Originally posted by: chatbuster
honestly i dont know. maybe i am looking for that unusual angle or for something that was missed in the conversation earlier. but if i dont see it, i wont argue for it just for the heck of it. seriously. if for no other reason than there's that bit of that ego- i wldn't intentionally want to make a jack-ass out of myself if i didnt have something to contribute or back me up with.
somewhere, i also learned from my seniors at IIT before i got to some of the IIM group interviews that what they are looking for is someone who can stand apart from the crowd and defend their viewpoints. that's the hardest thing for a leadership aspirant, to take a different stance and state it publicly.
so somehow it's all of that- both an interest in finding unusual aspects in an honest attempt to bring something new and interesting to the debate and perhaps a baser instinct to go for the kill, no matter what.
something else i think that's very important. one thing i got out of my Harvard days was the fact that there are almost always lots of legitimate opinions on anything. real world does not lend itself to precise answers, to simple night and day choices and calculations. there's gray. it often comes down to how well you can articulate things. we all get convinced, rightly or wrongly, by ideas that are well-formulated and put across, and by personable smart people who can sell well. but beyond style, i know there's good and bad in all sides, much the same as there's good and bad in most people. we just have to unearth it...
dont know if i got even close to answering this. but thx for the question and for the opportunity to present my case.