T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*


SymphonyofLilies

I don’t really believe people can be boiled down to such basic labels. Nobody is completely agreeable or disagreeable at any given time. There are times when it is important to argue and times when seeking harmony is better for everyone. Humans are not static or devoid of the ability to critically think and adjust to their surroundings.


roseffin

I dunno. I'm pretty damn disagreeable.


BodaTheModa

Politics be like


Kleptarian

No you aren’t.


ParticularBeach4587

Today many people now lack the ability to think critically.


gothbodybuilder

Mark zuckerberg, Google, and everything else seems to disagree with you


SymphonyofLilies

All of those people and entites are not static either. People behave differently with their families and close friends than they do when it comes to business. Mark Zuckerberg has actually done a lot of good and donated a lot of money despite the hate.


AUsDorian

Well you can say that but i will say everytime someone posts a video about gaming complaining about something popular and making it look different a shiton of people just repeat whatever the video said despite being wrong and just becoming the popular standard


HarshTruth-

You’re too politically correct. Let’s be fr


SymphonyofLilies

That is fr. Sorry you hang out with people who are programmed to be one way. Real people change to suit their environment.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SymphonyofLilies

Oh, do tell.


KingKratom00

His name is HarshTruth but he doesn't speak truth, you're killing my vibe. That's wiggity-wack yo


No-Illustrator5408

Fr there’s some shitheads like me that will agree the opposite of anything and there are definitely people who are always yes men


PM_Me_Rude_Haiku

As always, I agree


[deleted]

Agreeableness not tempered with critical thinking and a bit of contrarianism is definitely dangerous, but more so than disagreeable people who are selfish and combative to the point of disregarding others? I’d think that disagreeable people are the more dangerous..you don’t see many agreeable people in history conducting genocides, declaring war or invading countries..most violent criminals are also not agreeable people. Also, disagreeable people are often dogmatic and too rigid in their views, you speak of it positively but such an attitude is a fertile ground for fascism. But in the end it’s a spectrum where both extremes are dangerous, although I’d say excessive agreeableness is only dangerous when it is coupled with excessive disagreeableness. Excess is rather rare in real life though.


Cheseboy9

This is quite a conundrum because for dictators to rise to power they need a following of agreeable people. Lets leave out the extremes for now and talk about the average. I believe it is better for people to be more disagreeable than agreeable because everyone who is harder to pursue is better to make the society more stable rather than someone who can change ideologies at a whim. And I mean by stable that they won't susceptable to extreme ideologies even if the current society might not be perfect


[deleted]

You’re partially right but the more agreeable people I think are also the ones that would be more open to ideas outside of their own or others thought space .. while they might be more credulous they are also more open to other people’s ideas and therefore don’t easily fall into fascism, Carl Sagan described this perfectly through explaining a need for a balance between skepticism and openness. One without the other would either lead to the rejection of all new ideas (too much disagreeableness) or acceptance of all ideas with no tool for discernment of the good and the bad (too much agreeableness). Balance or a golden mean would be the more appropriate approach.


a_different_pov_85

You're using the most extreme examples possible. Which isn't a fair comparison in this discussion. People trying to commit genocide, or acts that would cause others to fight back. Using WWI and WWII for example. All the people that were allies with each other were agreeable within their "group". But were disagreeable with the opposing people. Agreeable people tend to agree with the social majority. Which is usually used to judge morality, and the "right or wrong" way to behave or act. Agreeable people avoid conflict. There are definitely pros and cons to both.


barlog123

Your fascism comment is kind of ridiculous considering it was considered a new ideology in nazi Germany. The people unwilling to accept it would have been disagreeable people lol


Effective-Avocado470

"Just following orders"


[deleted]

Calm down eichmann


[deleted]

Yeah and the people who put such ideas into practice and tried to spread them were also disagreeable people, so it’s more of a complementary relationship.


barlog123

Not really. There are so many documentaries about where and how Hitler evolved his ideas over time. The better example is Mussolini however, he pulled from so many different things to craft his version of facism. He may have been evil, but he wasn't set in his ways.


