I really enjoy arguing

Post Reply New Topic

It's all I like to do. It's been very rare as a radical Judeo-Christian Neoconservative conservative-Urbanist Americanist to find others who either agree with me or are interested in the things I'm interested in. I like arguing so much I'll even play devils advocate if it invites the chance for a good debate.

Is liking to argue(the only way I've often been able to explore the topics I'm interested in) a common aspie trait?

Dunno about it being a common aspie trait, but I know I like it too.
Sometimes I wish I'd joined some Oxford-Cambridge-style "debating society" when I was younger (though not sure if one actually existed near me). Sounds like a lot of fun, and a good way to turn what others may perceive as an annoying habit into a useful life and career skill.

^ I like arguing with people who have opinions contrary to my own, which is not to say I like to insult them. I suspect I'm not as good at it as I'd like to be.

I was at Oxford University by the way, and very definitely would not have enjoyed being in the company of the type of people who were in the Oxford Union (the university debating society).

Well then you can really have fun here on WP, go over to PPR and jump in. There are several here who make well researched points on various topics. And sometimes, there are those who take it to an emotional level and just tell you the truth but not in love.

Judging by the interactions among my family members, several of whom are autistic, yes. Loving to argue IS an aspie/autistic trait.

I think aspies are more likely to view arguing about a topic as a means to learn/think about it.
NTs tend to view it as just being disagreeable.

Consider yourself blessed. Or at least I think you are. I wish I had people to argue with in real life, my family are mostly on the Left or apolitical but don't like discussing politics, or theology, or male-female relations, or philosophy, etc.

I can imagine that it sometimes has its drawbacks, too.

I think so too. Understanding rhetoric, understanding how those you disagree with you think, and knowing what appeals to them, can help you persuade others, either to your ideas, away from theirs, or towards a generally shared consensus.

I don't like to insult people. I've always hated when an argument leaves ideas and focuses on the personhood of the rivaling opponent. I insult ideas freely, and I think we all should, and I do think that sometimes confuse that for a direct attack given that they view their ideas as an extension of themselves.

By the way, I would probably thrive in an Oxford Union type environment. I recently heard on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and given the range of issues they cover, it's probably an electrifying atmosphere when both sides are trading blows.

That's certainly true of PPR, which is my home here on WP.

I think that's what makes us aspies so eccentric. I think it's far more human to seek consensus, given our tribal/communal nature. My love for arguing is to uncover a new point, a new facet, a new angle to view life through, and my also as a reverence for the life of the mind, and particularly my own mind which like many aspies, needs a daily workout.

I think I'd enjoy real debate if I ever found it, but, so far, if it exists at all, it must happen only in social circles well beyond my reach. Every time I've thought I could have a rational conversation with someone, attacking ideas, rather than one another, ...

... that's exactly what happened, some way or other. People seem to consider trying to debate rude (they often accuse me of trying to force my ideas on them, and the more I reason them, the worse) and cowardly (since I'm attacking their ideas and trying to get away with it without suffering personal retaliation). They probably start hinting right from the beginning that my attempt to debate is not welcome, but, of course, I don't notice it till they're overtly insulting me, daring me to express my ideas to their face---if online---hitting me or otherwise making use of their position of power over me. They're always in a position of power over me, and, to them, this probably should settle any argument in their favor before it even starts, so they have to put me in my place for foolishly defying them.



I've never been in such an environment, but the closest experiences I've had suggest they'd easily dismiss anything I might have to say by pointing out what a smelly and functionally illiterate country bumpkin I am. The most polite would consider this implied and silently ignore me.

The impression I had of the Oxford Union types is that they were largely upper middle class people who knew very little about the society inhabited by the other 90% or so of their fellow countrymen, or about the real world in general. I was dismayed to observe 15 or 20 year later that some of these people were being elected to the House Of Commons, and that a few are now in the House Of Lords.

I really, really like a good argument too! It's not just about the argument - it's more about the show of passion and the intellectual challenge of being engaged in something that is usually as deep as an argument, especially about hot areas such as politics and religion. I know that sounds like pretty typical trigger topics, but those two topics are really interesting to see where people sit and to get to know their understanding of how they see things (possible devil's advocacy)

....And the more someone can actually hold their own to me in an argument, and do it well and with dignity, I like them more than someone who doesn't choose to argue with me at all! Talk about logic xD

I hate arguing.

Even if I know that I'm right and someone else is wrong, I'd just rather walk away.

I love devil's advocacy