ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, April 29, 2020

A belated convert

Grandpa Lampshade has come around to the idea that there is more to the concept of the gamma behavioral pattern than the mere desire to devalue disagreement:
Just wanted to say that I thought that the whole "gamma" thing came off a bit like "Anyone who doesn't agree with me = gamma"

I was wrong.

The patterns are like the "Well actually" meme; instead of simply pointing out where one could be incorrect about something, it always seems to be some form of semantics and always framed as a "gotcha" from a standpoint of superiority.
This is precisely why I no longer tolerate any mention of me, my motivations, my inclinations, or my objectives in the general discourse here. Because it's not all about me and there isn't a single idea that can be negated by my personal flaws and failings or proven by my positive attributes and accomplishments.

Argument ad hominem isn't merely a logical fallacy, not infrequently it is utilized as a dishonest rhetorical attempt to distract, discredit, and derail.

A government employee who has been responsible for public outreach during the pandemic adds his two cents on how to distinguish between people who are legitimately asking questions and those who are there to argue:
If the questioner refuses to click on a link, call a number, or take any effort at all to read or know the answer, then they are there to argue. Many times they have already read the answer and simply want to gripe. Other times, the answer is irrelevant and they just want to argue. They may have already asked multiple people and are digging for the answer they want to hear in order to pit different groups against each, and once again, argue.

They waste everyone's time and that is their actual goal.

Labels: ,

43 Comments:

Blogger Werekoala April 29, 2020 11:12 AM  

Can confirm, made the mistake (mostly out of boredom) of engaging a gold-plated Gamma on Twitter yesterday. Even when presented with LITERAL evidence that supported my position, it was one "ackshually" after another...

Blogger Voracious Reader April 29, 2020 11:17 AM  

I learn SO much from you, good sir. The subtleties addressed across this single blog post are simply astounding.

Who would have thought or cared about these kinds of bothersome people? But the more I look thanks to your own observations, the more I see this behavior across the workplace. And the higher I rise in an organization, the more these weeds appear within my responsibilities.

Thanks for putting up with us who seek wisdom into understanding and neutralizing this odd collection of gamma personalities surrounding us each day.

Blogger rognuald April 29, 2020 11:20 AM  

"it always seems to be some form of semantics and always framed as a "gotcha"

An accurate description of journalists' behavior.

Blogger Stilicho April 29, 2020 11:24 AM  

It's part of the gamma avoidance of direct conflict. If they cannot effectively combat an idea, they attack the messenger as a means of indirectly attacking the idea. All while trying to leave themselves some sort of plausible deniability as a line of retreat.

Blogger Haus frau April 29, 2020 11:26 AM  

Understanding the concept and behaviour of gamma has been a huge relief in dealing with certain family members. Generally, its a lot easier to not take the bait and get into heated arguements over petty, petty differences in semantics when you understand there is nothing at the end of the tunnel.
One brother will routinely take a statement and correct the other person's "error" by rephrasing it using different synonyms resulting in the exact same conclusions. He thinks he is doing the other person a favor even on topics he objectively knows little about. Instead of taking the bait and bickering over the semantics i can see the game he's playing and end the conversation accordingly. Its tiresome.

Blogger Balkan Yankee April 29, 2020 11:55 AM  

@4: How can gammas be conflict avoidant when they often "attack the messenger" directly? Yes, slander offers cover fire for intellectual retreat. But gammas strike me as combative types (ankle biters, with chronic daddy issues), who have no problem with direct confrontation when triggered.

Blogger Haus frau April 29, 2020 12:01 PM  

@6 the emphasis is on being right or "correct " and showing up the other person.
They don't necessarily want the conflict that goes with that so they approach the subject in an indirect, weaselly sort of way.

Blogger Azimus April 29, 2020 12:17 PM  

Can alphas, bravos and deltas be conditioned into de facto gammas by their environment? I knew a decent kid, architect, a little shy but smart, friendly, and polite. Then he took a job in Los Angeles and now he has black discs in his ears, tatts (not good ones), and spends much of his day online proselytizing his former friends and family in flyover country about how evil a d stupid they are. Is he rescuable? Is environment the key? I'm sure being conflict-averse in person is part of the reason for this change.

