Dynamic Tension

[Peredhil]

In all instances of human affairs, there is a dynamic tension between Self and Society. The crux of the matter revolves around a matter of rights and implementations.

 

When an individual is absolutely alone, there is a premium of Self. All that they do is seen by only one person. All they say is heard by one person. All they think influences that same person - themself.

 

Yet it is a part of Humanity to seek the company of others. We have a herd ungulant mentality. Solitary Confinement is considered a punishment for this reason.

Yes, being solitary is a necessity, retreating within one's self to rest and recuperate. But even the harshest curmudgeon after a bit begins to seek out other people. Whether through presence, writing, telephones, creating works of art for posterity, the NEED to communicate and have the message received in embedded within.

 

So individuality become collective or the individual begins to die within. And this forms Society - the moral and mores of interactions of individuals. The imprecise definitions of right and wrong, appropriate and inappropriate that govern all individuals as they interact with others.

 

The strictures of Society vary widely, and so I will not get caught up in details and hair-splitting at this point. I will note the pattern which governs these strictures however is in a dynamic tension.

 

There is a thin social line that separates the polar opposites that wavers in every situation, that redefines with each addition or loss of a person. Thus what is appropriate to say in a sports locker room might be inappropriate to say in a family dining setting.

This extends to actions as well. Cutting someone deeply with a sharp blade might be a Good thing if done by a surgeon seeking to restore health, but a Bad thing if done on a street corner by the same surgeon seeking revenge on a fancied slight.

 

Society and Self. Because each individual IS individual, an ideal Society will cherish, nourish, and affirm the rights of each individual to grow and attain their personal best. In turn, each Self-willed individual gives up a bit of freedom to the society so that all may fit together better.

 

That I may grow, I give up my right to murder. That I may have protection from fire, I give up a small portion of my monies to support a local government.

 

If we liken the whole of a segment of Society, perhaps an organization, to a body, we see that the Selves are cells. Each brings something different to the body, a unique contribution, yet works in concert for the good of all, nourishing and being nourished.

A new cell may require extra resources to grow to the point where it can produce. A damaged cell may require extra resources to heal to the same point.

But a healthy cell which puts it's needs above the others, that clings to its baby days, becomes tumorous. And if the other healthy cells with which it communicates give up producing and continue to draw on the resources, then there is a tumor, dragging down the entire body.

If the selfish cells begin attacking others, then they become a cancer and the body is doomed to die unless they are stopped in someway.

In this instance, consider the healthy cells, trying to hold onto body integrity, trying to produce and heal. If they cannot distinguish between the young or damaged and the healthy but selfish cells, they end up sucked dry of ability and either die to the body (leave), or become damaged and unable to produce (giving up), or become cancerous in turn (selfish and taking).

At one extreme of Selfishness, we have the clarion call of personal rights, of individualism, of "You must do it my way because my pain is more Real than yours because I feel it".

At the other extreme of Selflessness, we have many possibilities from Doormat to a Holy person (the Gandi, Christ, Buddha, Mohammed of the world).

 

The Mighty Pen is a Literary Society.

It exists that we may nourish one another and grow.

That we may take those creative souls, hurt by the world, and help them to heal.

That we may take those with potential, and give them a place to grow.

But all in turn must realize that if they don't give, if they don't nourish others, if they don't produce tolerance and put aside selfishness in consideration.

 

This Society will die.

[Falcon2001]

Hear, hear!

Good speech, Peredhil. As usual, you are completely right.

[Guest Rezure]

any particular reason to make it at this time rather than at another time? Did someone do/not do something?

 

Just wondering.

[The Portrait of Zool]

Good post Master P.

 

I will submit my own dynamic tension - That between spontaneity and system.

 

This is very similar to your self/society tension - is simply a smaller aspect, in fact. But I think it a very important one, because I think it conceptualizes a lot of what goes wrong with society, as opposed to the individual.

 

An interesting question might be, "How can something go wrong with society, when there is no society, other than the collection of individuals?" Master P addressed part of that, but I think there is another aspect worth mentioning, about how society can take over the self.

