Alphas being the devil's advocate.
Blaze has brought up here and there the ILE devil's advocate thing. I notice that I do it habitually as well, but in different ways. I never let anyone get away with only seeing one side of a conflict, no matter how close they are to me (in fact, the closer they are, the more likely I am to automatically come up with feel obligated to try to make them understand the other side)
?
Last edited by bg; 07-15-2010 at 07:11 PM.
ILE aren't devil's advocates.Originally Posted by Bionicgoat
We're the devil.
Actually why ILE seem to be devil's advocates is because we do not believe in many conventional interpretation of things.-PoLR combined without the need for a lot of status or power make it so we can basically say whatever is on our mind about a subject in many situations. I don't really care that a ILE cares whether something is presented in all sides or not, at least I don't, I just want to express my opinion and attack things I feel is illogical.
Biblically, the devil offered the apple from the tree of knowledge and this caused the fall of man. This is a lie.
The devil offered the apple from the tree of knowledge and this caused the rise of man.
Man did not fall from paradise, we rose from hell and the devil who offered the apple from the tree of knowledge is far more a symbolic savior then a god which demands worship, faith, and ignorance.
ILEs also seem to suffer from a chronic arrogance as well.ILE aren't devil's advocates.
We're the devil.
Actually why ILE seem to be devil's advocates is because we do not believe in many conventional interpretation of things.
Biblically, the devil offered the apple from the tree of knowledge and this caused the fall of man. This is a lie.
The devil offered the apple from the tree of knowledge and this caused the rise of man.
Man did not fall from paradise, we rose from hell and the devil who offered the apple from the tree of knowledge is far more a symbolic savior then a god which demands worship, faith, and ignorance.
D-SEI9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together
But don't we love it?
Perhaps this is better described as defending your quadra-mates, rather than defending the perspectives of anyone at all?
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
To be fair, my chances of being a bitch go up if the other guy is already a jerk.
I do this as well, although more frequently I'll think about doing it, but then decide it's not worth the trouble. I would expect ILEs to be more vocal about it.
Quaero Veritas.
hah I never think about it until after when I realize that all I seem to do is contradict people. then again, it bothers me more that nobody seems capable of seeing through the other persons eyes
Needing to express things from all sides sounds more like an idealistic cause that some NF (particularly delta NF) might care about. I might like for there to be a ton of different info floating around so I can bounce ideas, but I'm more interested in finding a single truth and being the first to organize it into something coherent.
I agree with what hkkmr said about exposing people's weak logic and just saying what's on my mind, and also being a bitch to people with different ideas.
Yeah, it's not so much an NF "can't we all just get along" thing, but more of a "your opinion of his opinion is incorrect, let me explain it to you" thing. I feel the same need to speak up when people make logical errors or grammatical mistakes.
Quaero Veritas.
after thinking about it, it isn't a matter of playing devil's advocate. it's a matter of people habitually seeing things the wrong way and me not being able to live with that. so yeah... it's the same thing.
Well, I think it makes sense that Ne valuers in general will like to discuss/listen to all sides of a situation. I've met a few ILEs and all of them are so different though... However, I do know one who plays devil's advocate for its own sake and that tends to annoy when you don't want to be playing that kind of game.
Whoa, whoa, whoa...let's just suppose you're all wrong just a second.
Wouldn't that mean in actual fact the reason you see things this way is that you are all wrong?
But seriously speaking, as iterated before, I think all Ne-types have the potential to play the devil's advocate. I've been accused of being "argumentative" because I bring attention to an alternative or obscure perspective that I think is a consequence of whatever statement that is being defended. It is the nature of Extroverted Intuition.
Ceci n'est pas une eii.
Removed at User Request
At first I had this long post typed up, but I hate criticizing you. So I'm just gonna say fuck it: You know, yeah BG - you do mediate too much and you're overly diplomatic. But who cares? It's just who you are. You're not perfect in your not perfection. It's just like I can be whiny, annoying and rant about gays too much. But I don't give a shit, it's just who I am. It's like Nick is too depressed and angsty and smokes and goes on park benches and is own worst introverted enemy sometimes but that's just Nick....being Nick. We can go on and on for every forum member here.
