7 Comments
User's avatar
MLHVM's avatar
1dEdited

As a relatively disagreeable person, let me say (not to you specifically, Peter, but generally), that agreeable people sometimes make work that they then want disagreeable people to come in and fix because they think we don't mind being a jerk and they themselves do not want to be a jerk.

But they are fine with *us* being the jerk. It's very unpleasant work, and the situation is often preventable by people being more precise and up front about expectations. Or blunt.

Clearly I have very different soul work to do related to being disagreeable, which I have been doing thanks to a kind but blunt brother.

Expand full comment
Peter Saint-Andre's avatar

Oh, that's very interesting! My work experience of cleaning up other people's messes leaned more toward being a highly conscientious person who was called in to fix things that spontaneous or big-picture people started but couldn't or wouldn't finish. Also because I'm very high on emotional stability I was often asked to defuse delicate situations with partners, put out urgent fires, and the like. There are so many ways to get dumped on in organizations!

Expand full comment
MLHVM's avatar

Definitely.

Expand full comment
Adrian Lory's avatar

Very interesting…. Perhaps along similar lines a friend of mine, in a social context, recently said to me “I want to see you get madder!” She said I was a little too nice and neutral about everything. In my case I think I’ve been hedging against pomposity for a while, which I believe was a problem when I was younger. But I guess you can lose some authenticity that way….

Expand full comment
Peter Saint-Andre's avatar

In my experience, one of the dangers of having perspective is having *too much* perspective, thus veering off into detachment.

Expand full comment
Adrian Lory's avatar

Indeed. It's one thing to be adaptable, another to be dissociative 😏

Expand full comment
Wes's avatar

Generally, our culture has lost the skill set(s) to be both passionately scornful of other people’s ideas while also remaining respectful of other’s ideas at the same time. Back in the day - the 1960’s (let’s say), controversies were argued heatedly but civilized respect was implied. Now, it’s nearly impossible to say anything if you don’t get your pronouns correct. The result is that the smartest people have to be agreeable and nice, and the least among us are treated with extreme and laborious deference. Blunt, smart, bold, caustic, and radical speech is repressed. What is the cause? Answer: We no longer respect ideas as potential factors for change. It’s all about “good” personality rather than good ideas. So the best among us have to “get along” with the group to make progress. Very ironic too because we also live in a period of nasty speech by the most powerful, now perceived as bold when it’s just asinine. We could sure use Hoffer now to tease out the current “temper of the time”. 🤪

Expand full comment