I posted this sentiment a couple of days ago and it was misunderstood by enough people that I felt like I should take a crack at clarifying it. Among my many weaknesses (or ‘flaws’ if you prefer (or ‘wretched shortcomings’ if you prefer (or ‘detestable sins’ if you prefer))) is writing open-ended comments that don’t adequately communicate my point of view. In my mind, I’m making perfect sense. Then I read the responses from people and I realize I’ve bungled the message.

I’ll explain what I intended to say by explaining what I did not say.

I did not say, “Keeping the peace is for losers.”

When a disagreement reaches a point where emotions are preventing productive conversation from happening, it’s good to walk away for awhile. Rather than risk damaging a relationship by escalating the argument, wisdom will leave a disagreement unresolved to allow one (or both) parties to “cool off.”

I did not say, “Losers disagree with me.”

Believe it or not, I understand that my opinions are not shared by everyone! It would be absurd to think my personal preferences should be the standard for every other human being on Earth. I sincerely do not care whether or not you agree with me on matters of personal opinion.

Let me say that again. I do not care if you differ with me on matters of opinion. I have zero interest in fighting with you about which toppings are best on pizza or the sinfulness of getting a tattoo. (And, if you’re angry because the words “sinfulness” and “tattoo” just appeared in the same sentence then YOU’RE NOT COMPREHENDING WHAT I’M SAYING!)

I have such apathy for my own opinions that I can’t muster the energy it requires to persuade you to adopt them. When you disagree, I’ll shrug. That’s all you’re gonna get from me. Even that is more than the disagreement deserves.

Here’s what I intended to say:

Some arguments are not mere disagreements on matters of opinion. Some arguments are over matters of truth. The truth is important. The truth is the only thing that’s worth arguing about.

The truth is not affected by your agreement or disagreement with it. And there is only one version of the truth. A light bulb is either on or off and your opinion about it is either true or false. If I say the bulb is “on” and you say it’s “off” – one of us is wrong. Here’s where we learn the loser’s identity.

We both see the light bulb gleaming brightly. I say, “Told you it was on.” You respond with, “I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.”

It is appropriate to disagree with falsehood.

When you ‘agree to disagree’ you are trying to make truth and untruth equivalent. Your belief that the bulb is ‘off’ is incorrect. It is not a matter of personal opinion so we cannot ‘agree to disagree.’ You’re asking me to accept something that I know is not true. That is a loser move.

Pride won’t let you admit that you’re wrong. You’re backed into a corner with only one correct course of action: admit that you made a mistake. But instead of doing the right thing, you suggest we ‘agree to disagree’ and think I’m not sharp enough to figure out the scam.

And THAT is what I was trying to say when I said:

“The one who ‘agrees to disagree’ is the one who lost the argument.”

The longer, more detailed version of this quote would go something like this: “When it becomes clear that one argument is inferior to another and you pretend that both arguments are equally good by agreeing to disagree; you’re a loser.”

It’s not important which of us has the truth at the beginning of an argument. What matters is that we both have the truth when the argument ends.

Here’s a link you can share with your friends who aren’t members of the clique. When you share the link, encourage them to stop being plebians and join us! Friends don’t let friends stay outside the clique.
https://www.evernote.com/shard/s10/u/0/sh/1696c9f1-aeaf-446a-849f-ac94e1a3eae3/5ade1b423af0814a60479260c2ff0844