Blogger maniacprovost April 29, 2020 12:18 PM  

One brother will routinely take a statement and correct the other person's "error" by rephrasing it using different synonyms

I'm now imagining a family that uses incorrect synonyms, constantly.

Blogger Stilicho April 29, 2020 12:25 PM  

>How can gammas be conflict avoidant when they often "attack the messenger" directly?<

They try to avoid the consequences of direct conflict (e.g. getting punched in the face physically or rhetorically). So they try to ankle bite and scurry away, or leave open a line of retreat (hey man can't you take a joke) to avoid consequences and/or which allows the "secret king" to claim ersatz victory (i'm living rent free in opponent's head!). The improper use of ad hominem attacks is a method they employ to avoid the embarrassment of being shown to be wrong on the substantive issue/idea being debated. An attempt to deflect the consequences of direct confrontation.

Blogger Seeingsights April 29, 2020 12:35 PM  

Gammas are terrible communicators, both on the argumentative and rhetorical level.

Alphas and sigmas are excellent communicators. They are upbeat and interesting. I think though that Sigmas might be more witty. James Bond is an example of a fictional Sigma.

Blogger Doktor Jeep April 29, 2020 1:19 PM  

"Well actually" is not the most insidious behavior from these people. It's almost endearing in comparison.

Blogger VD April 29, 2020 1:43 PM  

How can gammas be conflict avoidant when they often "attack the messenger" directly?

Define "directly". Gammas attack when they believe no one can - or will - touch them.

Can alphas, bravos and deltas be conditioned into de facto gammas by their environment?

Yes, although the lower they are, the easier it is.

Blogger Balkan Yankee April 29, 2020 1:48 PM  

@8 @11: Appreciate the feedback. It just occurred to me: Gamma rhetoric is similar to guerrilla warfare. The weaker commits an endless series of hit-and-get attacks against the stronger to wear him down over time. Vive la Resistance!

Blogger rumpole5 April 29, 2020 1:56 PM  

I don't know about Sigmas being superior communicators. Our gracious host can correct, since he invented the term, but I thought that Sigmas lack the full social engagement (and interdependence) that characterizes most human interactions. I suspect that Sigmas probably are examples of very high functioning autism. And indeed, most men tend more in that direction than women. ("Just the facts, madam") I always found it interesting to pick a jury with a female co-counsel. They always picked up a number of nuance details that I missed.

Blogger boron April 29, 2020 2:08 PM  

"gamma" is a very polite word.
Ah calls 'em as Ah sees 'em.
Your choice to label 'em as you want.

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia April 29, 2020 2:16 PM  

VD wrote:
This is precisely why I no longer tolerate any mention of me, my motivations, my inclinations, or my objectives in the general discourse here. Because it's not all about me and there isn't a single idea that can be negated by my personal flaws and failings or proven by my positive attributes and accomplishments.

Oh no!! Say it ain't so!

No more bromance comments to The Greatest Blog Proprietor on The Planet? (or certainly in the top percentiles in my humble view).

We do love you, even if you don't give a rat's ass about that.

Blogger Bucephalus April 29, 2020 2:20 PM  

Is it the gamma crowd that is trying to have the Patriots waive their just drafted kicker because they don’t like his “Right Wing Militia” tat?

Blogger Doktor Jeep April 29, 2020 2:21 PM  

Omegas are bad at speech communication but that wall of text can save the world.

Blogger Stilicho April 29, 2020 2:25 PM  

@rumpole i've had similar experience with female co-counsel, but limited to their observations about female jurors/witnesses/etc.

Blogger Oswald April 29, 2020 3:02 PM  

There are people that think if they never admit they lost an argument, then they didn't in fact ever lose an argument. I have worked with people like this and no matter how absurd their position became, they could never admit they were wrong. I never had a name for these people until now.

Blogger Dole April 29, 2020 3:36 PM  

Honest gamma question is rarer than a Joe Biden supporter.

Blogger The Cooler April 29, 2020 3:46 PM  

There are people that think if they never admit they lost an argument, then they didn't in fact ever lose an argument.

Most people have no idea they've been beaten, either. Thus the necessity of effective rhetoric with anyone but the most intelligent and upright, squarely-built souls.

Most folks have to feel some or another thing to enter the orbit of any knowledge whatsoever.

Blogger The Cooler April 29, 2020 3:54 PM  

Usually pain.

