"I personally believe quite firmly in--"
"But what about pre-WWII?"
"What? No, what I'm trying to say is that it makes sense if you look at it from a purely post-WWII perspective--"
"You can't just discount their perspective."
"Will you let me finish? Ugh, I'm just trying to say that postmodernism truly came into its own after WWII and everything was modernism and faith before that, so all of--"
"Faith? Nothing was faith then. Everything was shaky."
"But they still believed in things. Even though they had shakiness in their lives, they firmly believed. We can look back from our current perspective and accuse them all we like, but just because we see it one way--"
"But ideas always move forward. The past had problems, so we changed and moved forward. So our view of the past is more valid than theirs."
"But they still believed in things. Even though they had shakiness in their lives, they firmly believed. We can look back from our current perspective and accuse them all we like, but just because we see it one way--"
"But ideas always move forward. The past had problems, so we changed and moved forward. So our view of the past is more valid than theirs."
"That's ludicrous. We never move incessantly forward. Sometimes we move backwards. What was the Dark Ages?"
"The most current change to postmodernism was a move forward."
"We aren't even sure of anything! How can it be more correct if it says that everything and nothing is correct?! I'm just trying to say that their view is just as valid--"
"We aren't even sure of anything! How can it be more correct if it says that everything and nothing is correct?! I'm just trying to say that their view is just as valid--"
"But it can't be!"
[pause] "Okay, look. This entire time you've been nay-saying and tearing apart my suppositions. What the heck do you believe?"
"I don't have to say what I believe if there are things wrong with your premise."
"If you don't have a premise and I do, mine is inherently more correct than yours. Because it exists. Stop being such a dillhole and state something. Put yourself out there. Sack up. Be a man. Have an opinion."
Speaker 1: My argumentative style.
ReplyDeleteSpeaker 2: A stylized representation of my roommate's argumentative style. I can't say anything more definite than that (even though it is exactly the same as his) because he would try to tear any definite statement to pieces before (two hours later) finally coming to the thesis of his statement.
It is the most annoying thing in the entire world. Accept my premise for the moment and then declare yours. Then we will decide which has more merit. Don't just let me put myself on the line and then tear me to pieces for actually having an opinion. You can't be right if you don't say anything.
For this reason, we both always come away thinking we won.
Well, if you both always feel like you've won, it sounds like the best of all possible situations to me. Playing devil's advocate, of course, I couldn't think of a better way it could go.
ReplyDeleteThis is fascinating. Both speakers seemed to lose track of what they were saying about halfway through, which made it sound even more like a real argument.
ReplyDeleteI totally read this in your voices. :-)
The entire world, huh?
No, it's horrible. Because though we both feel like we won, we both hate the other person a little bit, and that's neither fun nor good.
ReplyDeleteBut I can see what you're saying.
The best possible outcome is what Curtis and I did: we would both figure out what the other was saying, and reconcile the differences if possible. Sometimes it came down to the fact that we were saying the same thing in different words. Sometimes it came down to a fundamental difference in belief that we weren't worried about arguing. It was great. I felt awesome every time.
This method is just aggravating and everybody wins but feels like they lost.
And @Janelle: I am good at arguing and also at fabricating arguments.
I didn't even write this correctly because at least twice, his character makes a solid statement. Which is never ever what he does. It's aggravating.
ReplyDeleteHaha! Yes, I think Curtis is a good arguer--not that I've really argued with him . . .
ReplyDeleteYour conversation sounds a lot like my high school class officer meetings. (It's the worst!)
Well I'm usually a decent arguer because I agree with the valid points of my opponent. However, that's a major weakness against people who don't ever return the favor and just want to win.
ReplyDeleteI have met and been in relationships with those types of people and it is so aggravating that they aren't at least being human about it and compromising. UGH
Well that's the past.
Wow. That is intense. I can understand what you're saying. I can't say I've ever really argued with Curtis, although I think it might be fun.
ReplyDeleteThat's a weakness of mine. I like to argue. I don't try to win when I argue (usually that's impossible anyway). I just think it's fun. I like picking apart what the other person is saying and helping him or her strengthen the argument until it is good.
That's weird, isn't it? I'm not even that good at it. I just find it fun.
I think the issue is respect (or a lack of it) for the other person and his or her views.
Janelle, I don't think that's weird. I think that's a sign of an english major.
ReplyDeleteI can't say I've ever argued with any of you. (Have I?) But you all seem like you'd be decent at it--seeing as you're reasonable people, and all.
Hm. I argue pretty forcefully if I actually want to win.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Brooke.
ReplyDeleteRobby: If?
Sometimes I just want to learn or to compromise and show them my side.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt, Robby, that you would, and do, argue forcefully. (I should hope so, after seeing parts of your sock collection.) (And, no I don't entirely know what I mean by that.)
ReplyDeleteBrillig.
ReplyDeleteYou just wanted to bring my socks into this, didn't you? WELL GOOD JOB.
ReplyDeleteThis half-amused me because I know Chris Dant fairly well lol. btw, this is totally Kyle Barker. (^_^)/) (me waving to all you people)
ReplyDeleteand no, my picture is not me, but all the pictures of me on facebook suck, so I didn't want to use one lol.
ReplyDeleteWhy, hello! Fancy meeting you here. Welcome!
ReplyDelete:-)
Captcha is appropriate, as always: "comein"
Well you are just Debbie Downer, aren't you, Kyle? SOME PICTURES OF YOU ARE GREAT.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=218381&l=8f80f25cc6&id=1348444832
The caption and the conversation there are just glorious.
ReplyDelete