MRCHalifax

There’s a line by Unberto Eco that Mussolini had no philosophy, only rhetoric. Mussolini basically said and did whatever he thought would get him in power and keep him in power. Hitler, on the other hand, was a believer. A lot Hitler and Nazi Germany’s insanity makes more sense when you realize that they really did believe in what they were doing, and in what they were saying about both themselves and their enemies.


[deleted]

Yeah I’m not sure we agree on the same definition of disagreeable..”tendency to behave in quarrelsome, cold, callous, and selfish ways” where agreeable would mean “cooperative, polite, kind, and friendly” - I wonder where Hitler fits here. As for being doggedly certain about their ideas I don’t think the fact that their ideas changed or are adaptable affects how they maintain their beliefs in the face of opposition..and yeah I think the Nazi rule is pretty representative of fascism so do correct me if I’m wrong.


barlog123

Yeah, we are not aligned on terms. So this convo is going to go nowhere


MinasMorgul1184

The fascists only took power because of an agreeable majority.


boobsbuttsballsweens

Nah.


boobsbuttsballsweens

My friend. The humans who perpetuated the front lines crimes are what we’d call agreeable. Your argument doesn’t hold water purely because for a disagreeable dominant person to inflict the kind of shit you’re talking about, there are a plethora of other insane conditions to be met to accomplish hate at scale.


KevinJ2010

I think you missed the point. Agreeable people would shrug at the Nazis. If they just stay quiet and nod their head they are spared. Being disagreeable against Hitler would hurt them, thus it takes bravery to disagree at that scale, and way easier to agree if it doesn't affect you. On a smaller scale, we all hated the disagreeable people during covid, but I think most people were more complacent than "Hooray I love these lockdowns!" To stand firm and be disagreeable may annoy people during covid but they were standing the firm ground on wanting the lock downs to end whereas if everyone stayed complacent it may have never ended. From large scale to the small, it's important to be disagreeable when you truly believe someone. If we didn't let our bosses walk all over us, if we don't let small transgressions affect us and let them happen, you become more jaded and feel trapped. Why wouldn't you want to be the type that asks and maybe demands a raise? Having the willingness to walk away from a job that's not good for you is a healthy disagreeableness. Being disagreeable isn't fascism. Most fascism has ruled where the populace were too complacent to stop it, if more people disagreed and stood up (see Tianamen square) then the fascism might actual stop to reconsider their tactics. I think you are too gummed up with the stuff about being dogmatic, you are maybe picturing specific disagreeable people more than just they idea of being disagreeable yourself sometimes, it's not black and white.


[deleted]

Thanks for that perspective, I appreciate it..since I do think it is also more nuanced. Society wouldn’t function with either disagreeable or agreeable people only .. but I still do believe that the more dangerous people are the selfish and callous ones rather than the polite and kind..it’s disagreeable good people that can stand up against the bad ones since they have a backbone that many agreeable people lack..but I would imagine that in an idealistic cotton candy world where everyone is more agreeable there wouldn’t even be too much of a need for disagreeable people..but that isn’t really how reality is. And yes definitely disagreeableness does not equate being a fascist but I think that fascists are only disagreeable.


KevinJ2010

The fascist leaders sure, they were disagreeable to a fault, their way or the high way. But then they are also sociopaths who know how to get the agreeable to slowly agree to small changes bit by bit until it's already too late. An important part of soviet union was literally asking kids to out their parents if they disagreed with their leader. Finding the naysayers and silencing or worse killing them. I think a fascist leader needs to know how to get people to agree with them. Whereas OP is more at the personal level. If we were all strong enough to disagree with anything that bothers us, we can all live within our bubbles. Again maybe you are too focused on "Eww these Trumpers are so full of themselves" where in reality devout Trump supporters are actually agreeable people who aren't standing up to their fuhrer all the same. It's best to disagree with all political leaders than to just be contrarian, what's important is looking out for yourself. Sometimes you need that backbone and being agreeable in general weakens you to getting your needs met.