 

Spontaneity is part discovery, part creation. It is the natural result from connection with the external while in connection to self. By this means, It is the main avenue of personal growth. That is it's value. Obviously, conditions have to be right for spontaneity to occur. As natural as it is, it is very easy in modern society to squash completely.

 

System is also important to society. It is the social/idealistic mechanisms that support society, in the roles and tasks that make society function. Obviously, without system, society would collapse, because no one would 'be on the same page' so to speak. That is system's value.

 

The problem comes in when someone is captured by system. What I mean by 'capture by the system' is that they begin to identify themselves with the system - without connection to the self. This is known by many names; Beaurocracy. The rat race. Workaholism. Dogma.

 

I think it is fine to make use of and support systems, but it is also important to recognise that we are not the systems we participate in. Otherwise, we become systemetized ourselves, of our own volition. The result is the halt of our personal growth - and societies loss of the resulting progression.

~Zool~

 

Elder of Elders, The Pen is Mightier than the Sword.

Bard of Terra, Patron Saint of Aspiring Bards.

Elder than dirt, more foolish than a jester, able to trip over the smallest logic in a single step. It's... Oh, you know.

[Peredhil]

Peredhil hugs Zool

 

Good points! It IS important to keep the balance between individual and system.

 

I'd submit that while traditions are important and worthy of respect (for they encapsulate the lessons and wisdoms of prior generations of humanity), they must be evaluated anew every generation for current validity.

Otherwise they become vain traditions, traps to the past that fetter and shackle instead of guiding and enhancing.

 

Peredhil turns

Yes Imposter, it was inspired by some recent events here at the Pen.

In brief, a Pen Member was transcribing a thread from the Conservatory to our Library. It contains writing from many many of the Pen membership in the thread, quality writing.

The Member has a Real Life relationship with a non-Pen member.

The non-Pen member, unable to emotionally accept the difference between Real Life and Role-Played characters, created such a disturbance that the thread has been deleted on request of of it's transcriber.

This saddened me greatly and was the seed which led to the genesis of the thoughts above, the dynamic tensions between individuals and groups of individuals.

[Guest Minta Rose]

I smell the stink of the UBB in here.

 

RagingGoat, are you wounded or not?

 

This discussion is not yet naked to me.

 

--Tzimfemme, the Naked Mage

[Peredhil]

And thus I have my answer -

 

Raging Goat, Rapture, Portable, Frank.

 

First, I should have indicated that I was musing, doodling, with a concept. I had hoped for the positive building type feedback to develop the ideas such as Zool provided.

However, thank you for your feedback; you've provided a wonderfully written analysis although it dribbled off into a personal attack.

 

As I have thought all along, you are brilliant. You have an abundance of talent, an intellect that leaves me somewhat awestricken, and the ability to connect the two.

 

I find it lamentable that it your pattern seems to connect only under great emotional duress. You seem to me to be at your icy analytical best when you feel you're fueled by hot rage.

 

In my armchair opinion, you have the intellectual breath, depth, and conceptual grasp of the genius you are.

To me, however, you have just demonstrated the emotional reaction of the insecure immature individual I feel you to be. In my life experience and exposure to the type, these are too often linked in creative geniuses.

 

You remind me of a child with an atomic weapon. You have that amount of power, and that lack of discretion in its use.

 

I'll not engage in a flame war, because I'm quite aware you'd win. I freely admit you are the better writer, particulary in this style of debate.

 

I would ask you to consider that this is NOT the Conservatory. This is NOT the Archmage Bulletin Board. This is NOT Archmage.

 

This is the Pen is Mightier than the Sword site. Many of the members are the same. But I submit that the stated purpose of this site is not Archmage, but to be a Literary Guild. This is a place that is more than children and video games. (Although there may be children and I personally enjoy video games.)

This is a place where creative people of all ages can come and work together to grow. It exists to provide a refuge from the negativity of the world, to provide a fertile environment where creativity is encouraged, and the people that create are nourished.

Of the two, creation and creator, the most important to me is the individual.

 

In my opinion, your currently abusive style has no place here. As an obviously involved person, I'll take no further action and give you no further response. The Elders and Voting Members can decide how to deal with this.

 

I abide by their decision.

