Do we need rebellion or conflict to grow or mature? | INFJ Forum

Do we need rebellion or conflict to grow or mature?

Gaze

Gaze

Donor
Sep 5, 2009
28,265
44,736
1,906
MBTI
INFPishy
For younger and older, do we need rebellion or conflict to grow or mature?

There's a strong belief we have in our culture, that someone must struggle through pain, conflict, or rebellion and experience "growing pains" in order to grow and mature? Is this necessarily true?

Inspired by post made by a member in another thread.
 
Last edited:
I think it's true, but too much conflict can be destructive.
 
"With agreement you find comfort, with conflict you find growth"

The key to personal growth is to find a balance between the two. You life shouldn't be a constant fight, but nor should it be stagnant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norton
Not probably relevant, but it was found that children who are bullied do not build character from it but are instead made psychologically worse off well into adulthood and maybe forever. Thinner skinned was a phrase used, as well as making them more withdrawn and less able to cope with future bullying.
 
DoveAlexa said:
Not probably relevant, but it was found that children who are bullied do not build character from it but are instead made psychologically worse off well into adulthood and maybe forever. Thinner skinned was a phrase used, as well as making them more withdrawn and less able to cope with future bullying.
Click to expand...

Yep. Kinda true unfortunately. And standing up to a bully doesn't always work. Sometimes, it just makes you a bigger and more obvious target.
 
Last edited:
Res said:
Yep. Kinda true unfortunately. And standing up to a bully doesn't always work. Sometimes, it just makes you a bigger and more obvious target.
Click to expand...
Especially since most bullies aren't loners, they travel in packs of close friends. Most of the people who get picked on are either totally alone or with unsupportive/cowardly friends.
 
The idea that "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is originally from Nietzsche. We seem to have internalized it in some regards, but I personally don't believe it. I think that what doesn't kill you, the conflict or the conflict that sparks the rebellion doesn't make you stronger; I think it makes you more vulnerable for the next assault, which will then be more likely to kill you (either metaphorically or literally).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze
There's healthy stress and there's unhealthy stress. I imagine that bullying could lead to something like PTSD because bullying attacks a person's soul. However, the stresses of performing a solo in front of an audience or, for an introvert, joining a club or organization to meet people and do good work, are healthy stresses. Choosing to move out of your "comfort zone" willfully after having weighed the potential risks and benefits is good. Being dragged or, otherwise, coerced unwillingly out of your comfort zone is destructive.
 
I think it depends on the situation and how extreme of a rebellious response we're talking about here.

If you're boxed in by authoritative parameters (parents, teachers, a rigid belief system) to the point where your independence is completely squashed, a certain amount of rebellion and the conflict arising from it might give you the better opportunity for growth and developing your self esteem than the more stifling alternative. Then there's rebelling because you just don't like being told what to do or because you're expected to rebel. For example, your mother mildly tells you to do your homework and you throw a tantrum and go do some hard drugs in response... well, no, you're probably not going to be better off than the kid who quietly complies.
 
Norton said:
There's healthy stress and there's unhealthy stress. I imagine that bullying could lead to something like PTSD because bullying attacks a person's soul. However, the stresses of performing a solo in front of an audience or, for an introvert, joining a club or organization to meet people and do good work, are healthy stresses. Choosing to move out of your "comfort zone" willfully after having weighed the potential risks and benefits is good. Being dragged or, otherwise, coerced unwillingly out of your comfort zone is destructive.
Click to expand...

Problem is, too many people confuse the two types of stress. They confuse bad stress with good outcomes because there's the belief that all stress is good for us in some way. On the other hand, good stress can have positive effects for one person but negative effects for another. So hypothetically, experiencing conflict as a teen - and fighting for independence may be a good thing to develop independence, but continued fighting or quarrelling can destroy parents as a couple.
 
Last edited:
Norton said:
There's healthy stress and there's unhealthy stress. I imagine that bullying could lead to something like PTSD because bullying attacks a person's soul. However, the stresses of performing a solo in front of an audience or, for an introvert, joining a club or organization to meet people and do good work, are healthy stresses. Choosing to move out of your "comfort zone" willfully after having weighed the potential risks and benefits is good. Being dragged or, otherwise, coerced unwillingly out of your comfort zone is destructive.
Click to expand...

that's a good point. it would have a completely different psychological effect if you chose your stresses after careful deliberation, as opposed to having them chosen for you (as in bullying). bullied kids really have no control over the bullying, which probably just makes them feel powerless.
 
tbh, i think many people survive, grow, mature, or thrive inspite of conflict or pain, not necessarily because of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sassafras
Yes, that's why I'm waging a secret war against the mods.
 
