People often confuse discussions with argument. The differences can be subtle. One form of communication is productive while the other is not.
When you discuss something, you have a conversation with another person. One party speaks while the other actively listens and attempts to understand the other parties point of view with the objective to find common ground and peaceful resolution.
When you argue, you talk AT them and instead of actively listening, you spend that time formulating a counter-argument and judging them.Sometimes people are unable to actively engage and listen without invalidating you. By invalidating your point of view, they deflect your point of view and convince themselves their point of view is the only valid one. Valid points of view often get deflected when winning is more important than understanding another point of view. This not only ensures that the conversation does not progressive positively, but it often distorts facts and is a very dysfunctional way of navigating relationships.
Destructive deflections is a form of projection that serves one purpose: to invalidate your point of view and escape accountability. Destructive deflections serve as diversionary tactics so that one’s own point of view, one’s facts, remain unchallenged and unquestioned. When someone deflects, they put up a wall that communicates that whatever you say or do will not get through to them, truth be damned. They may even tell themselves the wall is there to protect them from something that isn’t worth their time and emotional energy. Often, it is because there is some truth about their own actions that they are unwilling to face. They would prefer to delude themselves. They deny the veracity of other’s points of view in hopes of “winning”—which really, is fear, insecurity and sometimes self-loathing cracking through.