This article is a couple of years old, but I'm still going to post it here because it presents such a perfect contrast in terms of MBTI.
Bryan Caplan is an ENTP Anarchist who recommends a relatively laissez-faire parenting style (percieving), since your children are going to end up pretty much the same no matter what you do. Amy Chua is an ISTJ law professor who thinks you can mold your child into a more disciplined person in line with your idea of a successful person (judging). Caplan thinks you should treat your children gently and kindly, (fe) because, logically, it won't make any difference; their genes are their genes (ti). Chua, on the other had, thinks you should treat your children firmly, scheduling their activities and shaping their personalities (te), in accordance with your inner ideals (fi). Caplan clearly relishes the debate and critiques Chua's ideas enthusiastically (extroversion), while Chua is more measured and responsive (introversion). Caplan argues by citing "40 years of adoption and twin studies" (intuition), asking hypothetical questions (ne) and poking holes in Chua's logic (ti), while Chua argues from personal experience (si), and appeals to her values, such as discipline, respect, and tenacity (fi).