Richard L,
I wasn't talking about you. And I wasn't talking about debating in general. Healthy debate is good. I never said that those that debate on here have low intelligence.
I was talking about those on here that engage in unhealthy (often non-debate) debate, characterized as follows:
- starts as, or contains a lot of baiting
- is entered into by people that aren't willing to consider others POV (chest beaters)
- turns into personal attacks
- ends abrubtly when one side starts to actually get to the "meat" of why the other feels the way they do and has the other person SHUTTING DOWN (no ability for growth)
- has people defending a position or opinion that they aren't willing to discuss or can't articulate
IMHO, debates and discussions having qualities like the above are entered into by people that show signs of emotional immaturity and low intelligence.
Yes, it can be big ego, but I stand by "low intelligence", because to me, higher intelligence means more than just having a high IQ. For me, someone displays high intelligence if they can thing objectively, they understand and can articulate WHY they think as they do (and have the opinions that they have), and they can have such conversations without attacking others or feeling attacked when such is not the case.
So, there. You see a postive example in action. You disagreed with my statement. I restated in an unemotional way to let you know that I think you may have misunderstood exactly what I was saying; and then I articulated WHY I feel the sticky point between you and I (high intelligence) is considered by me as it is.
I'm not mad. I don't feel attacked. I don't feel that I am right, and that you are wrong.
TJR