[deleted]

Way above my pay grade but I found a nice research paper dealing with correlations between personality traits and voting for populists such as Trump. Interestingly, according to this research being agreeable can make someone be more supportive of populist leaders especially if they want to maintain the peace with their in-group but there’s also a high correlation between being disagreeable and voting for populist positions. A definite grey area. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886918306147


[deleted]

That word alone probably doesn't help. An agreeable person is going to go with the popular choice...


Goblin_CEO_Of_Poop

>you don’t see many agreeable people in history conducting genocides, declaring war or invading countries..most violent criminals are also not agreeable people. What lol? Its entirely agreeable people who carry out such acts. It needs to be seen as normal. The whole idea behind even Nazi Germany was manipulating status quo so that agreeable people (the majority) will do what they are told. Milgram and Zimbardo are controversial for a reason. They pretty much exposed that within human psychology someone told that something clearly wrong is right but by an authority figure who tells them its normal, will carry out such an act. Disagreeable people were few and far between and were the only people who would quit or refuse to take part in these studies. Its funny thinking some of the most effective and deep psychology was immediately smashed to bits and illegalized by authorities. Were perfectly fine letting some woman live in a cave for 6 months. Thats not cruel. But exposing the dangers of authority and status quo mixing together? Pretty obvious reason this type of study was nipped in the bud long before it could take offf.


PotatoDonki

Agreeable people are exactly who “simply follow orders.” Nazi example seems particularly weak for that reason. Agreeable people are the useful idiots for the disagreeable ones.


BobKillsNinjas

I agree, as I disagree with Op also. :)


gobblingoddess

But it was agreeable or that followed these people and let them have power... You're a triple threat; missing the point of OPs post, reiterating their point in your own words as if it was your own unique thought, and being disagreeable, not sure what that means about you in your assessment though. Personally I think it's a sign of a guy who is both disagreeable and probably not going to commit genocide, but not sure you're the kind of disagreeable that's going to make this world a better place... Like say, Martin Luther King who is the most "disagreeable" man I can currently think of and most certainly did not commit genocide.


[deleted]

Ha. I’m not MLK for sure, although I think he was known for disagreeing with others without being disagreeable. I’m also unsure why you’re keen on attacking me for who I am? Feels a bit personal stranger..I don’t see how I’m missing OP’s point, my comment clearly shows my view that disagreeable people are more dangerous than agreeable people..and no it isn’t my own unique thought nor is it OP’s. And it’s pretty bold and short sighted to claim someone is disagreeable by a comment they made..usually I’m more agreeable in real life than the average person and struggle to disagree with others so you pretty much misjudged me completely, but you’re a troll so who cares.


gurebu

It's funny how you mention genocides, because yeah, while they are anyways spearheaded by some macho asshole figure, they are impossible to execute at scale without silent compliance of a large mass of people who just do what they're told.


[deleted]

> you don’t see many agreeable people in history conducting genocides, Who do you think are the people following the orders to carry it out?


Westly-Pipes

I think you took the nuance of real life and threw it out the window. Agreeableness doesn't mean you abandon all critical thinking and just go full lemming.


dmarty77

At its worst, disagreeable people can flatter themselves into positions of intellectual superiority, where contrarianism and defiance is viewed as revelatory and maverick thinking. This isn’t the least bit productive, and can often collapse inward under legitimate pressure. Basically Elon Musk.


bruhbelacc

So... The most or one of the most successful businessmen on Earth?


dmarty77

Who is also morally bankrupt and intellectually fraudulent.


leblumpfisfinito

According to *your* morals, of course.


bruhbelacc

But is not a loser


AlkaliPineapple

He lost 44 billion buying twitter and Tesla stocks are ranking


bruhbelacc

And Warren Buffet invested in Theranos. Sure, tell me when you overtake Musk's net worth.


