The Instigator
Xer
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
Lifeisgood
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

The user Lifeisgood is a narcissist.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Xer
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/25/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,385 times Debate No: 9328
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (32)
Votes (5)

 

Xer

Pro

==========
DEFINITIONS:
==========

Lifeisgood - http://www.debate.org...

narcissist - The term narcissism refers to the personality trait of self-love, which includes the set of character traits concerned with self-image or ego. The terms narcissism, narcissistic, and narcissist are often used as pejoratives, denoting vanity, conceit, egotism or simple selfishness.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

==========
CONTENTIONS:
==========

1) Take a look at this thread: http://www.debate.org... and look at 90% of LIG's rebuttals. His rebuttals are basically: "You are intellectually inferior to me, your opinion if sh!t."

There are many instances of LIG's narcissism, but this is the most glaring (Page 5):

I wrote:
"**Do you understand how much of a narcissist you are sounding like? You are basically saying 'I won, the voters are stupid, and I'm always right... So, duh, I won (by a landslide).'"

LIG responded:
"You asked for a reason. You interpreted my response in a negative way, that is all. I was not trying to be arrogant.

I can't help it that I'm always right."

>"I can't help it that I'm always right." Wow, that is pretty much the definition of narcissism.

2) Lifeisgood and I originally had a debate on Abortion (here: http://www.debate.org...). He messaged me on August 19th to discuss Abortion further.

The message in full is here:
Part 1: http://i30.tinypic.com...
Part 2: http://i27.tinypic.com...

The two most glaring instances of narcissism in the message:

"First of all, why are you in favor of abortion, even after your pwnment in our previous debate? Why are you still convinced?"

"Anyway, are you afraid to discuss the issue of abortion with me?"

Each of LIG's posts are just oozing with narcissism. I have no other comments, the evidence is quite clear.

3) LIG just made a thread on his narcissism here: http://www.debate.org...

He makes a good case for his own narcissism:

"Sometimes (perhaps frequently) in my comments, I say ridiculously arrogant things, or just plain silly, nonsensical, statements."

"What's worse, I seem to have thoroughly convinced Nags that I am an arrogant, intolerant idiot who thinks he's always right."

"People who don't know me well get the impression that I some sort of extreme narcissist."

=====

I have nothing else to say for now.
Lifeisgood

Con

I accept the definitions. Now for the arguments.

"1) Take a look at this thread: http://www.debate.org...... and look at 90% of LIG's rebuttals. His rebuttals are basically: "You are intellectually inferior to me, your opinion if sh!t."

On the issue of abortion I am very emotional. On that particular thread I was having great difficultly responding to every single post there, so I became exasperated. I said some hasty things there that I greatly regret now. I actually wince when I see that thread; I associate it with my failure. It was simple frustration and stress for the most part, not narcissism.

"There are many instances of LIG's narcissism, but this is the most glaring (Page 5):

I wrote:
"**Do you understand how much of a narcissist you are sounding like? You are basically saying 'I won, the voters are stupid, and I'm always right... So, duh, I won (by a landslide).'"

LIG responded:
"You asked for a reason. You interpreted my response in a negative way, that is all. I was not trying to be arrogant.

I can't help it that I'm always right."

>"I can't help it that I'm always right." Wow, that is pretty much the definition of narcissism."

Do you honestly believe I was being serious there? I even said on the thread that I was joking.

I ask the readers, how many times have you heard someone say something like that? And how many times were they serious? There, I was trying to admit that I had been acting arrogantly in a light-hearted, disarming way. I had ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA that I would be taken seriously…

"2) Lifeisgood and I originally had a debate on Abortion (here: http://www.debate.org......). He messaged me on August 19th to discuss Abortion further.

The message in full is here:
Part 1: http://i30.tinypic.com......
Part 2: http://i27.tinypic.com......

The two most glaring instances of narcissism in the message:

"First of all, why are you in favor of abortion, even after your pwnment in our previous debate? Why are you still convinced?"

"Anyway, are you afraid to discuss the issue of abortion with me?"

Each of LIG's posts are just oozing with narcissism. I have no other comments, the evidence is quite clear."

Read my final comments. I wasn't being a narcissist; I was trying to be silly. I made the mistake of thinking that Nags and I had a better relationship. In the first comment, I was just being ridiculous. As Nags said in the discussion, look at the current score on the debate. That isn't pwnment! That is the second closest debate I have ever had.
In the second comment, I was a bit afraid that Nags would quit. So I gave a little friendly goading to make him want to show me how wrong I was. That's all.

In one message, I said "Do you have anything better than that?" There, I was again trying to goad Nags into a thoughtful response, and again I thought our friendship was stronger than it actually was. My mistake.

"3) LIG just made a thread on his narcissism here: http://www.debate.org......

He makes a good case for his own narcissism:

"Sometimes (perhaps frequently) in my comments, I say ridiculously arrogant things, or just plain silly, nonsensical, statements."

"What's worse, I seem to have thoroughly convinced Nags that I am an arrogant, intolerant idiot who thinks he's always right."

"People who don't know me well get the impression that I some sort of extreme narcissist."

I also make it very clear when I make those statements that I am JOKING. Those statements are supposed to be so ridiculously arrogant that a sensible being would never make them seriously. However, you people don't know me well enough to see that I am a sensible being, which is my primary mistake.

Over the internet it is very difficult to express things like emotion and tone. When you cannot see someone face-to face, with only little black markings to represent you, it is incredibly easy to misinterpret what is being said. I am afraid that is what has happened here.

I have never thought of myself as better than anyone here, nor do I fancy myself as being incredibly well educated. I understand my limits. Sometimes I am selfish, but not unusually so. I like myself, but not unusually so. Do I make arrogant comments? Yes, in jest. At other times, I am merely frustrated or upset, and I do not intend to cast myself in a superior light. Do I make these jests at inappropriate times? Sometimes. Do I delude myself into thinking that I am more than what I am worth? Never.

I am no narcissist.
Debate Round No. 1
Xer

Pro

My opponent's defense is as follows:

1) I was emotional, I didn't mean it.

2) I wasn't being serious.

3) I was being silly, I didn't mean it.

4) I was joking, I didn't mean it.

===

Voters- You are the jury of this debate. I, Nags, am the prosecutor. And my opponent, Lifeisgood, is the defendant.

His defense is atypical of the justice system in the United States. "I didn't mean it... I didn't do it." Yet, he failed to make his intentions known at any time. Every single time he has posted something narcissistic, he has done so without any smilies or emoticons like everyone else on the forum. He only apologizes after I call him out on it.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant may be apologetic now, but that is only because he knows his guilt. He is simply saving face. I have made a damning prosecution of the defendant, which he failed to defend other than "I didn't mean it... I wasn't serious." For all the above reasons, Lifeisgood is undoubtedly narcissistic, thus Lifeisgood is a narcissist.

I rest my case.
Lifeisgood

Con

Now, for the final argument.

"His defense is atypical of the justice system in the United States."

That is because this debate is very atypical of cases presented to the U.S. justice system. In this debate, my opponent must prove that I am a narcissist, something to do with my character. He has attempted to provide evidence to show this. I have shown that this evidence does not necessarily mean that I am a narcissist.

"Yet, he failed to make his intentions known at any time. Every single time he has posted something narcissistic, he has done so without any smilies or emoticons like everyone else on the forum. He only apologizes after I call him out on it."

I have had several reasons for not giving emoticons like other people.
1) I am afraid it will ruin the joke. I have found jokes to be much more humorous when one has to think for a moment about the statement before they figure out how it is funny. Just putting a little ‘:p' thing after every joke I made seemed to ruin the humor.
2) I honestly used to think that it was stupid to use the emoticon things. I was new to the internet when I first joined, and I thought I could adequately express myself without them. It just seemed redundant for statements that were obviously not serious. My problem lay in the fact that there are really people out there like that who ARE serious…

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant may be apologetic now, but that is only because he knows his guilt. He is simply saving face. I have made a damning prosecution of the defendant, which he failed to defend other than "I didn't mean it... I wasn't serious." For all the above reasons, Lifeisgood is undoubtedly narcissistic, thus Lifeisgood is a narcissist."

Your evidence, as I have previously shown, is not at all ‘damning'. None of it conclusively indicates narcissism.

I have presented my case. I have nothing more to say. Voters, make your decision.
Debate Round No. 2
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ReganFan 8 years ago
ReganFan
LOL Lifeisgood lost the debate "Life is good".
Posted by Maikuru 8 years ago
Maikuru
has = have, easily = especially. Carry on :D
Posted by Maikuru 8 years ago
Maikuru
For what it's worth, I believe you. Many of us has been misunderstood in this way, especially around your age. Besides, if you really were narcissistic to the extent implied here, you would have little reason to defend yourself. Like I said earlier, reputations are easily changed with time, easily in a site like this.
Posted by Lifeisgood 8 years ago
Lifeisgood
MTGandP:

I understand what your saying. I have lost this debate, it seems. I really only accepted to try and clear my name. Now I'm just beating a dead horse...

As for the abortion thread, that whole thing was a total disaster. I completely failed to support my case adequately. I wish I had never started it. I could have done a lot better, I just... didn't.

Maikuru:

What you say is true. That being said, do you believe me? Does anyone believe me?

This isn't going to be easy. :(
Posted by Maikuru 8 years ago
Maikuru
A vote for the affirmative does not necessarily mean the voter thinks you are a narcissist, LiG. Rather, the voter may have just found Pro's case to be superior. That said, I do think some members may hold a negative impression of you. That comes with the territory, though, and is easily corrected over time.
Posted by MTGandP 8 years ago
MTGandP
What I do think is that you never understand when you have lost. You need to work on seeing things from other people's perspective. Like that whole thread on abortion, where your entire case relied on a definition that other people weren't using.
Posted by Lifeisgood 8 years ago
Lifeisgood
Is there ANYONE here who doesn't think I'm a narcissist?

Please?
Posted by Maikuru 8 years ago
Maikuru
C: Tie - Calling someone a narcissist doesn't constitute a deduction here in my opinion, especially when that is the primary issue at hand.
S & G: Tie
A: Pro - Pro provided quotes that were pretty clearly narcissistic. Con's defense, while perhaps true, was unconvincing in the face of so much contrary evidence.
S: Pro - His sources were the crux of his case.
Posted by Lifeisgood 8 years ago
Lifeisgood
"Lifeisgood, your narcissism is showing."

What do you mean by that? I'm just arguing with you. That isn't narcissism; it's what this site is for. :)

"I gave hard evidence. My arguments were much more convincing. You had hearsay. That's why you are losing."

I know why people have voted against me. I'm just trying to show you guys why I think I rightfully won.
Posted by Xer 8 years ago
Xer
Lifeisgood, your narcissism is showing.

I gave hard evidence. My arguments were much more convincing. You had hearsay. That's why you are losing.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 8 years ago
Maikuru
XerLifeisgoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by patsox834 8 years ago
patsox834
XerLifeisgoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by MTGandP 8 years ago
MTGandP
XerLifeisgoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Xer 8 years ago
Xer
XerLifeisgoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Lifeisgood 8 years ago
Lifeisgood
XerLifeisgoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06