 

In closing,

 

I respect you - but not what you are doing.

I admire many things about you - but I don't trust you to do what is right when it is inconvenient.

And for me, it comes down to trust.

 

Elrond Peredhil, 31

Elder of Lists and Manners

[Falcon2001]

RagingGoat...

 

I just wrote a long huge post, then forgot to put a topic. Damn. Anyway, here's the gist of it:

RagingGoat, I'm going to skip the part where I put 2 and 2 together, but I did, and I think something happened with you, or else you wouldn't be getting so angry at peredhil, who apparently makes it a point to remain neutral in all things.

I understand what he's saying though, and I sense a kindred spirit in you if what he says is true. You're superior to me in many ways if you can do what he says...

First off, I (Apparently) have a powerful intellect capable of producing thematic poetry. I also have an artist's heart, capable of putting emotion into my writing, which is my only outlet. The only problem is that my emotion triggers my intellect, so if I don't feel depressed or angry or SOMETHING, I can't write. I just can't. I try and it comes out like my first poem for entry, which to quote my friend when he saw it:

"Man, that's disturbing."

After I lost my suicidal tendencies over Andrea, I lost my writing ability. Recently(as in TODAY) I was able to write a poem by scraping together what hopelessness and hatred I had left and shoving it into lyrical form. To write my real entry poem, I had to stand in front of the bathroom sink with a knife for ten minutes, and I almost lost it again. To get into an emotional high, some people use drugs, but I just wallow in my own psychic filth. The only thing keeping me alive is my (THREE) promises to commit to life, so all my suicidal energy pent up and I was able to write.

You, apparently, can write at will. I envy you, because I cannot. And when I can, I'm depressed for days.

Also, I have to thank you again.

When I attempted suicide, you were the only one who got my name and called the police to try and save me...thank you.

I can't write more, I have to go, but please take a little break and calm down.

Please?

 

CiodenDarkeye

Initiate of The Pen

Hopeful Patron Saint of Impatience

[Guest Raging Goat]

Peredhil, I do think you take yourself too seriously sometimes - with a pomposity that often comes off as rigid and holier-than-thou. Because, although it is not Archmage, you're correct, the Pen does not seem so much a literary guild as it is a place where people can come to be congratulated for their efforts. It does not seem so much a writing workshop, as a forum for patting each other on the back, and the vast majority of the participants not actual writers, merely dabblers for their own personal pleasure.

 

I think it's wonderful.

 

But it far from bestows the right to be intolerant without question of anything not fitting into your own personal philosophy on relationships or writing.

 

Peredhil, you are right, I did react harshly. But if you do not think that having someone in mind in an analogy to cancer - comparing them to cancer, however obliquely - is not a personal attack, and deserves no response, then I am not sure what to say.

 

I bow to your desire not to continue the personal attacks and flaming. In the future, however, I suggest that if it's your goal to avoid confrontation, don't attack people. I'm certain that with your normally characteristically bright disposition, people will treat you as you treat them, as you wish to be treated in kind.

 

RagingGoat

[Guest Raging Goat]

Falcon, You're very welcome. I like you . It's always nice to see you around, and I'm really sorry to hear about your struggles with writing. I can't offer much advice, I wouldn't know what to say, but if it helps, I can describe how it is for me.

 

Personally, my best creative writings are tumultuous emotions collected in repose. My history as a writer is very limited, so I might not even be accurately describing myself but I find it difficult to write well when I'm in the midst of a moment. The words will come, but they won't be controlled or refined. What they will be, as I'm sure you know from your own writings, is very passionate - which may or may not have even more personal meaning than something written after the storm.

 

The reason I was angry at Peredhil and he is angry at me are all the aspersions and judgments flying about. I'm sure it will be resolved for better or for worse shortly. Although he does not trust me to do what is right, the right in question is only what is right in his particular narrow philosophy. My idea of right is different, and I will do my best to follow that. Although he does repeatedly call me immature from that armchair of his, that follows from our differences in belief of what is right, and back to the same fact that I don't hold the same opinions as him. And, now, to avoid starting up again in what is supposed to be only a response to you...

