Hiferator wrote:Title text: Of course, everyone has their own profile. There are morning arguers, hangry arguers, meal-time arguers, late-night arguers, and people who get in a meta-argument over what their argument timing is, dredge up examples of past arguments, and end up fighting over THOSE again as well.
As a student, I went Interrailing (~Eurorail) around Europe for a month in a group of six. As a result of the attendant lack of sleep and food as well as the heat and close confinement, there were quite a few arguments. About halfway through I had the great idea of making an "argument matrix", with one traveller's name per row and column, to indicate the pairwise combinations in which we had argued*
. The act of making the matrix led to meta-arguments of exactly this sort, as a result of which the finished matrix was significantly denser than when I started it.
Looking back, what I should have done was have each element correspond to the number of arguments, and then calculated the eigenvectors and eigenvalues. I'm not sure what that would have shown, but there might have been a paper in it.*
The matrix was presumably symmetric, (so would have had real eigenvalues and orthogonal eigenvectors), and it wouldn't surprise me if there were some nonzero elements on the leading diagonal. I'm pretty sure I argued with myself more than once.
ETA: I'm definitely a hangry arguer.