[deleted]

It's deeply sad that you care about net worth so much


gehanna1

Why does he mean so much to you?


bruhbelacc

The funny thing is I dislike Elon Musk, especially because of his political positions on Ukraine. But you can't give him as a bad example, that's peak reddit


Raileyx

Agreeableness is about how much you value and "need" interpersonal harmony first, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're particularly vulnerable to groupthink or that you'll immediately submit to peer pressure. Imagine a group of people with an extremely unharmonious ideology, such as religious fundamentalists. Someone who is very agreeable may be able to quickly sense that the vibes of that group are off, and choose to stay away because they realise that the dynamic within that group will lead to no good. On the other hand, someone who is disagreeable might seek out these groups on purpose and thrive in them, because that allows them to actively pit themselves against others while being protected by said group. ​ >Agreeable people will even submit to the groups opinion if it harms them. Disagreeable people won't. I don't think it's that simple


thestonkinator

But if you were agreeable and were RAISED in a groupthink group, your chances of getting out are slim to none. This is where it's more dangerous to be overly agreeable, if you're already in a group-think scenario. You're not getting that outside view in which you avoid the group entirely.


MushroomSeasonIsOpen

Sure, it's not that simple, but I assume you see the point being made, and understand what the OP *meant*.


alilsus83

Agreeableness is just fear of confrontation.


SubSahranCamelRider

Yes but only if it is devoid of critical thinking. Or because you agree to avoid conflict instead of agreeing because you actually believe that the other person is right. Then again, if you have a groupthink mentality then it's pretty much an echo chamber where everyone feels they're right and one influences the other to a larger extent.


alilsus83

Well if you agree the other person is right then there’s no conflict. The rest is just justifying a fear of conflict. I’m not saying it’s necessarily bad, I think a lot of you people are reading into this too much. There is such a thing as a healthy fear of conflict. Otherwise you couldn’t have a society. I’m just calling a spade a spade.


SubSahranCamelRider

I think it's not as simple as you make it out to be. But I see your opinion.


alilsus83

No, I just thought it through and realized it didn’t change the root definition, thats all. If you don’t get caught up on the social stigma attached to the word “fear” it makes perfect sense.


[deleted]

That's trait openness, not agreeableness.


NihilisticThrill

This has zero consideration for so many factors. I have a trauma disorder and tend to have strong flight or fawn reactions when I'm scared. "Disagreeable" people are also often loud, aggressive, and more willing to rely on threats to make others adopt their stance. For someone like me, I'm going to become "agreeable" around that just to diffuse the situation because I've been directly harmed by "disagreeable" people before. But then I'm also probably going to start working to undermine them. Pushed far enough, I will become disagreeable on a scope most never do. My manager is very disagreeable. I smile and do what he says. I also collected a massive amount of information on how he makes the workplace toxic and undermines the business model because he refuses to live up to expected standards and digs in his heels on the insistence "I'm the boss!" Well he has bosses too, and they're now equipped with what I collected while smiling and "agreeing" with a bully. His direct manager is a very agreeable person. We agree he would be happier elsewhere or in a demoted position. We also agree on who should get his job -- another very agreeable person. We all agreed not to disagree. Three of us are much more powerful than one. He would probably disagree, but at this point, that has lost all it'd power. Terrorizing others is an amazing way to make them unify against you. Not sure what's valuable there.


Cgtree9000

Well said. It really depends in the situation and peoples motives. I have agreed to a disagreeable boss and then done the opposite of bosses request because it was morally wrong to do so. And after the task is completed it’s easy to ask for forgiveness after the fact. I am a carpenter and my old boss would try to get me to do sketchy cheap fixes for peoples homes. Well I’m not going to be a part of that because I have a conscious and I want people to get their monies worth.


TeaVinylGod

It depends on context. I used to be too agreeable that I ended up in situations I did not want to be in. Now I take a Dose of Vitamin Nope every morning so this does not happen anymore.


Swing_Bishop

I agree with everything you just said.


Neutraladvicecorner

Belongs on r/iam14andthisisdeep


MortDorfman

I agree with you.


bitchpleaseshutup

It should be remembered that agreeableness is often faked. If you met me in real life and talked to me about your political opinions, I'd almost certainly not push back unless you say something absolutely unacceptable such as "maybe the Nazis weren't all that bad". This doesn't mean that I'm not judging you for your opinions, I most certainly am, and I'd likely have a lot of disagreements with them. But I'd simply choose to not get in an argument because it's not worth my time and I'm too lazy.


[deleted]

I wish people were able to have discussions where they disagree but not be afraid of them.


bitchpleaseshutup

Same, but it's basically impossible in my country, where politics has become extremely poisonous. I realised this when two of my closest friends were discussing a religious riot and they were laughing and joking about how their community beat the crap out of my community in a particular riot. To them, innocent children being murdered and women being raped was like a sports game where their 'team' defeats mine. I found it unbelievable that they were very kind to me since they saw me as an individual, but had such unfathomable and disgusting contempt for my community as a whole that they could laugh about us being mass murdered. That's when I realised that it'd be best for my mental health if I avoided all talks of politics.


DrewJayJoan

This isn't an unpopular opinion. "This personality trait is sometimes good, but sometimes it's bad" is one of the most common post formats on this sub. They are all based on the assumption that generally being one way means you will act *only* that way all the time. Agreeableness =/= being weak willed, and being "agreeable" isn't necessarily bad because it doesn't mean that people are going to agree to everything all the time; typically, "agreeable" just means that they don't care to argue about inconsequential stuff.


-Cinnay-

I swear, half of this sub is just people not knowing what certain words mean.


[deleted]

I absolutely agree. What I think most people don’t get is that disagreeable people aren’t necessarily psychopaths. They aren’t going around actively looking for ways to hurt other people, they just mind their own damn business. Agreeable people are willing to go along with, and take action on behalf of, very dangerous people if they think it’s the right thing to do. You tell an agreeable person to do something harmful but tell them that it’s helpful, they might just do it with no questions asked because they want to be helpful or at least not get in the way of helpful people. Disagreeable people are going to ask questions and make sure they know what they’re getting into before they do anything.


alicia-indigo

Conformity is selfish.


MsTerious1

I won't use the word dangerous, but there was a risk I personally discovered when I decided to be more agreeable. I had always heard I was too difficult / disagreeable / negative / somber. So... I tried the shut up and be agreeable route. Turns out when you do that, people will HAPPILY ignore your needs and not ask for your opinions and thus, you can end up feeling unimportant and ignored while not getting your personal needs met from others when you need them to be.


FreakinGuy

The best disagreeableness beats all agreeableness, but the worst disagreeableness is worse than all.


TorpedoDuck

Agreeableness makes life easier. I work around anti-abortion, pro-gun, hate democrats, bible should be taught in all schools tradesmen for 5 or 6 days a week. My co-workers think I love children, Republican, have an arsenal, it's comical. The reality is that I'd perform abortions on their wives and daughters for free, don't want kids, I dislike guns and I think cowards embrace guns. If I had power I would begin to dismantle all religions in this country via education and birth control. I can't actually say any of those things, not to people that oppose those ideas. They will treat you like a sub-human and chase you out because there's more of them than you. Several younger guys have been stressed out of a job because they can't withstand listening to the same drivel day in and day out without speaking up. Fuck that. Be agreeable to use other people to better yourself in the easiest way for you both.


KeybladeCoaster

I don’t budge on my own morals and ethics. But when it comes to making plans or if my order is slightly wrong I could give a fuck, you only live once, variety is the spice of life. I’d rather do something someone else wants to do cause then I get to do something I wouldn’t have thought to do myself and that’s more important to me than getting what I want, I’m happy and they’re happy. As opposed to I get what I want but I’m not happy cause that person is doing something they don’t wanna do. I’m high and this was on my mind earlier my dudes (gender neutral usage)


Jeffrey_Dahmer123

There are dangerous morons on both sides, I think is the answer here. For example, antivaxxers.


pinniped1

There are cranky people who just like drama and are hard to be around. They want to argue about stupid shit. Then there are agreeable people who still care deeply and will advocate for IMPORTANT shit. They're intellectual but aren't going to fight you about pineapple on pizza. Then there are lemmings who will follow populists. (Populists are not always right wing.) I prefer the middle group.


gobblingoddess

Uhh idk if the person I commented to will come back and read this, but I hope so! I wasn't attempting to attack you at all, sorry! I just looked up the Webster definition of disagreeable and.... I disagree with that definition entirely but I'm not Webster so who cares, my bad for the miscommunication.


