JJ's arguing style is maddening

The blond aussie
Post Reply
User avatar
Flossie
Site Admin
Posts: 62540
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 6:31 pm
Location: Outside Eurozone
Contact:

JJ's arguing style is maddening

Post by Flossie » Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:04 am

I find JJ's style of argument absolutely infuriating most of the time, occasionally he is coherent, cogent and logical but often, when dealing with complex issues, he is simply idiotic, illogical and diversionary, and quashes his opponent with the volume and venom of the drivel he delivers.

One can supposed that his intellectual faculties are compromised by his high emotions in mid-argument but some examples of his logic and understanding of human behaviour seem to be so utterly invalid this could be a very generous interpretation of his problems.

For instance, when he was complaining about Ife commenting to Josie on the reasons for his retiring to the diary room following his distressing argument with Josie, he couldn't understand that Ife was entitled to express her opinions for his behaviour, particularly as Josie had requested them. He claimed that if Ife were to express opinions about him, she should only do so to him and to no one else. Not only is this an utterly ridiculous and illogical position, it is also utterly hypocritical given his propensity to express harsh opinions of housemates to other housemates than the target of his opinions. He has targeted Corin and Ben in particular. Somehow in his mind he seems not to equate his behaviour with the same behaviour of Ife which he found so offensive.

Even more offensive are his diversionary tactics in the heat of argument. For instance, when arguing with Ben in today's highlights Ben suggested that the public should decide which of them was in the right, he obviously meant that one of them would be evicted by the public before the other. JJ took the mention of the public as justification to rant about Ben's ambition to have a career in the media, which was utterly irrelevant to the point Ben raised. JJ then proceeded to rant with such passion and at such length Ben had little option but to be a spectator. It could be that JJ's grasp of logic is so poor that he couldn't understand the point Ben was making but I think it is more likely he has consciously or unconsciously adopted this style of arguing because in his mind he thinks he wins the argument if he is able to quieten his opponents.

I would love to be in the house to point out to him each time he attempts to use fallacious reasoning, diversionary tactics, or volume to win arguments.

User avatar
Triggers
Dancing machine
Posts: 9868
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:56 pm

Post by Triggers » Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:52 am

I wish I'd said all of that!! I watched his argument with Ben on live-feed (too late, so tired, but unable to stop watching) I was so annoyed - and for all the reasons you've stated.

I actually wished I was in the house - but YOU should so be in there "to point out to him each time he attempts to use fallacious reasoning, diversionary tactics, or volume to win arguments" Go get him Flossie!!! :-x

User avatar
Flossie
Site Admin
Posts: 62540
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 6:31 pm
Location: Outside Eurozone
Contact:

Post by Flossie » Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:27 pm

:p clap:

User avatar
Anna
Analytical Hubster
Posts: 14339
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:10 pm
Location: South-West London

Post by Anna » Mon Jul 19, 2010 6:10 pm

Firstly JJ is an emotional person who's very fluid with his emotions. What he's feeling is usually verbalised. Secondly, with the exception of you Flo, people are rarely rational and logical when feeling hurt, insecure or angry enough to argue. Their perceptions may not be accurate when overwhelmed by feeling - they're arguing directly from disturbed emotion.

The next day JJ seems capable of getting things in perspective and in the cases of Corin and Ben, we saw him apologise and in Ben's case, approach things more calmly the following day.

I also recognise with JJ the desire to pursue every point that he feels strongly about to its conclusion. He can't have anything unresolved or unexpressed within him when his feelings are high. I'm the same. You may be correct in that he needs to argue his opponent into silence to feel some kind of cleansing, but I do think that part of this is that he can't contain his tangled feelings, and has to get them out, no matter how illogical or inconsistent with each other some of his points may seem at such times.

In the instance with Ife, I think what she said: "Why would a 24 year old cry in the diary room over a girl he didn't fancy?" touched on something very personal and a subject where he was very vulnerable. We witnessed his distress when Josie was cold-shouldering him - that's the magnitude of emotion Ife (or BB in effect) was touching upon with that comment. The relationship between Josie and JJ is complex - no one really knows what JJ feels. Bear in mind also that he's suffered a major bereavement during the last two years (his father) where in the morning his father left for work as usual and in the evening he was simply gone. It takes between two and five years to recover from a major bereavement and any sudden losses during that period - even minor - can be magnified because of the degree of the underlying emotion. There's no doubt that JJ is emotionally attached to Josie, whatever the exact nature of his feelings might be. When she seemed OK one minute therefore, but the next was cold shouldering him, I suspect it touched upon the latent distress and loss of control he experienced where someone you're connected to emotionally is suddenly gone and nothing that you do will get them back.

In addition, they're all vulnerable in that house in that they're cut off from their support systems of family and friends, are in a situation that would induce paranoia in anyone, and are forced to form bonds with and rely emotionally on others who have been selected for BB by their very ability to rub someone in the house up the wrong way.

It was the comment that JJ reacted to primarily in my view, but targeted Ife as the originator of the comment. Ife tends to have a rather simplistic view of things in my opinion. She didn't know whether JJ was crying in the diary room or what he was saying, and she doesn't really understand the complexity of his feelings around Josie because he probably hasn't ever discussed it with her. I think in his view she has no right to make throw-away comments because she's incapable of understanding his inner state because he hasn't ever shared it with her.

Of course, observations and gossip about other housemates are what BB relies upon - in a calmer, more rational mood JJ would know that. However I think his position was that if Ife was discussing his emotions from a genuine desire to help, then rather than making possibly inaccurate speculations behind his back, she should have approached him with her perceptions. Not in the crass way of saying "Were you crying in the Diary Room just then because you really like Josie?" but more gently perhaps by saying things like "This split with Josie has upset you, could it be that you feel more for her than you thought? If I'm being intrusive just tell me." That sort of thing. Then it couldn't be claimed that she hadn't approached him with what she thought about his situation.

In my view it's a highway to error to form an opinion about someone's inner state without ever consulting the person in question about what they feel. Of course, we're all doing that with BB because as viewers we don't have the opportunity to talk to the housemates. However I think JJ, being a person who functions primarily on emotion, intuitively feels this as well - if someone's going to comment on your most personal stuff, then they risk being highly inaccurate unless they seek feedback from the person actually having the feelings! Ife didn't do that - and Josie was probably too insecure to ask him directly.

I'll continue in a later post.

Post Reply

Return to “John James”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest