• 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?

iridescentblack said:
So for people who argue, I wonder... what are you escaping, running from, or trying to hide by trying to prove you're right all the time?
Click to expand...

You named it. I argue to win and prove myself right, but hope to lose so as to self-correct to a better position.

It is more of a running into school to either show ones worth, or be corrected.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
What have you learned from pissed off people, other than they do not like to be challenged?

In your psychological studies, what does your own ways tell you of your personality?

For instance; do you acknowledge a loss and accept correction?

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
I have often learned that whatever question I just asked was unappropriate, and I think it helps me in general be better at conversations. I like strict rules, and human contact is a bit "wishy washy", so I write it all down. I have a little book I carry around with me, where I write down what I have learned.

From a neurological standpoint it tells me that I have issues understanding social cues due to my Aspergers. It does not have much to do with my psyche, other than the fact that I'm very curious about everything, with the changed detail that if I'm wondering about something, I'm going to ask about it. Be that asking people if they regularly have diarrhea because of their diet, or if they like listening to music. Well, by now I have ofc learned that excrement is not a dinner table discussion, but it's hard to decipher what is OK and what is not sometimes.

Also, I always accept correction, I rely on it, even if I don't understand it. I can't just run around explaining to everyone why I behave like I do, so it is important that said behaviour is reduced to a minimum. There's many things I just don't speak about because someone at some point told me that's something you do not speak about. I usually just accept it
 
December Flower said:
I have often learned that whatever question I just asked was unappropriate,
Click to expand...

I do not recognize such a thing. Seeking answers is always appropriate.

I would chastise you the way Yahweh chastised Adam. "Who told you you were naked,' ---- meaning, --- who was the fool who told you your question was inappropriate?

Regards
DL
 
dalpat077 said:
Agreed. And there's no shame at all in being proven wrong and admitting as such and apologizing (should an apology be necessary).

Sadly there's not too many people, not that I personally know of anyway, that'd actually come out and say "hey I was wrong". Let alone fucking apologize (if necessary).

I suppose there's some or the other study on this shit as well. In my experience anyway: only somebody that's got their shit together and has confidence in themselves is capable of admitting that they're wrong (and apologizing if necessary). To the rest it seems as though it's perceived as being a weakness and which, in most cases, actually couldn't be further from the truth.
Click to expand...
No weakness if you proved you wrong its actually another strength to be man enough and say sorry .
 
Surely there's no point in arguing unless you intend to win? (i.e. persuade the other party that your opinion is 'correct')

Arguing in the hope of being proven wrong seems like a waste of time to me...
 
Firstly I didn't want to write in this thread but as @Gnostic Bishop replied in another one I will give my take.

If communication level is "arguing" then learning is (for my perception of the words "arguing" and "learning") already not possible.

I like to learn so I tend not to argue. Unfortunately I do argue sometimes and then regret it afterwards. So much wasted energy... Communicating to learn is what I am after the most. I don't think that excessive stubbornness that leads in The Land of Arguing is efficient way of learning anything. It's like banging with ones head in the wall so the other side could find out how much it hurts.

But maybe I am dividing "communication" from "arguing" too much?
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
I do not recognize such a thing. Seeking answers is always appropriate.

I would chastise you the way Yahweh chastised Adam. "Who told you you were naked,' ---- meaning, --- who was the fool who told you your question was inappropriate?

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
Well I do agree with you, I think, but mankind so often does not, and I just play by their rules, even if I cannot understand them.

Sadly I have lost friendships due to my questions or the things I blurt out. I've often been told that I am too direct, and that I should watch what I say.
I've often experienced that it's fun for people for a time, but at some point some remark is too much.

I think what makes the things I say so inappropriate is that they hurt or shame others. That's why I'm doing my best to avoid this, even if I am curious.
 
yubacity said:
Always want to win an argument thats why i argue because i think im right but if proven wrong no shame in saying sorry and admit you wrong
Click to expand...
What do you gain when you win, other than a pat on the back from your ego?

Please know that I do not say that in an unpleasant tone.

My point is that you gain that tiny pat while not gaining anything new in the way of knowledge.

Winning pisses me off, even as I must strive to do so for honesty.

My loss must be earned to be real.

If not here to seek and give new info, we may as well all be the, --- chimps at keyboards, --- that some picture as eventually writing something worth reading.

Regards
DL
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
Surely there's no point in arguing unless you intend to win? (i.e. persuade the other party that your opinion is 'correct')

Arguing in the hope of being proven wrong seems like a waste of time to me...
Click to expand...
You are proven correct, to some degree, in the fact of the other's inability to prove you wrong.

In esoteric terms, you put your ideas to the heat and fire of purification.

You are correct in that it has to be an honest argument from both sides.

Right and wrong are worthy goals.

Seeking such might be wise, especially if the search is within.

Regards
DL
 
Psycho_Logic said:
Firstly I didn't want to write in this thread but as @Gnostic Bishop replied in another one I will give my take.

If communication level is "arguing" then learning is (for my perception of the words "arguing" and "learning") already not possible.

