Gammas: What is your goal in a debate?

[Creepy-]

Please, only Gammas respond to this poll [there is a similar poll in each quadra’s section]


In a debate, my main objective is...
... to win at all costs [I’m a Gamma]
... to arrive at a high truth [I’m a Gamma]
... to learn something from my challenger [I’m a Gamma]
... something else [please explain]. [I’m a Gamma]


ETA: The word "debate" [and "argument," for that matter] is not intended to connote a fight. For the purpose of this discussion, I intended "debate" to mean a discussion in which disagreement is expressed.

[Bardia]

The point of an arguement is to get the facts straight.

[calenwen]

I would say... to make sure that everyone gets heard and everyone articulates their point of view and that the facts are all straight. What can you really do from there, anyway? Ninety-nine percent of the time people's minds will never be changed, so why bother?

[FDG]

I voted "to arrive at the high truth", but I believe more in "to arrive at the best possible approximation of reality".

[Warlord]

Expose the errors in the others persons understanding. I rarely state what I actually think, what I say is more of testing the validity what the other person is saying. I think it's rare to find truth via a debate.

[calenwen]

Warlord, you are alpha. I'm sorry.

[Jarno]

My vote: to arrive at a high truth.

BTW I know an ENTJ who would have answered: To win.

[strrrng]

Warlord, you are alpha. I'm sorry.

Keep it real.

[Warlord]

Warlord, you are alpha. I'm sorry.

In any dispute Balzac holds demonstrative neutrality, trying no one not “to accompany”. Its relation to any act it expresses not as particular personal opinion, but seemingly advances certain, as it seems, objective and correct evaluation.

The information, which contradicts the prevailing systems or destroys them, it accepts very critically.

Contradictions and actual errors in positions and opinions are revealed well.

If I ever need a opinion about my type from someone clueless about socionics, you will be the first to ask. Learn to tell the difference between demonstrative Ti and Ti-ego.

[calenwen]

In any dispute Balzac holds demonstrative neutrality, trying no one not “to accompany”. Its relation to any act it expresses not as particular personal opinion, but seemingly advances certain, as it seems, objective and correct evaluation.

The information, which contradicts the prevailing systems or destroys them, it accepts very critically.

Contradictions and actual errors in positions and opinions are revealed well.

If I ever need a opinion about my type from someone clueless about socionics, you will be the first to ask. Learn to tell the difference between demonstrative Ti and Ti-ego.

I've yet to see a great demonstration of your profound knowledge of socionics, and unfortunately, a paragraph or two from a poorly translated Russian type profile is not enough to convince me that you are not INTj.

And, since you brought it up, why don't you tell me, in your own words, the difference between Ti ego and Ti demonstrative?

[Warlord]

I've yet to see a great demonstration of your profound knowledge of socionics, and unfortunately, a paragraph or two from a poorly translated Russian type profile is not enough to convince me that you are not INTj.

You don't see the obvious correlation? And even more so, you don't even know that from before?! Why are you even trying to type me or INTp's in general then. I'm not interested in your opinion.

My point was simple. If you think that the content of my earlier message was somehow "alpha" or "not-INTp". You obviously don't have the faintest idea about either.

And, since you brought it up, why don't you tell me, in your own words, the difference between Ti ego and Ti demonstrative?

How long explanation do you want? Why should I bother, what is it in for me? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't "convince" you, no matter what I said anyway.

[strrrng]

In any dispute Balzac holds demonstrative neutrality, trying no one not “to accompany”. Its relation to any act it expresses not as particular personal opinion, but seemingly advances certain, as it seems, objective and correct evaluation.

The information, which contradicts the prevailing systems or destroys them, it accepts very critically.

Contradictions and actual errors in positions and opinions are revealed well.

If I ever need a opinion about my type from someone clueless about socionics, you will be the first to ask. Learn to tell the difference between demonstrative Ti and Ti-ego.

lol, this must be an INTj tactic. I've seen hugo, phaedrus, UDP and now you do it. Sorry, but pasting words from your prescriptive manual isn't an argument; this is reality, not your Ti matrix.

[Warlord]

lol, this must be an INTj tactic. I've seen hugo, phaedrus, UDP and now you do it. Sorry, but pasting words from your prescriptive manual isn't an argument; this is reality, not your Ti matrix.

O RLY?

I've seen plenty of people of different types using that "tactic". You and your crazy typings. You're there with Dee Has Calenwen been listening to you? No wonder she's so out of it. That's just sad.