You're actually not very empathetic in your extreme empathy, cause sometimes there is a side to take and you realize that. It's funny and ironic. It's like 'I'm gonna play a hero and be jesus and mediate here no matter what anybody says!' It's cutely rebellious.
So I love you anyway buddy even though you're too diplomatic.
And furthermore, people like Nick (and he does look up to you) and negative introverts like that, who have a tendency to loathe and hate other people for silly neurotic reasons, need people like you around to tell them the other half in ways they can hear. So in the grand scheme of things it has it's positive sides. You have personally annoyed me sometimes by this behavior, but it's like a non issue cause you're such a good guy all-around. It's nothing really to worry over, I don't think.
It might hurt you interpersonally though, as your empathy and narcissistic supply is a narcissist's wet dream.
I don't think BG ever mentioned being concerned about being overly-diplomatic or mediating too much. This thread was a place for conversation about alphas and their roles as devil's advocate (whether that was an accurate assessment, etc)
On what you just mentioned, where has BG claimed to be empathetic or diplomatic here? If anything he wanted to discuss his habit of not being blindly empathetic. That is to say, he claimed his motivation was not mediating for the sake of mediating, or sitting there nodding like a bobblehead while someone rants. Instead he saw something wrong with clinging to one perspective in a conflict and felt the need to bring the otherside to light as well, which can be beneficial for the person and can mediate, but other times can cause tension between you and the person who wants automatic loyalty and agreement.
I'm just kind of WTFing at the moment, because I can't figure out where you get off with the condescending prod you just put up. It's like you're pretending that you're giving BG advice about a problem he has with himself, when in actuality it's an issue you seem to have with him. If you want to call BG out for something, then do it. Don't gussy it up with cheek-pinching "cute rebellion" and "don't worry we're all have imperfections". It's one thing to do that when someone is looking for some consoling and guidance, and another thing to sandwich what is essentially a personal critcism in it. Honestly, that annoys me.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
Vero, it's BnD we're talking about here. He randomly dispenses his advice and analysis on his own initiative.
and he can go fuck himself for that
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
i'm not sure diplomacy is the right word. it is a convenient word, a label that points towards some of the effects of SEI's actions. the motive behind SEI's actions is different than what you say. i might be going out on a limb here and i'm sure i'll be corrected if i am wrong but SEI wants a cohesive, contradicting, self defining, yin-yang whole.
di·plo·ma·cy
/dɪˈploʊmə
Show Spelled[dih-ploh-muh-see]
–noun 1. the conduct by government officials of negotiations and other relations between nations.
2. the art or science of conducting such negotiations.
3. skill in managing negotiations, handling people, etc., so that there is little or no ill will; tact: Seating one's dinner guests often calls for considerable diplomacy.
there are several meanings of this word. one of them involves the government and power relations. there's almost more of an Se & Fi feel to it. the #3 definition seems closer to what SEI does but this is a behaviorally oriented definition that doesn't really speak to deeper intentions.
em·pa·thy
/ˈɛm
–noun 1. the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.
2. the imaginative ascribing to an object, as a natural object or work of art, feelings or attitudes present in oneself: By means of empathy, a great painting becomes a mirror of the self.
here's where you are wrong about bionicgoat B&D. he, and other SEI's are able to be empathic towards everyone, since everyone is part of the organic whole which SEI seeks to keep intact and in balance.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
/edit
I forgot to quote it, but yes to the last post of Veros (I'm") But as far as what Vero had to say with the rest of the post, I was sitting here nodding in agreement.
wow. reading that just gave me a "click" moment of finally seeing something that I've always struggled to put into words said in a way that simply and clearly captures it.
di·plo·ma·cy
/dɪˈploʊ
–noun 1. the conduct by government officials of negotiations and other relations between nations.
2. the art or science of conducting such negotiations.
3. skill in managing negotiations, handling people, etc., so that there is little or no ill will; tact: Seating one's dinner guests often calls for considerable diplomacy.
there are several meanings of this word. one of them involves the government and power relations. there's almost more of an Se & Fi feel to it. the #3 definition seems closer to what SEI does but this is a behaviorally oriented definition that doesn't really speak to deeper intentions.
em·pa·thy
/ˈɛm
–noun 1. the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.
