How to Argue with an NT

Post Reply New Topic

this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6Yd3FwJJ6w

Well I don't agree completely about why it got to there (but there is that influence, the excuse why people get beat because "Society doesn't give room"), but yes black people beat their kids. from beginning to 2:30 of the vid Im referring to.



"I took you into this world, and I can take you out"-black mother threatening to kill their children.

Black mother trying to deny it: "No, I don't mean it; it's a threat so you should obey me"

Person #2: "What gives you the right to say 'this' way is 'wrong' and this way is 'right'; I'm not you and I can't do things that way easilt"

Black Mom: "Well Still do it, my Mother beat me; she whuuped my ass and i turned out great"

O RLY?
http://uncnews.unc.edu/news/health-and- ... abuse.html

that and studies linkign spanking and violence..




Remember that Boondocks episode where Granddad ends up meeting the prostitute? He gives the girl a belt.

I considered OP's post as a good advice to other aspies on how to "fit in" with other people.
It is unfortunate if you considered his post as an "insult" and a plot "to get revenge".

I am VERY good at winning debates and my style is pretty much OPPOSITE of what you have described.

I won't engage in debate with someone if the goal isn't to increase knowledge on both sides. Yes, I've encountered many power-trippers. I'll come up with some zinger one-liner and dispose of them. But most people are not like that. It's is unfair to imply that they are.

And I AM NT. It's my son and husband who are AS.

That is very laudable.

bahaha, I read through it properly. If you followed those rules over here, you'd get the s**t beaten out of you! Aspie's probably get into trouble cause they don't know when someone is being sarcastic. Plus if you show you're upset, they just make things worse. So him saying to stay calm is about the only good advice he's given.

You seem to have a very luxury way of considering debates as something you can do in your free time, when you decide you want to.

For most people, discussions and arguments take place at work time, when you do have to come to a resolution and convince other people of facts. Just because they don't want to increase their knowledge, you can't just come up with some "one-liner and dispose of them". You have to make everything you can to convince them, because that's your job, and that's what your employer pays you to do.

I would not mind doing that but how would it help her? It is designed to help people who don't know how to emotioinally argue (which includes some so called NTs). She is really quite good at it.

But there is a far more fundamental reason why that would be irrelevant. All of these techniques were primarily figured out by observing her behaviour. I know full well when I am emotionally or positionally arguing. I know it is based on instinctive emotional behaviour and insane. She does it naturally without thinking about it. So she would learn nothing by reading it. She might also deny doing any of those things although I think a video cam would solve that problem.

The good news is it works and allows us to get on to resolving the problems at hand rather than posturing. To quote the Karate Kid "I learn how to fight so I don’t have to."

ttyl

I guess I don't think of work issues as debate, but rather as persuasion. And it's majority or heirarchy rules. If I'm out-voted or over-ruled, I'm out-voted or over-ruled, and I don't think much more about it. But I do usually get my way. Largely because time has usually proven that I was right even when I was out-voted or over-ruled. Even though I never say, "I told you so," people usually do remember. My profession is based on understanding certain rules and how they relate to each other. I'm good at what I do.

So I think of debate as related to those issues with no real right or wrong answer, like discussions of politics or ethical dilemnas. And that IS for fun.

But I will say that I read back my post and it sounds so arrogant. Sorry about that. It's just that I really disagree with the parameters the OP specified. You may win certain arguments, but you won't win long term respect. I find a lot more value in long term respect. With that, you can get to the point where the simple fact that it is your opinion carries a lot of weight. Where once you speak, it tends to be the last word. Even though you said it quite gently and politely. It seems to me that Aspies already have enough problems with being seen as annoying or arrogant; using a power debate style will only make it worse. I don't think the majority of NT's like the OP's wife.

[quote="benjimanbreeg]yeah, what so we have no ambition of fitting in one day? We just come on here to insult the rest of the world and plot on ways to get revenge on them for having it so easy?[/quote]

By my definition that is fitting in... With emoters anyways... I don't try to understand how emoters think any more. That is when dealing with them became easy.

ttyl

By my definition that is fitting in... With emoters anyways... I don't try to understand how emoters think any more. That is when dealing with them became easy.

ttyl[/quote]

emoters?

I dont think it is about being an "emoter". It has nothing to do with emotion. It is to do with the interaction of egos. Aspies have plenty of emotion, but they see it as existing alongside the truth they wish to talk at all times. They feel emotional about the truth, not about people's egos and self-images.

I will tell a story, which is something I do a lot. A few years ago I was temping in an office. We were outside having after work drinks and I was invited to stay for them. The boss, a rather arrogant, puffed up alpha sort, at one point was saying:
"So me and my mates got really drunk, we were absolutely wasted, and then we got in a car and drove around in a field shooting at rabbits with a rifle, hahaha, it was so funny, those rabbits were running away, and we went after them..."

He would have told more of this drinking story but I angrily interjected with "I can't believe you find that funny. How cruel, those poor rabbits must have been terrified. Couldnt you have found some other type of entertainment? There is nothing funny at all about shooting animals." There was quite a silence, and then the boss muttered something about rabbits being pests.

Remember I was a temp, not even formally employed with them. The boss wouldnt even look at me for the rest of my assignment there.

So people would probably pick up from this that I made an awful faux pas. But I think that the boss made the faux pas and I just responded in an angry manner, it was a faux pas too I guess...

Consider the social mistakes he made here:
- Telling a story for entertainment to a crowd that involves shooting animals for fun. Major faux pas
- Failing to assess whether all of his audience would be open to the story (ie, 2 females present, females often have a fondness for fluffy animals, not to mention the majority of the population not approving of animal cruelty as a rule.)

But because he was the boss it was perceived by him that I was in the wrong, and most people knew not to speak up. It seems you can make as many social mistakes as you like as long as you are the boss, and people will be too afraid to say anything.

Last edited by zen_mistress on 21 Aug 2008, 5:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Now we're talking! You have many interesting arguments. And I have some questions... First, what is an Aspie like?

OP seems to say, that Aspies generally are very modest, backs off easily, focuses on arguments and tries to treat the opponent with decency and respect. They have to become more arrogant and more self-assured, instead of focusing on the logic and arguments, to convince others.

You seem to say, that Aspies are generally quite arrogant, talking a lot, being very self-assured that their point-of-view is the most correct one or even the only reasonable one. They have to calm down a bit, talk less, listen more too others, being less pushy etc.

Two almost opposite views of Aspies. I think, that OP's view is more in line with my view of a "typical" Aspie.

I think this is a lot of the problem here. NTs perceive us as arrogant because we put our views out there when they are afraid to.. they think that such a person would believe they were always right, when actually aspies tend to also be seeking new information and viewpoints and dont believe we are always right at all.

Actually, most NTs don't even know about Aspergers, or know very little about it, let alone have preconceived notions or judgements about people with Aspergers.

Yes but they do meet us out in the world and they tend to think we nerdy, odd types are being arrogant when in debate, whether they know about aspergers or not.

I can think of two possible interpretations:

1. You are using the "dominance"-style instead of "logic"-style, exactly like OP suggests, but in a more polite way. You are often winning the arguments based on your former success and correctness, not necessarily because your colleague has the capacity or energy to really dwelve into your arguments (which I do believe are often correct and well presented).

2. Your colleagues are intelligent (or at least polite and well behaving) "thinkers". Against them, a calm, logical argument works well.