native language of the majority. The words are not intended to be taken
seriously, and are just a vehicle for non-verbal stuff, mostly snarls and coos.

Lol Tahiti:

The reason they reacted like that sounds a great deal like sarcasm to me but I could be reading it wrong too. I used to have trouble with this but the reason they are reacting to you like this is because you are too honest and that comes with "Stating the obvious." NTs hate that about us. The best thing to do would be to keep your thoughts to yourself and if they make a comments that sound logical to you and come up with something sarcastic.

They say, "I think X is the reason."

You go, "No I think it was variable A," or "No really?"

Yep ! ! I sometimes think of that sort of group discussion as them playing a game of "keep it going". Topics and comments seem more geared to keep up the pace of the exchanges than to engage in any type of meaningful intellectual discourse.

When I sense that happening I usually just sit back and listen to the banter, or leave. ( Check please ! ! )

I think the next time that happens, I'll just leave. Usually when my oldest brother does that, I just assume he is looking for a scapegoat for his BS or he is more psychotic than he lets on. I remember one time we talked of my project for Asperger's, he mentioned the sane thing over and over again: "you are going to mention yourself, right?" No dumbass. I will talk about a disability that doesn't concern me for a half an hour. He then eventually called Asperger's a mental illness, which I should have scolded him for.

He did it again when I mentioned doing stuff on my own and keeping busy to forget my loneliness because I am less so when I am not thinking of it. All if a sudden ge brings up Spring Breakers, which gad little to do with the subject. I usually wind up cutting him off in conversation. I always cut people off when they contradict themselves, talk in circles, or talk just to buy time.

He is the king of nonsequitors in a conversation and he wonders why I don't talk to his mixed-up azz.

Yikes! I'm sorry that I let you guys into my personal life like that. It isn't necessary. But this is one discussion I feel strongly about, especially since I like having long, meaningful conversations. It seems anything that reminds me of his mannerisms brings a fair amount of vitriol out of me. I need to work on that.

It is meaningful. It's just not intellectual. It's mostly primal stuff, like determining who's the boss; who is expected to kiss a**; who likes who and therefore must agree with any stated opinion, no matter how absurd... Loyalty, subordination... I get confused because they're using modern English on the surface and I incorrectly assume that the subject is important.

Yep. Just a subtle form of bullying. He wants to believe that he's better than you, and he wants you to acknowledge it. The issue is never the issue.

if that is the goal, he can quit while he is ahead. I already see through that dude enough to know what he is about. Plus, excuse my language. I forgot it is a family site. My bad. ��

In your example, it looks as though you have said something that shows they are wrong, and they have no comeback to that particular argument, but still need to save face and be the "winner" so they come up with new arguments. Most people have great difficulty simply saying "ah yes I see what you mean, thanks".