Do we need rebellion or conflict to grow or mature?

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.

 

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 Thinner skinned was a phrase used, as well as making them more withdrawn and less able to cope with future bullying.

 

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).

 

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.

 

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.

 

Yes, that's why I'm waging a secret war against the mods.

 

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.

 

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?

 

Ah, okay

 

Interesting perspective. What makes you think that?

 

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.