[FDG]

Warlord is right. Finding flaws in another person's reasoning is the strongest suit of the dialectical-algorithmic thinking style (proper of ISFP-ENFJ-INTP-ESTJ). Of course, it's also their biggest flaw, since they're unlikely to suceed in new edeavors due to their negativism. Regardless, it's perfectly compatible with an ILI typing.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Here we see an example of Gamma's in a debate

Ehh, Calenwen, I would be interested to hear why you think Warlord isn't an ILI.

Warlord is right. Finding flaws in another person's reasoning is the strongest suit of the dialectical-algorithmic thinking style (proper of ISFP-ENFJ-INTP-ESTJ). Of course, it's also their biggest flaw, since they're unlikely to suceed in new edeavors due to their negativism. Regardless, it's perfectly compatible with an ILI typing.

Interesting observation. High marks in all categories

[strrrng]

O RLY?

I've seen plenty of people of different types using that "tactic". You and your crazy typings. You're there with Dee Has Calenwen been listening to you? No wonder she's so out of it. That's just sad.

Nah. I've seen a lot of alpha NTs promote theoretical material onto people, without providing any real subjective analysis quite often; I think they believe it speaks for itself or something.

And no, she hasn't been "listening to me," although we have agreed on your type, given how blatantly obvious it is. Look no further than the fact that you practically light up at the slightest sign of Fe on stickam.

[Warlord]

Look no further than the fact that you practically light up at the slightest sign of Fe on stickam.

Umm no, I doubt many would even agree with that observation. I'm pretty much oblivious and don't pay attention when there's Fe-atmosphere, and start surfing on the web. If I light up, it's because someone is trying to establish a personal connection with me. I've been probably talking in private then.

But that hasn't have anything to do with this thread.

[calenwen]

Warlord, I'm sorry. I suppose I wouldn't want my type questioned in this manner, so it's thoughtless to do so with yours. I will PM you in the near future when I am not about to go to bed, because I am curious how you decided on ILI.

Oh, and I should add that what I said about you being alpha has nothing to do with anything that you said in this thread. I've thought it for a while and for some reason brought it up here. Meh.

[Warlord]

Warlord, I'm sorry. I suppose I wouldn't want my type questioned in this manner, so it's thoughtless to do so with yours. I will PM you in the near future when I am not about to go to bed, because I am curious how you decided on ILI.

Well, I appriciate the effort to patch things up. Maybe we'll have better relation in the future.

[Khamelion]

I'd like to pick 2. The truth one mostly. And sometimes the learning about your challenger one.


The goal is definitely to get to the truth though.....I answered the question before even clicking on the thread



oh and....

If I ever need a opinion about my type from someone clueless about socionics, you will be the first to ask. Learn to tell the difference between demonstrative Ti and Ti-ego.

rawr!!!!

[crazymaisy]

What is my goal in a debate?

To prove that my side of the debate is true [truth]; to show the other side's errors, to make them see how right my position is -- though usually they are just too "something" to see the truth.

It might be something I hold dear in my mind, or just something that I'm debating about and have no personal convictions for, but I see the end of what side looks best to debate and choose that to debate.

It's about making corrections to their flaws, and also my own if I find something [rare .] To draw from my vast knowledge and connect things on the fly to support my side of the debate. It's about Truth, no doubt, but what truth? High Truth? not exactly. Moreso it's about correcting flaws and piecing information together to test it's strength when it's webbed together to see if it holds together as something whole (invisibly done.)

[strrrng]

yuck

[crazymaisy]

...This is a really annoying attitude. Argue because you have something to argue for, not just for the sake of it.

yuck

Oh please. You both are too serious.

[crazymaisy]

So I should take you as a joke from now on? Okay.

No. Not at all.

You might never know when I'm joking or when I'm serious.

The thing here is, you seem to be taking offense at the fact that I stated I could debate just for the sake of debating something.

It surely doesn't mean I never hold a stake on anything I debate. It's simply that I don't HAVE to hold to something to debate about it.

If it's not your thing, that's just the way it is. You don't do it, I don't fault you for that.

[crazedrat]

Warlords repulsive avatar, and his generally unjustified self-importance makes me wish he wasn't ILI.. and make me want to believe he is LII.. unfortunately, he is ILI. He is ILI-Te. Kinda like a male, socially stunted version of implied.. if you can imagine it.

This is a really annoying attitude. Argue because you have something to argue for, not just for the sake of it.

And have something to argue for which is meaningful, and which you don't value just for the sake of it.