• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Do you argue to win or to lose?

Mjäll said:
Sure, it happens. I'm not very cynical about that myself - just referencing a common attitude!

If someone openly changes his/her mind after being defeated, that is a welcome surprise. Usually they stop arguing or keep on producing non-arguments in the hope of getting the last word and demonstrating fake power to a dumb emotional mob.
Click to expand...
That is why I seek those surprises.

I B Greedy.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
Yes, that is why I ask questions, but you are not answering them.

I gain no answer, and without your bottom line, I refuse to waste time in the definitions of words.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

I was responding to your arguments without responding to your rhetorical questions. I will now respond to them, because you insist:

What one may gain from winning: Having convinced, and/or a sense of victory. You are in no way obliged to think this gain is a better gain than knowledge. Debate is in no way obliged to offer gains that are better than learning.

What the paramount reason for debates is: Pitting opinions against each other, seeing what case is the strongest, convincing an audience.

(Both of these answers are implicit in my previous posts and also implicit in the concepts themselves - the questions are unnecessary and irrelevant)

I note that you are not responding to my argument at all, even while making a point of details i'm not responding to. You are in the process of losing this argument. This makes perfect sense, since you consider losing winning. Now you will gain the knowledge of what i'm telling you. Win!
 
Last edited:
Mjäll said:
I was responding to your arguments without responding to your rhetorical questions. I will now respond to them, because you insist:

What one may gain from winning: Having convinced, and/or a sense of victory. You are in no way obliged to think this gain is a better gain than knowledge. Debate is in no way obliged to offer gains that are better than learning.

What the paramount reason for debates is: Pitting opinions against each other, seeing what case is the strongest, convincing an audience.

(Both of these answers are implicit in my previous posts and also implicit in the concepts themselves - the questions are unnecessary and irrelevant)

I note that you are not responding to my argument at all, even while making a point of details i'm not responding to. You are in the process of losing this argument. This makes perfect sense, since you consider losing winning. Now you will gain the knowledge of what i'm telling you. Win!
Click to expand...
Wow. All about the fight and not adding to knowledge or wisdom.

Ok.

I think having a goal or gain in knowledge after losing, as you think I have, is the icing on the cake, so to speak.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
Wow. All about the fight and not adding to knowledge or wisdom.

Ok.

I think having a goal or gain in knowledge after losing, as you think I have, is the icing on the cake, so to speak.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

How did you conclude i'm "all about the fight" and why does it matter?

And why do you not follow your own logic and now agree with me and my winning argument after having learned from your defeat?
 
I think its best to not start most conversations. Life is too short to be barking with a dog. Unless it's for big money in short time, barking isn't worth it.Stick to stable bussiness.
 
Mjäll said:
How did you conclude i'm "all about the fight" and why does it matter?

And why do you not follow your own logic and now agree with me and my winning argument after having learned from your defeat?
Click to expand...
Your "What one may gain from winning: Having convinced, and/or a sense of victory." is why I concluded the way I did.

One wins an argument for respect of thinking first, not a sense of victory, although at the rather un-understood part of us, at depth of emotional thinking, we may not be able to be sure of anything.

Your last speaks of a winning argument, but I speak of who profits from it.

Regards
DL
 
Veritas Sleep said:
I think its best to not start most conversations. Life is too short to be barking with a dog. Unless it's for big money in short time, barking isn't worth it.Stick to stable bussiness.
Click to expand...
I see your words as evil, if you are applying them to not chat about our oppressed and persecuted by our wonderful religions.

Insert gays and women harmed by homophobic and misogynous religions to this quote. You should get an idea of what you should be doing with the homophobic and misogynous mainstream religions if you live by the golden rule.

Martin Niemöller
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
Your "What one may gain from winning: Having convinced, and/or a sense of victory." is why I concluded the way I did.

One wins an argument for respect of thinking first, not a sense of victory, although at the rather un-understood part of us, at depth of emotional thinking, we may not be able to be sure of anything.

Your last speaks of a winning argument, but I speak of who profits from it.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

You're drawing unnecessary conclusions. I'm about both the fight and a deep respect for truth and logic. Hence why i'm arguing against your absurdity. This is still irrelevant.

One wins an argument by winning the argument, not by having respect for thinking, although the correlation is likely high.

You are capable of being a dick and incapable of presenting valid arguments. Your "respect for thinking" is fake, a mere identity token.
 
Mjäll said:
You're drawing unnecessary conclusions. I'm about both the fight and a deep respect for truth and logic. Hence why i'm arguing against your absurdity. This is still irrelevant.

One wins an argument by winning the argument, not by having respect for thinking, although the correlation is likely high.

You are capable of being a dick and incapable of presenting valid arguments. Your "respect for thinking" is fake, a mere identity token.
Click to expand...
Shove your personal shit back into your mouth.

regards
DL
 
Snd what if you change the style from arguing to dialogos? It would be akin changing from boxing to dancing. Just a thought.
 
I usually walk away with a paradoxical shift.
Arguments seem such a banal phenom
Beaming up
jk
lol
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
Do you argue to win or to lose?

I see many feisty debates and apologetics, with little potential for a happy conclusion and wondered what motivates us all.

Preach, teach, or learn comes to mind.

Do you want to loser arguments or win them?

Which gives you the most pleasure and pain?

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
I argue to learn. Hopefully the debate teaches me something new. Then it was valuable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top