Hi Guys!

Although I have been very active on the forums, one place which I have not been very active is the off-topic forums. However, of course, like any human being, I have thoughts which do lie beyond the scope of Warlight. So this thread will be devoted to them. Feel free to comment about my thoughts, as I love an engaging discussion.

So today, I would like to share how I view people, especially when I first encounter them, so that I don't develop an immediate taste, nor distaste of a person. Although they can be easily changed when I get to know someone, I always have a specific set of views and thoughts about any person, as, no matter how different people are, all of them share many similar common traits. I like to call these set of traits the "rational person". Now, I know that many of you may get critical by this, for me saying that I "judge" a person before I even meet them, but this is far from the truth. Rather, the "Rational Person" should be better viewed as a set of questions, to help more easily define people as I get to know them better.

The first, and most important, piece of the rational person is something that is quite obvious: every person has a set of strengths and a set of weaknesses, a set of virtues and a set of flaws. What they are, is not apparent at first, however, there is not a person who lacks any of these. Some people are adept at expressing their strengths, whereas others struggle to cover up their flaws, however, in the end we all have them. Being aware of this helps me to realize that some people's flaws, when they express them when I first meet them, may not be helped, and be painfully visible. This helps me to prevent getting an immediate negative first impression of a person which might be otherwise undeserved, especially after their strengths are expressed. For example, a common flaw that I see among people is that they have an inability to express their ideas. For many people, this comes off as "incompetent" or "not bright", even if that may not be the case at all. Sure, what they seem to express visibly might be true, but it is always worth it to dig deeper to find true understanding in the situation.

Another piece of the rational person is a bit more specific. Every person, no matter how much they might refuse to admit it, has a tendency to argue, especially about something they feel strongly about. Once again, when you first meet someone, this is not clear what exactly this is for that specific person. What someone feels strongly about to one person might mean nothing to another. This in itself can be a source of argument. If someone, with some argument they deeply care for, runs into another person who does not, it can be extremely upsetting for the person who does care. Thus, when talking to someone, I maintain interest in what they feel to be passionate, even if I am not that interested, so that they do not get upset. Then, of course, there is the contrasting viewpoint, a greater source of argument than the lack of interest. People tend to get into dogfights when their viewpoints contradict. It happens all the time in politics (and elsewhere). In these cases, it is best to be able to have strong composition skills, for both sides, so that a point can be made without being too upsetting for the other side of the argument. If both sides can do this, what happens is debate: an intellectual argument in which both sides do not feel threatened by the other. This is the best kind of argument, and that is something that all should strive for, no matter what. The key is keeping a level head, and not falling to your emotions. If you can do this, then an argument can be constructive, resulting in a better understanding and respect for both parties involved, rather than destructive, which can result in one or both sides being seriously offended.

The final piece of the rational person I would like to discuss is that people, for the most part, have generally a favorable personality, and are easy to get along with. We all have our differences, but since most people realize that we do, we can accept then and get along with just about anyone we encounter. Thus, when I first meet a person, I assume I will get along with them. Now this may seem obvious to many of you, but there many people out there with the "prove you can get along with me" mentality. These people, whether aware of it or not, tend to think that their way is the right way and only way. Some people are much more subtle about it than others, but, alas, there are many people who have this unfortunate trait. Luckily, I don't initially assume this about people, and luckily, I do believe that any person can have their own views, as long as it is not something like removal of basic human rights, or other views that can be detrimental to humanity as a whole.

In any case, what are your thoughts on this? Agree, Disagree? Different ideas? Views? Mindsets? Additions or Removals? Own thoughts on the idea of the "Rational Person"? Discuss below.

Edited 1/26/2016 02:50:33

TL;DR

If your gonna go start posting on OT, keep it short n to the point.

+1 Lord. Only read the first half of the first sentence of each paragraph.

Problem is, I have a lot of thought into this musing. I honestly don't see any way to further shorten it. There is a lot of content in there... and some of the political stuff on warlight ends up being waaay longer than this...

Yes, and only a small group of select ppl read all the political BS.

Fine I'll read it. Just read it 1/10 would not do. I categorize people based upon what I learn about them. Like my one friend I classify him as pole/german hybrid, stoner, atheist, deaf in one ear. Then when I disagree with a person I think back to what I know about them and avoid the debate entirely by derailing it before it happens. I will do this by going ''well you're a german nazi'' or something like that. Debate is only good when it is productive. It is pointless to try to change the opinions of the average person since they're powerless anyway and debating them will only serve to alienate them.

Edited 1/26/2016 03:19:26

Considering all of the stuff that does exist on the off-topic forum, I wanted to provide something engaging and not politically based, unlike EVERYTHING that exists here. I figured this would provide for something a bit different. If you don't want to read it, or if even no one does, that is fine. I was just hoping that I could have a non-political, intellectual based discussion for once.

Edited 1/26/2016 03:15:17

1). Theres plenty of non-political stuff
2). No one here should care about intellectual stuff; its not appropriate.

lol. you want an intellectual discussion on an internet board game forum.

^^^

that's what I thought

yeah lol what a noob.

Ripper, your the n00b here.

@Varys- Is anything appropriate for warlight in the off topic stuff?
@Ripper- Once again, its the off-topic forum. What is the purpose of it?

If you don't care about it, don't comment about it.

you're* not your. The offtopic forums are for banter. This is not banter.

We need more people like you, Aura. +1 Wonderful composition. Now I'm not the only one with long threads.

Definition of off-topic-

Discussion not directly related to WarLight

This easily applies.

Edited 1/26/2016 03:30:38

Was ist das cancer?

DDB- shame on you!

This is OT.

OFF TOPIC. ALL SHALL BE DERAILED, AND PERISH!

Is cancer in German still cancer?

My mind:

(Well... now I know what the off-topic forums are like... gl getting any meaning out of them...)

@Ripper- I think we have a different way of defining what "Debate" is. To me, debate is the use of intellect, reason, and evidence to support your argument. It has absolutely nothing to do with changing another's viewpoint, rather, the goal of debate is to defend your own viewpoint. In fact, the most successful debates are those where both people have successfully defended their argument.

What you are likely imagining is a political debate, which, is not a debate at all. Its two or more knuckleheads trying to bash each other, tbh.

Edited 1/26/2016 03:50:55