 

Best of luck, Falcon

 

RagingGoat

[Guest Rezure]

aaahh, I WAS wondering why that thread was gone...

[Guest Raging Goat]

Nice points Zool .

 

But Peredhil, how strange. Assumptions and empty armchair psychobabble.

 

I would have expected better from a supposedly educated individual... Let's take a look of this.

 

The beginning of your post is self-evident, however wordy, and quite frankly irrelevent. I fail to see how it connects in any way to the crux of your post. I do understand the need to string words together prettily, however void of significance, though such tiresome speechifying in the end only wastes space. So I'll get straight to the point you're attempting to make.

 

Your analogy of society to cells is flawed, and the extension of this to the example of cancer doubly so.

 

You say a damaged cell may need extra resources to heal.

 

You say a cancerous cell is a healthy but selfish cell.

 

A cancerous cell is far from a healthy cell. It's not a decision by a cell to be selfish, it is an actual attack upon the cell that causes cancer. The cell is injured, changed, it is not the same healthy cell it was before, it is now a damaged one, diseased, attacking other cells. A better analogy might be the case of biological attack on a society. Say a group of terrorists or an army introduces smallpox or anthrax into an enemy society. The people (cells) hit by smallpox would go around infecting others, attacking them, people would die. Are those people with smallpox selfish, but healthy? No, they are seriously ill.

 

But even this I feel is hardly the point. The real problem is when you try and make the ridiculous connection between your flawed cancer analogy and relations between individuals. It simply isn't there. The complexity and variety of social interactions denies it. There are many cases, especially in a supportive relationship between two people, when it's proper to do exactly that - support each other. Two people can never get every single thing they want out of relationship, differences of opinion are inevitable. But compromise is not cancer. And it's how people love each other and work slowly (or quickly, and that's wonderful) to the relationship they want to have together that can make it beautiful. Mostly, perhaps, it's the love they have for each other.

 

As a note.... the disturbance was unfortunate, but not the reason itself. It's unfortunate you're depressing yourself contemplating hypotheticals... but what might be sadder is the result: the verbiage you titled "Dynamic tension", and the fact you think it's relevant enough to justify being patronizing.

 

Uninformed, assumptive armchair pyschobabble.

 

Has the respect some AM players accorded you gone to far your head? Archmage is a video game forum, filled with children and gamers... it's hardly a forum for intellectuals. Even the man with one eye can be king in the land of the blind. Don't make the same tenuous assumptions when you're patronizing others who also have an eye.

 

RagingGoat

[The Portrait of Zool]

Falcon,

 

Passionate writing is easy. One need put little thought into it, and it is it's own motivation. It's use is at first as a kick start to productivity, but eventually other avenues must be found.

 

Being emotionally motivated, after a while one's passion dries up. The initial impulse after that is usually to try harder and harder to seek out the emotional experience, to even artificially inflate the passions if needed, to continually seek out the 'high'. Obviously this is misplaced, because it becomes a matter of stronger and stronger stimulus to achieve the desired effect, just like any artificial experience.

 

The honest answer is hard work. Writing is NOT easy for me. Writing for me is a matter of sitting down, facing the cold hard paper, and laboriously filling it up with people and scenes. The payoff comes later, when a well crafted and meanigful work is finished (if I am lucky).

 

Don't get me wrong, it's not quite the opposite of writing passionately - it is often fun, and sometimes one is able to join the intellect and the emotional seat and the words flow out. But it is maintainable, with lasting rewards, even if it is hard work.

 

You have had a taste of what a life of words is like. Now you are being encouraged to develop in fuller, more versatile ways by your dissatisfactions. Listen to them. Keep working at it, and the reward will be far better than a simple tidal rush of emotion. The difference is, it isn't a 'given' motivation - you have to want it. Life has a way of forceing these decisions on us sooner or later.

 

And stop by anytime for a pat on the back. You deserve it.

~Zool~

 

Elder of Elders, The Pen is Mightier than the Sword.

Bard of Terra, Patron Saint of Aspiring Bards.

Elder than dirt, more foolish than a jester, able to trip over the smallest logic in a single step. It's... Oh, you know.