Res said:
For younger and older, do we need rebellion and conflict to grow or mature?

There's a strong belief we have in our culture, that someone must struggle through pain, conflict, or rebellion and experience "growing pains" in order to grow and mature? Is this necessarily true?
Click to expand...

Rebellion is a tactic, nothing more. Someone who rebels for a long period of time, is a rebel. The point here is that one mus always know why one is rebelling or for what purpose or principle. Someone who rebels just for the sake of being a contrarian or just for validation or vanity isn't going to last a long time.

On a more general level, nobody starts where they want to end up. Therefore, a process of change must take place. Sometimes the strategy is trial and error, sometimes it's formulating a set of principles, most of the time is a mixture of both. The important thing is to understand that rebellion is best used in defense of principles.

There are also good and bad ways to rebel. Rebelling with violence is a means to scorch the earth or some other battlefield. Rebelling with love is a way to repair or bring about understanding without the need of the other's approval. In short, it's defending boundaries. Ghandi comes to mind as an example of a loving rebellion.

---

Nobody really starts from where they want to end up. Therefore, change is necessary. Some change is easy, some change is hard. But if you really want to reach your goal, then you must "pay the price" or make those hard changes. For instance, if you have a strong prejudice against making right turns and you're stuck in a round about or a cul de sac, then you must make that hard change and make that right turn to get out and reach your destination.

Some of the most difficult changes that humans face are the ones which are in conflict between nurture and nature. The all vary like abstaining from a chocolate candy sundae, to solving the existential crisis of "survival instinct" vs "we'll all gonna die anyway". Some of the more difficult ones are overcoming fear/death, and coming to realize that validation can only come from within.

---

Protect your principles. If you must, rebel with love and understanding, otherwise the other side will see it as an unprovoked attack. It's about a sense of justice with respect to a set of held principles.
 
Last edited:
Res said:
tbh, i think many people survive, grow, mature, or thrive inspite of conflict or rebellion, not necessarily because of it.
Click to expand...

Oh I wasn't suggesting that they do. I was specifically addressing the notion that it's more beneficial for teenagers to rebel; this thread was inspired by acd's mention of such a study related to this premise, was it not?
 
TheDaringHatTrick said:
Oh I wasn't suggesting that they do. I was specifically addressing the notion that it's more beneficial for teenagers to rebel; this thread was inspired by acd's mention of such a study related to this premise, was it not?
Click to expand...

No, i wasn't responding to your post. I was just making a general statement. No worries.
 
durentu said:
On a more general level, nobody starts where they want to end up. Therefore, a process of change must take place. Sometimes the strategy is trial and error, sometimes it's formulating a set of principles, most of the time is a mixture of both. The important thing is to understand that rebellion is best used in defense of principles.

---

Nobody really starts from where they want to end up. Therefore, change is necessary. Some change is easy, some change is hard. But if you really want to reach your goal, then you must "pay the price" or make those hard changes. For instance, if you have a strong prejudice against making right turns and you're stuck in a round about or a cul de sac, then you must make that hard change and make that right turn to get out and reach your destination.
Click to expand...

I think making difficult choices can be good in that you learn to make decisions, and learn from the consequences of making one choice v. another. But it's having to make the choice which allows learning. I'm not sure that the simple act of experiencing a conflict necessarily makes someone better off.
 
Last edited:
Res said:
tbh, i think many people survive, grow, mature, or thrive inspite of conflict or pain, not necessarily because of it.
Click to expand...


Interesting perspective. What makes you think that?
 
Res said:
I think making difficult choices can be good in that you learn to make decisions, and understand the consequences of making one choice v. another. But it's having to make the choice which allows to learn. I'm not sure though whether the simple act of experiencing a conflict makes someone better off.
Click to expand...

Matter of correction. People don't learn from making decisions. People learn from experiencing bad results.

Experiencing a conflict is meaningless unless it's applied in a framework of justice or a set of principles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back