The difference between a debater and a virtue signaller
I am a debater.
When I engage a virtue signaler, I am always taken back by their complete disinterest in discussing or having their points challenged.
Here are the differences: (and yes I wrote this all by myself)
Virtue signalers are not interested in debating their points. They've already debated it in their mind, and they have come to the conclusion(s) they state.
They are not interested in being challenged on this. They have spoken and have expressed their virtues. They are letting you know where they stand, and they are not interested in hearing information that contradicts what they have chosen to believe.
What virtue signalers ARE interested in is having their virtues agreed with and flattered. They want to hear from people who agree. They want people to tell them how smart, wise and moral they are. They want to be told how special they are, as they are the true chosen people of the world. They believe everyone should listen to them and do what they tell them to do.
Debaters want to be challenged. They want to hear other viewpoints, then determine if they should consider that viewpoint, or if they want to challenge it with other ideas or thoughts. They want to hash out the issue and then come to a conclusion, regardless if it is in agreement.
Virtue signalers want to be praised. They want like minded people to agree with them.
Debaters don't care about that, they want to be challenged and challenge others on their beliefs.
Virtue signalers believe they are smarter and better than those with whom they disagree.
Virtue signalers speak down to people who don't agree with them. They demean and degrade them as unworthy, for they do not share the same virtues as a signaler.
Debaters challenge those to prove their points when they don't agree with them. They then take that information and consider it, and accept or reject it accordingly. They don't care about a person's morality; they care about facts and information.
Virtue signalers ignore any information that doesn't line up with what they already believe. They are suspicious of things they disagree with. They find it easier to go along with the crowd, and want to be accepted by the mainstream.
Debaters don't care about how they are perceived, they want to understand and learn.
Are you a debater or a virtue signaler?
When I engage a virtue signaler, I am always taken back by their complete disinterest in discussing or having their points challenged.
Here are the differences: (and yes I wrote this all by myself)
Virtue signalers are not interested in debating their points. They've already debated it in their mind, and they have come to the conclusion(s) they state.
They are not interested in being challenged on this. They have spoken and have expressed their virtues. They are letting you know where they stand, and they are not interested in hearing information that contradicts what they have chosen to believe.
What virtue signalers ARE interested in is having their virtues agreed with and flattered. They want to hear from people who agree. They want people to tell them how smart, wise and moral they are. They want to be told how special they are, as they are the true chosen people of the world. They believe everyone should listen to them and do what they tell them to do.
Debaters want to be challenged. They want to hear other viewpoints, then determine if they should consider that viewpoint, or if they want to challenge it with other ideas or thoughts. They want to hash out the issue and then come to a conclusion, regardless if it is in agreement.
Virtue signalers want to be praised. They want like minded people to agree with them.
Debaters don't care about that, they want to be challenged and challenge others on their beliefs.
Virtue signalers believe they are smarter and better than those with whom they disagree.
Virtue signalers speak down to people who don't agree with them. They demean and degrade them as unworthy, for they do not share the same virtues as a signaler.
Debaters challenge those to prove their points when they don't agree with them. They then take that information and consider it, and accept or reject it accordingly. They don't care about a person's morality; they care about facts and information.
Virtue signalers ignore any information that doesn't line up with what they already believe. They are suspicious of things they disagree with. They find it easier to go along with the crowd, and want to be accepted by the mainstream.
Debaters don't care about how they are perceived, they want to understand and learn.
Are you a debater or a virtue signaler?
56-60, M
