|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: When in an argument, do you take a(n): | |||
| aggressive stance (attack the person for faults to prove them wrong) |
|
10 | 43.48% |
| defensive stance (defend your points to prove yourself correct) |
|
13 | 56.52% |
| Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Rhythm game specialist.
|
The reason why behavior is in quotes is because it's intentionally meant to be a vague question.
Also, I'm talking about behaviors in arguments, and not in something planned out or meant to be recreational arguing (or debating). My question to you guys: when in the heat of an argument, do you find yourself more likely to take an aggressive stance and attack the receiving party for their faults or mistakes, or do you end up taking a defensive stance by defending yourself? In many of the arguments that I've been in (mostly with my parents), we both seem to take a defensive stance -- neither of us really accuse each other of faults, but rather defend ourselves in hopes of proving ourselves correct (rather than proving the other person incorrect). Last edited by TC_Halogen; 05-7-2011 at 09:15 PM.. Reason: Thank you, Hammy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Aug 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 8,548
|
Needs option 3, a mix of both options 1 and two.
You need to prove yourself correct, but also deny or give doubt about your opponents stance. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
|
I pretty much agree with Midnight on this
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Rhythm game specialist.
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
FFR Player
|
I usually defend myself
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 227
|
I do both, especially when someone attacks something thats very dear to me like a story I wrote or something like that.
Honestly though, I probably attack a lot more people than I realize for their critiques... |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
~ added for cuteness
|
I've never really realized it, but now looking back it does seem like I am more defensive than aggressive in arguments. I guess I would attribute this to me being more worried about myself having a correct stance rather than my opponent having an incorrect one.
__________________
I'm retired ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
FFR Hall of Fame
|
I use the prasangika-madhyamaka method of reductio ad absurdum to argue that any positive beliefs that anyone else has are wrong.
I don't need to defend my own beliefs because I don't have any
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Everlong
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Age: 32
Posts: 3,832
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
♥C.S. + A.M.♥
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Age: 27
Posts: 4,680
|
I do either depending on the argument...
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Snake Princess
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Amazon Lily
Age: 28
Posts: 931
|
I probably lean more towards the defensive stance. Usually I go with the "You believe what you believe and I believe what I believe" stance but I try not to get aggressive or the arguments I have tend to escalate and may become violent.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Oblong
Join Date: Jun 2009
Age: 33
Posts: 196
|
Aggressive, yup definitely that one.
![]()
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum User
|
I don't see why defensive is the majority vote, it seems to me like everyone on FFR has something to prove, and as it's the internet no one has anything to lose, so everyone comes out swinging. At least they do here.
Also, the type of argument Midnight is talking about is called Rogerian. It's the practice of reasoning with your opponents points and then proving your own. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Rhythm game specialist.
|
Thank you very much.
Quote:
point 2: fair enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Cata_X
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Orlando, Florida
Age: 31
Posts: 394
|
This poll is kind of hard to really decide on just because everyone usually does both when they are in argument. If you think about it, when you're in an argument the other person is trying to prove and defend their point as well while they fight against yours, so it goes back and forth between the two choices constantly as more points are brought up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 27
Posts: 152
|
i'm usually defensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Sukiru#11148
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Xepherverse
Age: 31
Posts: 1,729
|
i defend myself
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
stepmania archaeologist
|
It's kind of hard to say what I do more often, but I guess I'm more "aggressive" in arguing. I wouldn't say "attack the person for faults", though, as much as "try to show why their argument/idea isn't valid". When someone's really stubborn, I tend to feel that defending my own points won't do much good, because they're not going to be convinced if their own points still hold, and I certainly don't need convincing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 27
Posts: 152
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
FFR Player
|
I take an aggressive stance on certain issues in where I know I'm right and the person has made a blatantly untrue statement. Often this happens in political discussions, as government is my education and I'm pretty informed. I'll attack basically any belief thats completely unfounded hence my stances in the Osama threads. :P
__________________
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|