Blogger carnaby April 29, 2020 3:59 PM  

There are people who think that if they talk smack about gammas then they aren't one.

Blogger Scott April 29, 2020 4:00 PM  

"... and a rod for the fools back."

Blogger Unknown April 29, 2020 4:08 PM  

I've noticed that different traits make arguing with some people about some topics impossible. For example visibly low testosterone correlates with high egalitarian impulse, so arguing against that with information is useless. However I don't think that just this is enough to classify the individual as a gamma. To clarify, a lot of the subjects in question, although exclusively playing beta game, did have girlfriends.

Blogger Kiwi April 29, 2020 4:20 PM  

I watched a clip where N Taleb presented a slide of a beautiful peacock. He said something along the lines that its tail had no purpose.

During question time, a guy stands up and informs that the peacocks tail DOES have an important purpose blah blah, I'm a biologist or something important blah blah.

I pondered the guy was autistic and specialised in peacocks, but his body language suggested no, he was more likely a gamma.

What was fascinating was watching the response from Taleb. Would this unusual outburst derail his train of thought, would it put him on the back foot, would he explain why he said it, would he defend his powerpoint, would he belittle the "questioner"? No, within the blink of an eye he circumnavigated those rocks and speed away into clear water.

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia April 29, 2020 5:13 PM  

Bucephalus wrote:Is it the gamma crowd that is trying to have the Patriots waive their just drafted kicker because they don’t like his “Right Wing Militia” tat?

On the one hand, I can understand why, as a young future NFL player with lots of money at stake, you don't want to get involved in controversies, even with a bunch of crazed woke folk infected by a useless upswelling of outrage.

But, holy shit, do you have to grovel about it as this kid seemed to do? Just say, "Hey, I was thinking one thing, it turned out to be another, so I'm getting it erased."

That's it, end of story, move on.

I know that doesn't follow Vox's principles of dealing with SJWs, but you do have to pick not only the hill you are going to fight for, but the time when you are going to choose to fight for that hill.

For him, maybe after a few million in the bank.

Blogger Balam April 29, 2020 6:12 PM  

''For him, maybe after a few million in the bank.''

People have refused more enticing deals for their souls.

''but I thought that Sigmas lack the full social engagement (and interdependence) that characterizes most human interactions''

My understanding is that Sigmas engage the hierarchy from unusual angles, not being a part of it. Thus the alpha has to keep in mind certain niceties and formalities to keep the hierarchical structure intact (leading by example) while the sigma does not. Thus the sigma can say the things no one else can but badly want to and engage the individual people as their truer self instead of as Mr Delta employee, Mr beta husband, etc. On the other hand the hierarchy gives the alpha a lot of unspoken language power - when Mr Trump walks into a meeting grumpy everyone else probably automatically tries not to piss him off, no further engagement required.

Blogger Lazy Hero April 29, 2020 6:54 PM  

Here's something I've done with gammas over the years, belittle their opinion or position. Yeah, I see your point, but who would want to have that point? Yeah, I guess technically, that's right, but who is that technical and who wants to be right like that? When they have to defend the subjectifying of what they say it makes them very angry and usually incoherent in response.

Blogger PurpleMelbourne April 29, 2020 7:48 PM  

@3 An interesting idea that journalists have and thus popularise those gammma traits. Which goes on to promote them to the rest of us, especially those amongst us most vulnerable to the bad example because of our poor predilections.

I'm now inspired to be mindful for such flawed traits in myself so that awareness may wash away the bad reasoning once exposed. Its nice to have a tool to remove ones blinkers of falsehood so as to be clearer of thought.

Blogger JamesB.BKK April 29, 2020 7:59 PM  

Can I just note that a jilted female lawyer can be among the most dangerous creatures? It's more than sending pizzas. In search of total destruction using any snakelike means. Only with funds. Scorched earth. Somewhat like what some of these triggered gammas have done after transitioning from best buddy to server cost expert.

Blogger Uncle Maffoo April 29, 2020 9:11 PM  

Can alphas, bravos and deltas be conditioned into de facto gammas by their environment?

Just put a delta in a female-dominated workplace, and you'll see it.

Blogger martelsdeplorables April 29, 2020 10:49 PM  

Vox, the social sexual hierarchy has helped my practice immensely. I am now able to identify the problem clients i.e. gamma clients and fire them. Not worth the time or money. THANK YOU.