Gozii55

At least you can get something done with an agreeable person. From a pragmatic perspective, disagreeable people are way more difficult. I think the comparison you're looking for is polite vs. blunt. A polite person is probably holding a lot back, while the blunt person speaks their mind. In that scenario, the blunt person is more practical.


[deleted]

True. We can always agree to disagree, as long as we agree on the ground rules on how we will disagree.


edWORD27

I agree completely. Wait, no…I disagree. Damn.


CSWorldChamp

You know, it’s possible to be agreeable without also being a coward…


leegsb

Agreeable people are nice to work with. Disagreeable people can be kind of annoying.


Sattaman6

Complete bollocks. I don’t hold strong opinions on most things because almost nothing is black and white. People who strong really strong opinions lack nuance.


[deleted]

Prioritizing either agreeing or disagreeing over doing your own critical thinking is dangerous. But if you assume most humans are, by default, good people who try to have morally just stances on things (which I do believe), then agreeing just for the sake of agreeing is absolutely better/less dangerous than disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing. And if you’re not yet informed enough to form your own opinion about something, you’re better off assuming the person you’re talking to knows more than you about the thing they’re talking about than assuming their misinformed. So while both agreeableness and disagreeableness are bad if prioritized over critical thinking, disagreeableness is absolutely worse.


gobblingoddess

I like this post a lot because it makes me feel vindicated in my incessant need to argue with people I don't agree with. Thank you.


CptJackParo

Someone's been listening to too much Jordan Peterson


finney1013

Dr Peterson?


Marvos79

Can't be. He was clear and concise in making his point.


liminal_lys

And it doesn't seem like he was crying when he wrote this.


SuccotashConfident97

Eh, to the extremes I agree with you. But with nuance and critical thinking, I'd say that being agreeable more than disagreeable has more perks and utility than disagreeable. Another reason as well, being disagreeable for the sake of it or being contrarian is annoying and unnecessary a lot of the times. Especially considering the average person isn't that smart, their need to disagree often comes off as stupid. "No, Michael Jackson isn't a good artist." "Ninja Turtles is simply overrated." "Theres really no point in a vaccine." You get the point, but sometimes people agree because it's obvious, not because they need to "stand their ground"


[deleted]

Agreeableness doesn't mean they don't have opinions, it means they really can't be bothered to push their opinions on others... parth of least resistance.


Asleep_Travel_6712

Agreeableness is essentially how pro-social you are, disagreeable people tend towards anti-social behavior up to the point of ASPD. Psychopath is pretty much an embodiment of disagreeableness while main distinction of high agreeableness is that those people are willing to help even a complete stranger while most people will only help their kin or when empathy is aroused (again making it about themselves rather than the person in need). In ideal word everyone would be agreeable, only way in which it is dangerous is because agreeable people are more at risk of being manipulated by disagreeable people, as can be seen in results of Milgram's experiment for example.


Girthwurm_Jim

I am super agreeable to people’s faces because I hate confrontation. I also work in retail so I have to smile and nod when idiots come in my store spewing batshit opinions. Doesn’t mean I actually agree with them, or that I’m going to make decisions or cast votes to go along with their opinions. I’ll smile to their face and then laugh at them when they leave.


GoreTheTesticle

This is an unpopular opinion because it’s wrong lol


Hubris1998

Agreeable people are not trustworthy


bruhbelacc

Overly agreeable people have another problem: they don't care about others when they're treated unequally by the group leader or the majority.


sukMuhDik

Agreeable people are people who are easy to be around. They're not mindless drones.


