What should I expect from people?

My closest friend is also an ex lover and there are certain things we just cannot talk about, mainly because she finds me too argumentative and too reliant on logic. I have tried mightily to mend my argumentative ways but I fear abandoning logic is beyond me.
Anyway…she says I “set the bar too high” in my dealings with other people. I reply "This is all I expect, at a minimum–

           Do not lie to me.

           Do not manipulate me.

           Do not increase your fortune at the expense of my own.  (Petty much don't cheat me or steal from me)

She says “That’s setting the bar too high”

Is it?

I think your three expectations are reasonable, but I’d have to know how you actually react to people who don’t meet those expectations in order to be able to give an opinion on your friend’s claim that you “set the bar too high” when dealing with others…

My opinion of them is lowered. If it happens often enough I choose to have nothing to do with them. I spend a lot of time alone anyway and I can’t be bothered with people who are unreliable. I don’t confront them or anything unless the offense is egregious.

I like logic a lot, too. Can you give an example or two of what happened that made her say that?

I think your standards are admirable, but they’re not applicable to people in the abstract. I’ve found that expecting things like that from a random population just leads to disappointment.

But apply those same standards to friends, and you’re spot-on. It’s fair to expect that kind of behavior from friends, and it’s also fair to not consider them that any more if they fail those standards. You choose what kind of people you associate with, and as long as you’re following the same criteria you’ve set, I think you’re going to have a nice group of people around you.

Just doesn’t apply to the Joe Shmoe you bump into. Well, it might, but you can’t assume that it will.

Seems like a pretty reasonable set of standards for friends.

What does this have to do with being logical or argumentative?

One example would be her belief in alternative medicine. She will purchase homeopathic cold remedies. When I present evidence against it, or use analogies(you wouldn’t put molasses in your car’s fuel tank because some self-taught guru said to, would you?) shes says something like “Logic can’t explain everything, you know,” or she will ignore me or just walk away.

Nothing, really, except that we cannot have a serious discussion because of her distrust in logic. She claims I set the bar too high but will not provide examples or even abstract reasons to support the claim. I have tried really hard to be a better person. I am accused being “judgemental.” (I think everyone is.) So I try to explain to her what I expect from people and how that dictates how I respond to them. She simply repeats her claim “You set the bar too high.” End of discussion.

[

.

Thhat’s pretty much what I do. I guess I am seen as less than social because I would really rather spend time with a book or my dogs than at a party or other event where I know that 90% of the people there are just blowing smoke up my ass, and if I try to start a real conversation or challenge the more obvious bullshit I am told to “lighten up.” I don’t go out of my way to confront anyone.

To the OP …

You and she are really polar opposites, so it’s hardly surprising that you don’t work well together. Some folks think with logic and add a thin veneer of emotion for diplomacy. Others think almost purely emotionally and add a thin veneer of logic for respectability. In my experience, the former can recognize the latter even if they can’t “get” how or why they do it. The latter are unable to even comprehend that the former approach exists, or are repulsed by it, equating it with Spockian or machine-like coldness.

As to your standards, they’re reasonable on their face, but it depends a LOT on how you personally define “lie” and “manipulate.”

I know a gal who lives by your rules and is flat impossible to get along with:

Her definition of “manipulate” is any suggestion by you of anything that she wasn’t already thinking about. Example: Me: “We’re going to the movies, would you like to come along?” She: “I was going to stay home and watch TV”. Me: “Are you sure, we’re seeing (insert latest hot ticket here)?” She: (Angry) You’re trying to manipulate me!!! I said I was going to watch TV.

etc. Yecch.

Her definition of “lie” is equally outrageous. If she asks three people about a party they all went to and doesn’t get the exact same play-by-play from each, there’s a conspiracy of liars who’re hiding the real truth from her. She is totally unable to process the concept that two people at an event will honestly remember it differently, much less describe even common recollections differently.

If she was there and your version differs from hers in any detail, you’re either lying or stupid, and she’s more likely to decide you’re lying.

In her world, she’s fine and everybody else is all messed up.

She’s admittedly an extreme case, but there’s a continuum from way out there to back here where normalcy lies. So where are you? Only you can answer that question.

I define “lie” as “deliberately and knowingly telling me a falsehood.” I define “manipulate’” as “Lying to me or misleading me to further some hidden agenda.”

i am shocked!, I thought that I was the only one who lived this way. I am not here to spoil your life, you are free to live any way you want but if/when I encounter a “dealbreaker” (lying, stubborn idiocy, manipulation, etc.) I will NOT have any further dealings with that person.
As far as relationships go, I know what I like (and what I can not/will not put up with) and I think that I am doing us both a favor by going away sooner rather than later.

Unclviny
(to quote the great philosopher CA3799 “I don’t take any shit, I don’t give any shit, I’m not in the shit market”)

No.