I like to learn so I tend not to argue. Unfortunately I do argue sometimes and then regret it afterwards. So much wasted energy... Communicating to learn is what I am after the most. I don't think that excessive stubbornness that leads in The Land of Arguing is efficient way of learning anything. It's like banging with ones head in the wall so the other side could find out how much it hurts.

But maybe I am dividing "communication" from "arguing" too much?
Click to expand...
If I said learning in the Socratic way, would you know what I mean.

Learning through questioning is my take from it.

The arguments you regret; win, lose or draw?

Regards
DL
 
December Flower said:
Well I do agree with you, I think, but mankind so often does not, and I just play by their rules, even if I cannot understand them.

Sadly I have lost friendships due to my questions or the things I blurt out. I've often been told that I am too direct, and that I should watch what I say.
I've often experienced that it's fun for people for a time, but at some point some remark is too much.

I think what makes the things I say so inappropriate is that they hurt or shame others. That's why I'm doing my best to avoid this, even if I am curious.
Click to expand...

I think that the brightest use a KIS system that goes to facts of the issue, and not the facts of what presenting the facts will do, in terms of emotional impact. Tongue twister that.

Like a demographer saying rape or abortion stats are down with a big smile and leaving it there without proper sympathy to what remains.

Having friends is good, but being true to ones ideals is what is important.

Friends are not always good friends. We are all WIPs. Works in Progress.

Regards
DL
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
Surely there's no point in arguing unless you intend to win? (i.e. persuade the other party that your opinion is 'correct')
Click to expand...

My ex-gf and sister would disagree. They would argue with a dazzling array of illogical non sequiturs simply to piss you off. I believe they derived pleasure from it.
 
arguing to win or lose is a false dilemma.

there are other reasons e.g. purely for the enjoyment of a good discussion.

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
arguing to win or lose is a false dilemma.

there are other reasons e.g. purely for the enjoyment of a good discussion.

alasdair
Click to expand...
The two terms, argue and discuss, are not quite defined the same way.

Discussions are more on what is objectively know.

Arguments are more on subjective issues not yet confirmed and have a persuasive goal.

One argues to make points. In fact, I recently found a debate/discussion site where you can only put one point at a time.

Regards
DL
 
sure. i'd argue that all arguments are discussions but not all discussions are arguments.

alasdair
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
If I said learning in the Socratic way, would you know what I mean.

Learning through questioning is my take from it.

The arguments you regret; win, lose or draw?

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

In that case my response is that I don't have real preferences. As long as it is a sincere dialogue I can learn just from observing my responses. It is preferable that I learn and if that means I "lose" I am good with that. I will not bend the dialogue just to "win", but I am obligated to defend my view sincerely as possible so the other side has a clearest mirror possible. The best outcome for me would be to sincerely "lose" because that would mean that I have learnt most that I was capable at the given time. I don't regret any sincere dialogue but I will stop it if I recognise that it is not sincere. If the logic stops and other side isn't in dialogue I will give my opinion and stop the conversation. I can than later have internal dialogue in which I will try to find what were my flaws in addressing the person and ponder could have I done something differently that would open up the other person. I am trying as sincerely as I can to have no direction when truly conversing so I don't have a preferable outcome.
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
I think that the brightest use a KIS system that goes to facts of the issue, and not the facts of what presenting the facts will do, in terms of emotional impact. Tongue twister that.

Like a demographer saying rape or abortion stats are down with a big smile and leaving it there without proper sympathy to what remains.

Having friends is good, but being true to ones ideals is what is important.

Friends are not always good friends. We are all WIPs. Works in Progress.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
What's a KIS system? Keep it simple? I find interhuman verbal & non-verbal communication complex as naught else, and I feel like I don't even understand a fraction of it, because it's so random.

Well I think I agree with most of what you're saying, it's OK to have imperfections, but I'm not OK with hurting people, and I do that - so I'd rather learn how not to hurt them :) This is especially a concern with strangers. It's very hard to decipher what is OK to say to a stranger, because there's different rules for strangers, colleagues, friends, family, females and in a relationship. Each set of rules is slightly different, and some are entirely arbitrary (communication in a relationship - ALL OVER THE PLACE, totally nonsensical) and is absolutely understood between neurotypicals, which also makes me feel stupid often. I feel like I want to change my "behaviour", so I write down everything that is OK or not OK to say in certain situations.

With my good friends I don't have to "behave"/watch my words, which is awesome, and I'm very thankful for every one. They seem to just be able to shrug off any comment I make.
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
What do you gain when you win, other than a pat on the back from your ego?

Please know that I do not say that in an unpleasant tone.

My point is that you gain that tiny pat while not gaining anything new in the way of knowledge.

Winning pisses me off, even as I must strive to do so for honesty.

My loss must be earned to be real.

If not here to seek and give new info, we may as well all be the, --- chimps at keyboards, --- that some picture as eventually writing something worth reading.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
Don't think I argue for a pat on the back it just happens because you think what you are saying is the truth. But to be put right by losing an argument does not piss me off either. When I say I argue to win its because if I know im wrong I won't argue about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top