2. the imaginative ascribing to an object, as a natural object or work of art, feelings or attitudes present in oneself: By means of empathy, a great painting becomes a mirror of the self.
here's where you are wrong about bionicgoat B&D. he, and other SEI's are able to be empathic towards everyone, since everyone is part of the organic whole which SEI seeks to keep intact and in balance.
Yes. I'm not at all offended or bothered by what you said BnD, It's just that you're wrong in that assessment. Conflict does not bother me in the sense that I need to make the world all fluffy puppies and kitties who constantly get along and agree with eachother. Conflict can be highly entertaining sometimes. When it's at a certain point of intensity though it's no longer enjoyable to me though so I either attempt a resolution, or more often than not simply remove myself so that the two in conflict can go on doing what they're doing (If people enjoy conflict, then I'm happy that they have something that they enjoy and don't want to ruin it for them through resolving it)
I'm a bit self-conscious that most of my real-life stories here to illustrate things involve the drug world. I don't feel as though the drug-world is Cool or that I want to impress people with my experience. It's just a matter of that's the life that I have, so drugs are going to be involved in some way or another in most stories about my life... I'm pretty sure that all of you already understood that, but I've been noticing it lately so I wanted to put that into words just so that it's been said.
with that said, this came to mind as I was taking a walk after reading this thread. I have seen this happen countless times to countless friends, and gone through it myself many many times. There is a type of argument that happens between meth users (probably other users as well, but I've seen it being more prevalent with meth abusers).
It happens when two peoples currently drug induced perception of things come into conflict so that they say or do the exact thing that exasberates the other persons perception. I guess you could see it as mutual paranoias that are about completely different things synergizing with eachother in negative way until both people blow a gasket.
This results in days, months, even years of he-said-she-said conflict between the two of them over "what really happened." It's a conflict that can never be resolved because neither one of them can accept that they were the one who was crazy high delusional when the other person was so clearly the one who was crazy.
Sometimes the people involved can pass it off with time, agree to disagree in a way. But they cannot resolve it. The merest suggestion that touches on the event will restart the never-ending cycle of it all towards bad blood.
I've found that the only way to truly resolve this is to remove the question of who was right, and who was seeing things clearly. Both sides must get the opportunity to describe their headspace and perceptions at the time, and what it was that the other person was saying or doing that was reinforcing that negative headspace. If this can happen the bad blood usually will just fall away as both people see how even though they were saying and meaning entirely different things, as if speaking different languages, understanding where the other person was at allows them to see how their actions appeared in that context. They were meaning to be nice or funny, but it fit into the other persons thought stream as mean or intentional fucking with them. This resolves the issue of "You were fucking with me!" vs "How can you even think that? I cared about you and would never do that!"
At that point, the parties can honestly let the other know that they are sorry and regret that what they did or said aggrivated their friends downward spiral.
The issue is resolved, the feelings are dealt with, and soon after the whole incident becomes one that everybody can laugh over at how silly a thing it was to become so hugely negative.
It isn't the conflict that offends me and makes me try to do something about it. It's seeing friendships devolve into nasty back biting and deep emotional hurt over what's really a silly misunderstanding at it's core. It's seeing peoples egos sending them into blinding tunnels of their own perceptions as the only Right perceptions. In a way, I'm being bothered by and attempting to aleviate the things in people that are keeping from being able to do what I do, empathically or however you want to describe it.
It's healthy to have yourself a bit of ego, but learning that your ego is constantly getting in the way, so that you can manage it, is a true step towards happiness and inner strength imo. Also, the realization that the world is more about infinitely overlapping and contradicting "Realities" than it is one cohesive and True Reality. I can see where that last bit is going to rub some NTs the wrong way, but perhaps it would help to consider that I have a humanistic view of what the world and reality are. I know that dirt is dirt, but I also know (and for me it's a Key thing) that a person in a deserts dirt is not the dirt of a person in a forest. Maybe what I'm saying is that for me subjective > objective and that way of ordering connects me to a deeper truer reality as much as those who swing the other way.
ehh now I'm rambling
Last edited by bg; 08-02-2010 at 01:26 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