If you have high standards—or in fact any standards at all—then people who don’t live up to those standards are going to try to make it your problem for having the standards. Don’t let them.

I concur with your list of expectations. I wouldn’t want to have much to do with someone who doesn’t live up to them. In fact, I would have left out the “to me” part of them: I wouldn’t want as a friend someone who went around lying to, cheating, or stealing from other people even if they were totally honest with me, because (1) I wouldn’t respect them and would be somewhat morally repulsed by them, and (2) I wouldn’t trust them: I’d figure that what they would do to other people, they could sooner or later do to me.

[QUOTE=trandallt]
you wouldn’t put molasses in your car’s fuel tank because some self-taught guru said to, would you?) QUOTE]
I have a notion that semantics and a lack of civility and respect come into play here. Your comment could be said as though it’s dripping with venom, but if you said, “Well, I wouldn’t put molasses in my car’s fuel tank because some self-taught guru said to, but of course you should do what you want to with your money,” you are at least respecting her right to her opinion. Something along those lines, for example. :wink:

LSLguy’s continuum is certainly alive and well, IMO. When’s the last time you learned something new, and changed your opinion, by listening to and considering what someone said? Are you open to doing that at all?

My guess is that your “high bar” doesn’t have to do with the things you listed, but with your expectation that other people make decisions as rationally as you do.

Some people are right to distrust logic, not because logic itself is invalid, but because these people may not have the skill to evaluate logical arguments correctly, and recognize that they may be confused or misled by spurrious arguments. These same people may, however, have excelent instincts and intuition. This doesn’t mean that they never have solid reasons for believing things. We all remember people from algebra class who could get the right answer to almost every problem, but never knew how they got it, right? They obviously were doing the math correctly in their head, but not in a way that was accessible and articulatable to them.

This method obviously has limitations, especially in math class, where you’re required to show your work. In real life, however, it seldom matters, as no one expects you to show your work in real life.

Except for you.

In this case, your friend’s intuitions have clearly given her a wrong answer (that homeopathy works), but by trying to “prove” it to her logically, you are implicitly asking her to show her work, which she can’t do, and implying that because she can’t, her judgements (not only this one) are less valid and trustworthy than others’ (especially yours). This is insulting to her, and not necessarily true. (How often have you used faulty logic that seemed valid to you at the time? How often do you continue to do so without realizing that your beliefs are incorrect?)

Add to this the fact that her reliance on homeopathy may be influenced by other factors than its efficacy (such as a cultural identification with others who use homeopathy, a subjective feeling of taking care of herself, etc.) which may not be articulatable for her, and which you fail to account for or take as valid.

So yes, even though you are right that homeopathy is a load of hog’s bollocks, you may, in fact, have set the bar too high.

BTW, trandallt, if I’m right about this, I know because I have the same problem you do. People like you’re friend drive me nuts! Of course, I drive them nuts too, and it’s taken me a long time to realize that their reasons for being driven nuts by me are just as valid as my reasons for being driven nuts by them.

And I still don’t believe any of the stuff I’ve just said when it actually applies to me. In the abstract, or when it applies to you. It’s all perfectly sensible, but when I disagree with someone, its because they just aren’t smart enough to see things rationally. :smiley:

Just to state for the record: I’m in that logic camp along with some of you. But I think that the core problem is one of style.

Many emotion driven people can drive me nuts if I insist on applying logic to their actions…until I remember that it is illogical to apply my logic to their non logical world. When I remember this, I can then gracefully and respectfully interact with them, which they deserve as full fledged human beings.

So speaking only for myself, getting my head in the right place helps in my tolerance for others - of all types, including my own.

I can only change me.

Exactly! i have an example for you but it is taking me awhile to compose it. I will be offline for about 14 hours.

[QUOTE=Thudlow Boink]
No.
I concur with your list of expectations. I wouldn’t want to have much to do with someone who doesn’t live up to them. In fact, I would have left out the “to me” part of them: ]
Actually that is how I feel as well. I say “to me” only because I distrust gossip and prefer to witness the behavior for myself. With enough corroboration I certainly include peoplewho may not have anything to do with me personally.

[QUOTE=MizQuirk]

Let me emphasize that she is probably my best friend in the world, and she has helped me inmmeasurably, literally to the point of guaranteeing my survival. I would not hurt her for the world, and at all times I try to consider and respect her thoughts and opinions. Having said that, it is certainly possible that I fail to do so on occasion. In that particular instance I was attempting to point out how meaningles the word “alternative” is when it comes to medicine; that it basically means “anything that is non-standard.” I was trying to show her that she has a higher standard for what she puts into her car than what she puts into her body. Molasses is natural, renewable, and certainly alternative to normal fuel, but that is not enough to convince her to fill up at Sap-N-GO.
Iwould like to think that the last time I learne something new by listening and considering was no later than yesterday. I hope that I am always open to that.