[Falcon2001]

Well, it's like I said. I CAN crank out meaningless serving of worthless, tasteless poetry, but that's the intellect talking. I don't like that...it's usually not worth the time it took to write it.

 

Example: My first entry poem.

CiodenDarkeye

 

Initiate of The Pen

Hopeful Patron Saint of Impatience

[The Portrait of Zool]

Different methods take... different methods.

 

Work at it. What is it you don't like about the poem? What is it you are trying to say? What emotion are you trying to evoke? What moment are you trying to convey? Where do your printed words fail to work?

 

Change the words. Try different things. Play with it. You may write something great the first time - you may eventually throw the whole thing away. But you don't know till you try.

 

There is a romantic notion, in the original definition of romanticism, which relates to unconscious action (like passion), which demands that things, like good poetry, just 'happen'. But as a mind matures, it becomes by definition more and more aware of what is going on around it, of the underlying process of things. Eventually, one must mature beyond the romantic notions - not to say there isn't shadow and mystery to the creative process, there always will be - but one eventually becomes aware of the 'process' of creation, and what a person should and should not do to help it out.

 

Focus, Falcon. Help yourself.

~Zool~

 

Elder of Elders, The Pen is Mightier than the Sword.

Bard of Terra, Patron Saint of Aspiring Bards.

Elder than dirt, more foolish than a jester, able to trip over the smallest logic in a single step. It's... Oh, you know.

[Guest Cerulean]

Falcon - I'm with Zool here.

 

The Primitivists' perspective used to maintain the necessity of poetry remaining a 'spontaneous overflow of powerful emotion.' Problem was, none of them actually followed their own dictum entirely!

 

It isn't too hard to string a stream of haphazard thoughts together without structure and then validate the work by claiming it to be 'genuine' emotion, and thus worthy. Inevitably it's far harder to slog at crafting a polished piece. Perhaps I'm biased though, because I'm a metricist lol!

 

Read widely, graft, revise.

 

Good luck and enjoy writing! That's why we're all here, after all.

 

Cerulean.

[Peredhil]

I wasn't going to reply, as discussion with all the Pen Members directly involved had finished and decisions had been made, but I feel constrained to do so by what I see as a possible misunderstanding.

 

sigh

 

The thematic line was the dynamic tension between Self and Society.

 

As I've already expressed in an earlier reply within this thread, the post was written stream-of-conscious, a verbal doodle that wandered. For me, the main point of the post was that identified in the subject line.

 

For clarification in the analogy: the tumor and cancer of the ending was not 'aimed' at Raging Goat, although to be fair, he was one of the issues simmering in my mind at the time.

 

The quote comes from my paranoid-schizophrenic son. It's a very selfish condition.

Part of the observations come from my experiences with other Bipolar family members. I've observed that extremely high intelligence combined with a bio-chemical feeling that one is godlike tends to be selfish. At the other, suicidal end, the overwhelming morass of depression is selfish also.

 

Some of the "doormat" selfless side of the analogy comes from observing friends that have gone through co-dependent relationships (and one who ended up in a cult).

Some of the selfless side comes of recent experiences in working with some people who claimed 'they were just getting the job done,' or 'I can't let the team down', victims of burns, bruising, and broken bones laboring to set up shop as quickly as possible after having a plane crash into their building.

They were a learning lesson is how much pain, grief, and misery a person can set aside to continue on.

 

In short, (finally eh?), the essay on Dynamic Tension was an attempt, admittedly triggered in part by the deletion and discussion of the Masquerade thread, to rise above all these inputs and to extrapolate the idea behind them all, present and past, to a intellectual model (however poorly stated.)

 

For the rudeness in not removing the idea far enough from one of the triggering inputs,

 

I apologize to you, Raging Goat, for the inference that you are comparable to a tumor or cancer in a body.

 

Peredhil

[Falcon2001]

Well, I always kind of followed the romanticist idea of poetry, if it doesn't flow, I'm not going to force it. Of course, I'm only sixteen, so give me a few more months and I'll be back to able to write without my emotional side controlling it. I've gone over some poems before and changed them, and from those come some of my better work...but my little eccentricity is that I HATE REDOING MY WORK! I know I'll just have to get used to it...but it annoys the living poetry out of me. All my emotionally based poems are written all at once, within sixteen seconds or so, but everyonce in a while I have a line running through my head all day and I go home, turn on the Dreamcast, load up the web page, disconnect the net, and spend an hour or so writing...that's how my songs are all made(See the Poetry Forum of the AM UBB for them, they're recently bumped up)...but I like some of my poetry better. It's personal opinion, really, but I'll take your advice and try it out sometime...

 

CiodenDarkeye

Initiate of The Pen

Hopeful Patron Saint of Impatience

[Ozymandias]

RagingGoat,

 

I can understand (in the context of this thread, at least. I have no knowledge of what else has gone on, and won't ask about what people don't want to share. That said-) how you took what Peredhil posted intially and subsequently as attacks on you personally, and thinks being angry's a reasonable, if irrational reaction. It seems like you read what he said, and then assumed that he meant his words one way, and not another- without even asking him about it first. A small matter, but that was your first problem. Your second was reacting in anger (as you still seem to be, somewhat.).

The key to successfully discussing, debating, or even arguing a topic is staying dispassionate. When we get emotional, our reason gets sloppy, our patience shortens. It becomes much easier to say what you don't mean or simply make your case unclearly. Finally, lashing out at someone, angrily or otherwise, tends to make them shut you out more readily because the usual reaction is to be hurt by a violent reaction when they're trying to be reasonable. Hurt could mean offended, disappointed, saddended, and so on, but do you see what I mean?

 

I do want to clarify, though. When you try to make a point, you shouldn't be *completely* dispassionate. You should care about the things you choose to fight for, but keep that caring as a motivation, rather than an arguement to present.

 

Falcon-

If I read what you were saying right, please don't ever try and stimulate your creativity like that again. It sounds like you're putting yourself through needless torture, and there is an important difference between accepting pain and seeking it out. One is educational and strengthening, the other saps one's strength and leads to addiction.

 

I've got a similar problem with my writing, only mine stems more from impatience, than anything else. If I don't get it done in one sitting, suddenly, it's alsmost too hard. At current, I've got six projects, some that have been languishing for years, that I started off on brimming with ideas for, and then lost time to work on regularly at some point, which led to them being VERY stuck in limbo. All because that intial level of ideas 'just wouldn't come back'. Which I know, logically and philosophically, is poppycock. With the liberal arts especially, you sometimes just need to throw things against the wall to see what sticks.

 

Damn! I just remembered that I wanted to get that...

There's an article in the October issue of Dungeon magazine that I think would make a great reference here; It's all about how to find your way past deadlock in a role-playing adventure. The advice it gives I think is very well-thought out, succintly put, and applicable with many other things too. I'll bring it with me tomorrow.

 

My current online access is only at school. Pain in the neck, I assure you, since I don't live here.

 

One tip I can give is to not be afraid of using your writing as a general soapbox. I just put up my story For the Time Being today, and if you read that, you'll see a good deal of common thoughts in my head running through the main character's. Slightly exaggerated, of course. But only slightly.

 

It might not work for you, but hey, why not try?

 

Finally, to all of you, a sincere thank you for helping me keep it in perspective.

 

~Ozymandias~

[Guest Raging Goat]

Thank you, Peredhil

 

I had indeed taken great offense at that inference.

Especially considering private conversations you've had with me and the other person in question before.

 

I still hold onto much of my analysis, especially the highly dubious connection between what you put forth and originally stated "triggering input", which is, at it's heart, based purely on your personal philosophy on relationships - which I don't ascribe to, and do not enjoy being judged by (for this in the out, private conversations mostly, as well as here until the apology). I can't say I know what's going on with your other triggering inputs, but I feel the relation between this one to your analogy a little confounding.

 

I disapprove of some of your actions in your personal situation just as much as your disapproval of some of mine in mine, voiced here by you as well as in private conversations. But even though I too feel I have nothing to be ashamed of, and I too look down upon some of your dealings, I never judged you, I never turned it into a post, I never judged you in public. And I still won't now.

 

That all being said, I did respond in anger, I did respond harshly... I'm sorry for that.

