“I am sorry, Uncle, as I did not find any space for parking despite searching for 30 minutes and I had 15 minutes of work, I parked here and left.”
“You guys don’t have any sense of what emergencies can occur due to your stupidity. You just think about yourself, not anybody else.”
An argument in any context is a war on assumptions. It is a struggle against preconceived notions and biases. You, as a party in any argument or quarrel, respond to what you think the other person is thinking, what context the person is in, and where he wants to go with it. The words used in the quarrel are usually what trigger the response, but they are the most innocent party in the entire situation, despite their role in escalating the conflict.
Confused! Let me give a recent example of a similar situation that may help clarify.
I recently went to Jayanagar in Bangalore for a small shopping trip. I was unable to find a place to park, so after spending a lot of time searching, I parked it in front of one house, which looked locked as it was dark and no vehicle seemed inside the house. Considering my plan to do that shopping in 15 minutes, I thought I could come back even before anyone came. . I went ahead with my plan and confidently walked away towards the shopping area, hoping to return soon.
It took me more than 15 minutes to finish my shopping, and I rushed towards my vehicle, huffing and puffing.
The moment I reached and was about to take my car out, one elderly gentleman came out of the house shouting. “How could you park your vehicle in front of my driveway?” He started explaining all the inconveniences he had during this time because of me. I came out of the car out of courtesy and apologized for the mistake. He seemed uncontrollable, and he began yelling even louder. I maintained my calm, continued to apologize, and explained that I would make sure to be more careful in the future. He told me not just for his house; I should never park my vehicle in front of anybody’s house, as it can cause an emergency situation. I acknowledged it and apologized again.
I expected him to calm down, but he seemed to be getting more and more angry and had no words to express his frustration. He started talking about today’s society not caring about others and how outsiders are making the city unlivable, and throughout the entire process, he was looking for me to say something that could fuel the argument further. I remained silent and kept observing him, as humans fascinate me more than anything else. When he heard no other word than sorry from me, he started mentioning how’sorry’ as a word is most misused and has lost its meaning, and how I should not use that word but rather change my attitude and behavior and work on my value system. Now it started hurting me, but once again, I told my mind that right now I am on a research project and researching this gentleman’s inner thought process. To calm him down,
At this point, I tried to hold his hand and seek forgiveness. And that’s when I saw the transition happen. He was still upset but did not want to discuss it any further. He closed the door and went inside his house.
While I have no doubt that I made a mistake that could have been a grave error, and I must not repeat that, I also learned more about how the mind plays a game with us when we are outraged.
Based on the incident, here are three key insights into how the human mind works during arguments:
1. Projection of Past Experiences:
The elderly gentleman’s reaction seems disproportionate to the immediate situation. His comments about “today’s society” and “outsiders making the city unlivable” suggest he’s projecting past experiences and broader frustrations onto this specific incident. The human mind often uses current conflicts as an outlet for accumulated stress or unresolved issues from the past.
2. Escalation in the Absence of Expected Reactions:
When I remained calm and apologetic, the man’s anger intensified rather than diminished. This demonstrates how the human mind can sometimes escalate a conflict when it doesn’t receive the expected pushback. My calmness might have frustrated his subconscious desire for a more dramatic confrontation, leading him to amp up his rhetoric to provoke a reaction.
3. The Power of Physical Touch in De-escalation:
The turning point came when I attempted to hold his hand. This physical gesture seemed to break the cycle of verbal aggression. It highlights how the human mind can rapidly shift gears when presented with unexpected, non-verbal cues. Physical touch, when appropriate and consensual, can bypass the logical centers of the brain and appeal directly to our emotional core, often diffusing tension more effectively than words alone.
These observations reveal the complex interplay of emotions, expectations, and non-verbal communication in human conflicts. They underscore how arguments are often about much more than the immediate issue at hand, reflecting deeper psychological needs and patterns.
Life as Sakti 