Talkboards woiuld get very thin if we constantly simply agreed to differ. I'm happy to say that once differences are explored; not so much as a replacement for the debate.

Some of the reasons I gave originally for disagreement need to be explored.

An obvious and common one is lack of information or straight misinformation. Who is going to agree to differ you think uninformerd/misinformed?

Others include illogicality, failing to understand what the other has said or meant, and a dangerous view, directly or by implication. Same as in last sentence; e.g. if you think the other is illogical, are you really going to be happy to differ?

And where something like cognitive dissonance comes into play, there can be a real stale-mate/endless debating loops.

The time I mentioned 'frustration' was with regard to arguing with people who take things personally when that was not in the intention. I don't, of course, see that as a problem of my ego.

I do find that periodically I have withdrawn from discussion feeling a need to get a perspective on things. Sometimes in doing that that I have been in error. When that has happened [on other boards] i have said so.

I say again, a reading of e.g. Gentlemen's Agreement is a good corrective to not challenging what should be challenged.

Debates, say here, can often go on because one or the other cannot grasp something or other. Or because the subject or point is important. And we don't have an ultimate judge to sort out what is going on.

It can also take a while, if ever, for one or both sides to see that the other is arguing with their own picture of the other rather than the real other.