 

And especially if, as you say now, the "triggering inputs" were only in a very small part what you implied they were earlier.... I'm sorry, too, for the misunderstanding.

 

I apologize to you, Peredhil, for my own attacks, and for letting my analysis of your inference dribble off into personal attack

 

RagingGoat

[Guest Raging Goat]

I'd thank you, Ozymandias, for the tips on how to debate, but they rank among the most cliched pieces of advice I've ever been given. Even forgetting the fact the tips were self-evident, this wasn't even a debate as you mean it, so the fact that you offered them leaves me scratching my head. Secondly, you're right, you don't know the situation or what else has gone on... so if this were a debate, you'd be dissecting points without knowing what you were talking about. Fortunately, it wasn't...

 

But anyway. I can't say I haven't done the same things now more than a couple times myself

 

Best of luck to you Ozymandias, I so enjoy your writing

 

RagingGoat

[Orlan]

Actually, the key to debating well, unless you're debating to convince, is to piss somone off without actually looking like you're trying to piss them off.

 

You want to make them lose thier cool while keeping yours, which will lead them to slipping up and making mistakes.

 

Doing little things, such as repeatedly using your opponents name when you debate is one of many tricks that a debater can use towards this end.

 

Debating to convince is another matter completely. It is the hardest kinda to accomplish. In fact, the only way to convince is if the person you're debating to has no opinion, or is unsure of thier opinion, or if you have some MINDBLOWING analogy, or idea and the other person is able to admit to it. When debating to convince, the best you can ever hope for is for the person to see where you are coming from. But with so many closed minded people in the world, you're better off saving your breath.

[Guest Rezure]

My problem with that is that I get convinced of the other person's points too easily, only to realise in a day or so that I was right and the other person was completely wrong.

 

Even when it's not me talking, I usually find myself going "yeah, that makes sense, they're right" and then "well, that makes even more sense. never mind, it's the other person who's right" and so on and so forth...

 

It's not that I can't think of anything to say, its just that what the other is saying makes me unsure of saying it. I could even do it to myself... I remember writing history essays, and when I would, every time I'd believe what I was writing at the beginning, and have the exactly opposite opinion by the time I finish.

 

What can I do about that?

 

Oh, and just while I'm here, I'd like a pat on the back please!

[Falcon2001]

*Pats Rezure on the back, conseqeuently lifting his wallet*

Let's see here, what's the biiiiiig news with me (While, of course, leafing through Rezure's wallet and removing all items of value)...could it be, nah.

YES IT COULD!

You guys know the two halves I was talking about?

Y'know, intellectual and emotional?

Well, I was sitting there, reading some of Shadowflower Maiden (Porcelain, now)'s poetry, and it all clicked back the way it used to be!

I CAN WRITE!

PRAISE THE LOOOOOORRRD!

Well, recently I could write prose and stories anyway, like the 'Rooms of the Mighty Pen Keep' thread I recently created...EVERYONE GO THERE! REALLY! I need your input!

GO THERE RIGHT NOW! It's in...one...of the other...rooms...not sure, I think it's the Assembly Hall.

 

CiodenDarkeye

Initiate of The Pen

Hopeful Patron Saint of Impatience

[Ozymandias]

I tend to use cliches often I'm afraid, but I still give 'em out if seems even possibly useful. Just because they're cliches does not mean they're not true, AND (and that's a big and) I tend to oversimplify as a matter of course when I don't fully understand what's going on- that way, there's more to be said if you know the basics, but not particulars. Why did I give you tips on debate? Because really, that's what any argument is, isn't it? I also know how easy it is to lose sight of simple things in the heat of passion too, so my philosophy when attacking a problem is to start with the basics, and work your way up. That way, one can relax a little bit more easily or avert losing their cool.

 

I'm glad, one way or another that my rambles were appreciated. Thank you, and you're welcome. I just didn't want you two fighting. I'm REALLY happy to see that it's been settled amicably, Honored Guest. I look forward to having you around. :>)

 

~Oz~

 

(And no, I don't really *talk* this way. Maybe half of any writing I do actually sounds like my conversation. The other half, well... utica.)