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia April 29, 2020 11:03 PM  

Balam wrote:''For him, maybe after a few million in the bank.''

People have refused more enticing deals for their souls.


Right.

I think you actually mean refusing LESS enticing deals for one's soul.

Getting rid of a tatoo due to a modest and transient controversy in order to move on with one's life is somehow compromising their souls?

Got it.

If so, enjoy your purity. In your solipsism.

Blogger Unknown April 29, 2020 11:10 PM  

I recall arguing with a SJW a couple years ago in the comments section of a YouTube news video. Original comment of the thread was mine about the downside of adopting Prussian Model schooling, then the ankle biter tried to accuse me of wanting to arm teachers. The qualities he displayed were an inability to shift from his talking points, an unwillingness to google search about my comment's concept, and when caught out, he tried to claim it was a misunderstanding.

Most people would say this experience is an obvious waste of time, but after abandoning many useless conversations to arrogant, stupid SJW's, I wanted to push one of those conversations to its breaking point. Both to see what it would do and show any observers just how irrational the SJW was being.

One thing that specifically struck me was the guy demanded I provide citations for my opinion. After I countered that original opinions don't have citations, he demanded I provide a link to the historical concept my opinion was referencing. He was not interested in running the Google search himself. He wanted me to post a link directly into a YouTube comment saying that he didn't have the time to waste to hunt down what I was talking about. He then posted an incorrect link to show how "easy" it was, and that I must be stupid to not be able to do it (this was just after YouTube changed how links are incorporated in comments, making all previous tutorials on this wrong). The result was I learned the new skill of posting links into YouTube's comment system, the anklebiter got his link, and I pushed him to the brink for dishonestly asking for citations and accusing me of wanting to arm teachers (something my original comment never discussed).

He never admitted his mistakes. His last retreat position was that this was a "misunderstanding". I blasted that too. The SJW never admitted his lies, but he also never bothered me again. From this, I learned that bouncing the rubble can be fun and satisfying.

Blogger Darren April 30, 2020 12:17 AM  

Great article; look where it got mentioned (and the positive response, mostly) -- https://gab.com/NeonRevolt/posts/104084532156993858 -- may the awareness of the SSH continue to grow to those ready to put it into action as they face reality!

Blogger JamesB.BKK April 30, 2020 12:25 AM  

I'd like to arm teachers. But just the ones capable. There'd need to be a preceding housecleaning. Of hags, harpies, and excessive scolds as well. The boys and maybe willing girls should get marksmanship training too, as it was not long ago.

Blogger furor kek tonicus ( no need to be racist, Ratchets can Karen better than anybody ) April 30, 2020 12:34 AM  

36. KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia April 29, 2020 11:03 PM
I think you actually mean refusing LESS enticing deals for one's soul.


Christ refused the whole world when Satan offered it too him.

if Christ is going to refuse W in exchange for his soul, what is impressive about me refusing to exchange W * 1 / 10 billionth for my soul?

probably ought to have thought that 'correction' all the way through.


36. KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia April 29, 2020 11:03 PM
Getting rid of a tattoo due to a modest and transient controversy in order to move on with one's life is somehow compromising their souls?


that's actually a point.

perhaps he didn't really know that 3%-ers are commonly accused of racism ( just like everyone else even remotely of the Right ). how many jocks really pay that much attention to politics of philosophy?

as the example of Kyle Larson shows, you can't play the corp sponsorship game while causing unnecessary drama for the corp.

Blogger Akulkis April 30, 2020 9:40 AM  

@30

"Thus the sigma can say the things no one else can but badly want to and engage the individual people as their truer self instead of as Mr Delta employee, Mr beta husband, etc."

In the medieval era, only the Court Jester could safely tell the King things he didn't want to hear about what people were saying about the world in general and the King personally.

Blogger Akulkis April 30, 2020 9:43 AM  

"An interesting idea that journalists have and thus popularise those gammma traits. Which goes on to promote them to the rest of us, especially those amongst us most vulnerable to the bad example because of our poor predilections."

And (((journalists))) (as opposed to reporters) and (((Hollywood script writers))).


Blogger Luis April 30, 2020 9:53 AM  

The social sexual hierarchy serves as a tool to identify them but also as a starting point for them to change their behavior.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts