Some notes on my style of argument

[joe_galindez]

• I am almost always arguing in good faith. It means I've done my homework and am stating my case as clearly as I can. It also means I'm open to reasonable and well-researched arguments. If I see that you're right, I will admit it. (I do this all the time on Reddit.) The truth is more important than my ego.

• My approach is multidisciplinary. I look at problems from multiple angles, some of which may seem unusual. If something is unclear, please let me know and I will be happy to explain at length.

• I'm not trying to make myself look smart by making you look dumb. I know exactly how dumb I am. My grade-school teachers told my parents to send me to retard school. I don't believe these arguments take a lot of smarts either. Just a bit of Internet legwork.

• What bothers me is the feeling that you aren't taking my arguments as seriously as I'm taking yours. Like I said, I usually argue in good faith. That means I do my due diligence and I play by the rules. I put a lot of thought into what I say (and into what you say, too) so please afford me the same courtesy.

[DiegoPalacios]

Hi Joe ! , i understand your frustration. Personally i think you often make solid arguments and come up with interesting questions. At least in the conversations we had you never argumented in an insulting way. Personally, i take you seriously.

What i think is happening based on what i have seen is that sometimes the arguments you get into don`t come in an appropiate timing or context. For example, in a topic about "X" topic, when people are searching info about "X" topic, you go to "tangent XY", but after that the conversation goes deeper into "Y" which is completely unrelated to topic "X".

Some tangents can be related with the topic at hand, but the tangent of a tangent gets further from the original topic.

Sometimes those conversations can be interesting to explore, but in the ocassions things go off topic, i may recommend to create a new topic to elaborate on these points.

So.... in few words, i think is more a timing issue.

[awesomefeelsman]

I take you seriously, because I know I'm not capable of doing the things you do. (And also coz I'm not that smart) I like learning from the things you state and the arguments you make.
But mostly I analyze how you construct your sentences. Because dang dude, you make good sentences.
it's cool to have you back here in the forums

[joe_galindez]

So basically they're already off-topic when I go off-topic, and even if I wander back on topic they want me to get back on-topic, which is off-topic.

I take you seriously, because I know I'm not capable of doing the things you do.

Don't sell yourself short. Pretty sure I'm the only one whose parents had to get the retard talk from the school principal.

Anyway, I've always compensated through effort and attention to detail.

[DiegoPalacios]

@joe_galindez @awesomefeelsman i don`t think intelligence can be measured by just a couple of skills like math or language. There are many types of intelligences that exist outside of the academics.

School can be easy for some people and harder for others and the reasons for that can vary.

In 1983 an American developmental psychologist Howard Gardener described 9 types of intelligence.

here is a link for the curious https://blog.adioma.com/9-types-of-intelligence-infographic/

There may exist even more types.....did i just went into a tangent?

[joe_galindez]

I'll allow it. I had a theory that for every form of intelligence there was at least one art form designed to show it off. Like dancing showed off your bodily-kinesthetic intelligence and illustration showed off your visual-spatial intelligence.

The theory of multiple intelligences has fallen out of favor though. Current research seems to point toward a general multi-purpose intelligence.

[awesomefeelsman]

This is what I get for passively shoving away arguments when I was in highschool. We occasionally had hot debates in class like tackling current world problems, voicing out our own opinion on a certain subject and just arguing with the teacher when they were obviously in the wrong. Because me back then didn't have a lot of confidence compared to now, I didn't have practice to exercise my argument nerves.
To be honest I didn't like making arguments since most of the people in my highschool were so ignorant they'd resort to yelling and using the occasional "edi wow" come backs when I make a point.

[DiegoPalacios]

The theory of multiple intelligences has fallen out of favor though. Current research seems to point toward a general multi-purpose intelligence.

That`s curious, you mean like "learning ability"?

do you have any of these researches to see it?

[awesomefeelsman]

Generalizing... when you get tired of exploring things beyond the norm and you just wanna do a one size fits all thing.

[joe_galindez]

I read Gardner's book in college, but this is what Wikipedia has to say:

Many of Gardner's "intelligences" correlate with the g factor, supporting the idea of a single, dominant type of intelligence. According to a 2006 study, each of the domains proposed by Gardner involved a blend of g, cognitive abilities other than g, and, in some cases, non-cognitive abilities or personality characteristics.[6]

Then there's the criticisms part of the article, which is considerable.

[fleohr]

I personally like your comments and do take you seriously

I think some of the users are still young and don't want to hear anything from us old folks haha, but it was the same thing when I was a kid too.

At that time, I used to dream a lot and thinking everything was possible, it still is, but not at the time I wish it was, so as an adult now, I know it takes time for certain things to happen, but I also have to make it come true and go for it.

[ISNEKO]

I fucking love that we now have notes to help people deal with you.

<3

[DiegoPalacios]

I can see some why the success in some school topics is correlated in a way, like math and physics because both involve calculations and formulas.

I think one of the reasons the performance in many school subjects correlate so much is that the teaching methods between many subjects are pretty similar. (sitting in chairs, listening to a teacher, writing in a board, reading, etc...) But the learning style between students can vary a lot. For example, some learn better by reading and writing and others by making and doing stuff. (There are more learning ways, but those are two examples that contrast a lot with how often school teach in these ways)

So in academic settings, the kinesthetic learner may have a worse performance because of the teaching method more than from his natural abilities.

[SleepingPoppy]

I don't know if it'd interest you two, but this reminded me of an issue schools have with testing for dyslexia. It's a really common problem that dyslexics go undiagnosed because they test with a high IQ then have trouble in the class room, leading to assumptions that they're "lazy". The high IQ is used as an excuse by the school not to test for the actual dyslexia even though it's a known fact that dyslexics tend to test with a high IQ.

However one measures intelligence, there are certainly factors that complicate it. Though I do believe areas of intelligence correlate- arts and music can help with mathamtics, for example. But that doesn't mean bright people don't have areas they better understand. Though I am mostly speaking from observation/what I've picked up, not any specialized knowledge on the subject.

[joe_galindez]

(I'm not dyslexic though.)

I mentioned that episode in my life to explain where I'm coming from. I have a complicated history with my own intelligence (and with people's expectations) but it's not an ego thing. I enjoy a good argument but I'm not placing myself above other people. It's not an intellectual dick-measuring contest. I just love these sorts of puzzles. And of course, I learn from them.

I'd also like to add that I don't need special treatment. I'm good at some things, spectacularly bad at others. It evens out.

[SleepingPoppy]

I enjoy a good argument but I'm not placing myself above other people.

I don't think I implied you are doing that or anything else? I I just thought it might be an interesting fact to add into a conversation about how intelligence works and how we perceive it. I'm not making any judgments on you.

[beta1042]

I'm interpreting this thread as a "Please stop flagging my posts and getting me banned" cry for help, so I'm gonna share my thoughts on the matter,

Based on my observations, some your comments are coming off offensive to people because:
1- You sometimes straight up resort to name calling, or diminutives. Albeit often times in sarcasm but sarcasm doesn't translate well on the internet.
2- Not everyone feels the need to continue arguments to the lengths you do and when they are clearly not interested and are done, you keep going... even digging up old threads from months ago.
3- Some people weren't looking for an argument or discussion or anything in the first place.... so it's kind of like you're giving unsolicited advice, except it's in the form of an argument.

I say all this loving each and every one of your comments Joe, but dude sometimes you need to take a step back and accept that not everyone wants to play with you.

[joe_galindez]

It's not getting flagged or banned that I mind so much, it's getting flagged, not because I'm wrong, but because I'm being a bother.

1. Apart from that one Discord server I rarely call people names. I subscribe to "show, not tell." You can't simply tell people that they're misinformed, you have to show them. And usually I don't aim to make anyone feel stupid. I aim to make them feel ignorant so they'll do something about it.

2. This is because my goal is to arrive at the truth or defend the truth. I hate being misunderstood.

3. That's fair.

[beta1042]

Doesn't really matter what your goal is Joe. It takes 2 to argue, and if the second person isn't interested anymore, you're kinda forcing them into a non-consensual situation... as a result they're not going to be happy with it and well... they'll flag you regardless of the point you're making.

I'm not diving into who was right or wrong, I'm simply explaining why the situation becomes what it does and why people get pissed off.

and let me just quote you on something:

it's getting flagged, not because I'm wrong, but because I'm being a bother.

This is EXACTLY your problem. People are allowed to be wrong on the forum, or to have disagreeing opinions. But you're BEING A BOTHER. Stop bothering people, K? Pretty sure that's against the forum rules... and exactly the type of thing that SHOULD get flagged.

[joe_galindez]

I just don't get how other people can stand the possibility of being wrong.