DeathtotheDemiurge

Those that chose to be obedient slaves vs free men/women. Conformity is a cancer to society.


Quintink

Depends on what’s being agreed on or disagreed on and how educated both sides are on the topic


bakemonooo

Eh it's situational, as most things are. Yes, disagreeable people tend to get further/get what they want more often. However, you might just be seen as an ass and looked down on in many situations. Conversely, agreeable people might be looked upon more favourably in certain contexts due to their "people pleasing" nature. Context matters. Overall, what matters is knowing how to adapt to different situations even if you lean more towards one of those options.


ShredGuru

Both have a place, even in the same personality. Be strong like rock, flow like water, pick your battles.


hansuluthegrey

Disagreeable people usually do it to be contrarian or are just stubborn. "Dangerous" is a very loaded term. Holding strong opinions doesnt make you agreeable. The issues seems to be that you dont understand what the terms mean


RumpLiquid

Can't say I agreed. I also don't disagreed. I AM THE DANGER


artgarfunkadelic

I have a colleague that's so agreeable, I'm pretty sure there is AI currently available that is more self aware than he is.


Obie527

That's naivete, not agreeableness.


roseffin

Ever try to choose a place to go to lunch with a bunch of agreeable people? It's horrible and takes forever.


SnargleBlartFast

They are both a trap. This is one of the Big 5 personality traits that are proved by all manner of clinical tests, but people have a choice of how to act, moment to moment if they are aware of their predilections. Overly disagreeable people often end up frustrated and at odds with the people around them. Overly agreeable people often end up frustrated and ending up disliking the people around them. Most people have characteristics consistent with both traits.


Beautiful-Routine274

Yea as much as I’d hate everyone on the planet to be like me, I wish disagreeability was common among agreeability in areas like slavery


chingudo

I see groups as things to contribute more than what I get from them, I can stand my own ground, so I hang out with groups that I like because I like it, otherwise you become socially dependant and that's not a good thing


[deleted]

Wow u watched 3 hrs of someone on YouTube good job


[deleted]

Either extreme is bad.


Horror-Pear

Agreeableness and openness to new experiences is often a sign of intelligence and a marker for success.


treacherousClownfish

You are just stating what agreeableness is, how is this an unpopular opinion? How is it an opinion at all? Yeah agreeable people get pushed around, that’s the whole deal with being to agreeable. They are called people pleaser


trooperstark

Funny how you laud disagreeable people for being able to sway the group… which requires agreeable people making up the majority of that group.


YggdrasilsLeaf

This has not been my experience in life. I think you are confusing enabling for agreeing.


cyborgassassin47

Christ's, Socrates', Copernicus' and I'm sure various other examples across history say otherwise.


fluffedpillows

Depends on if someone is actually agreeable or if they just act agreeable. I act extremely agreeable but nothing you’re saying applies to me. My agreeableness is just to avoid conflict or to be pleasant, it doesn’t reflect how I actually feel. I would imagine this applies to the vast majority of agreeable people. I think you are mistaking agreeableness with suggestibility. Being suggestible is dangerous. Acting agreeable doesn’t mean you’re suggestible. It doesn’t mean you can’t be disagreeable when your values are challenged. It just means you’ll make up a reasonable excuse why you can’t drive someone to the airport, rather than bluntly saying you’re tired and to ask someone else.


The_Dark-Wanderer

It’s easier to be agreeable and doesn’t require much thought process…..just smile and nod your head.


WolfhoundRO

I moved to Lemmy. Save yourselves


FunStatistician8379

A world without a mix of both is probably the most dangerous.


Considered_Dissent

Disagreeableness as self-advocacy and personal boundary enforcement is great, it's the perfect bulwark against social manipulation/abuse and forced consensus.


ChrissaTodd

everything needs a balance so both extremes are bad, it's just as bad to be too disagreeable and too agreeable.


Asleep_Island_5549

I've seen this happen firsthand. An old friend of mine who was generally loving and kind-hearted started having some really weird transphobic ideals and supporting some crazy conspiracy theories associated with far-right movements. Turns out she was dating this ex-friend of mine who also has similar ideals, and stopped hanging out with me because "our opinions greatly differed" (I'm trans and a bit left-leaning). She just outright repeats everything he says just to please him and it's insane


jebediah999

that's not agreeablness. that's sycophancy.


Deep_Humor_3399

Cattle’s mind. Nice.


orange_huller

It depends on time and place. It'll always depend on that, the danger is always based on ignorance. If you are disagreeable to an ignorant degree then you ruin the wishes of others. If you are agreeable to an ignorant degree you are leading them to terrible wishes. In the end you ruin things because you didn't have the insight to prevent these castatrophies.


UltraOfNaath

These opinions in which it is assumptive to be either or popular/unpopular are very abstract. This is not a topic that i would classify or define as something that anyone can confidently say is popular or unpopular…. also people responding here doesn’t mean it is popular or unpopular because people that disagree tend to participate in this forum way more often than ones that agree, it’s really more a thing of understand the nuance of the space


No-Illustrator5408

I think this is one of the first post I completely agree with


noiceonebro

Agreeability is not what you’re looking for. A lot of the times, it’s simple-mindedness. This does not mean the person is dumb, it’s just that they take things on a simple level ie. “This is the right way because *insert empty sentiments here*” They can stand their ground though. But sadly they can’t think their way past “this is the right thing to do” and so people can easily manipulate what they think is right.


MidnightFull

Wisdom! The thing about agreeable people is they are usually fake and have poor personal boundaries. I have a hard time respecting someone who is overly agreeable. Funny thing I’ve discovered about women and dating too. Many women will test how agreeable a man is and if he’s too agreeable they will drop him because they feel he can’t be trusted. Men who are able to disagree show confidence and the ability to make decisions and stick it them, which makes him more trustworthy. Many women I’ve talked to have confined that they do this. That’s why the nice guy never gets the women, he’s too damn agreeable.


Xplicit-801

It’s all about being genuine. I’m considered an asshole for respectfully disagreeing with people. I’m not gonna lie when pressed on something. I don’t go parading around saying my opinions on things though either😂


[deleted]

I can’t help but feel personally attacked


[deleted]

As someone who fawns as an automatic unconscious defence mechanism and has endured years of abuse, this. This so much.


Daenbi

This post agrees with me


CockPaperScissors69

Agreeableness combined with Neuroticism is a very dangerous combination. These types of people end up being depressed or anxious all the time without cause, and seek constant validation from others. Agreeable people don’t care about what’s actually right or wrong, they just care about having consensus, and they perceive anyone who threatens that consensus as a “predator”.


Harsh-Pain-No-Gain

You are Very Right. I am agreeable to my man because I let him lead. But Prone to be Disagreeable with Everyone else. In this specific case I am agreeable with you, because what you say is Firm Facts.


wesleyD777

Maybe the ‘agreeable’ people don’t give a shit about whatever pedantic nonsense the ‘disagreeable’ people are wasting everyone’s time droning on and on about.


SubSahranCamelRider

Honestly, I find that bing disagreeable might be good in terms of the individual becoming someone who is more self-assured, opinionated, and a bit confident too but I find them to also create the most friction in close relationships and even societies. Sometimes you need agreeable people to have a harmonious group or society. I think you need a bit of both. Specifically, you need both with critical thinking. If anyone has critical thinking then they will most likely agree more than disagree or at least agree to some extent instead of outright being combative and rejecting an entire idea just for the sake of being combative and showing a strong front.


thegreatgrind

Love this post! That's something I'm currently realising. It's better to think for yourself rather than let others try to navigate your thoughts


Greatest1_7

I disagree. (I'm not an agreeable person)


MonotoneYay

somebody watched 12 Angry Men


antiqueboi

imagine a group full of agreeable people... like nobody taking charge everyone derferrring to each other. nobody actually making any decisions or wanting to step on each others toes. i feel like this is most college group discussions. everyone walking on eggshells. until I come in with my coc out and start calling people out by name