[MBTI General] xntj vs xntp

[Costrin]

All that proves is that INTP's are delusional, bro

ENTP: They would "win", but only because no one understand what they're saying.
INTP: Truth-seeking foremost, therefore they win, even if they lose.
INTJ: Would lose, even if they don't realize it.
ENTJ: They would lose, but convince you that they won.

Your ENTJ mind tricks do not work on me!

 

[Uytuun]

Winning would be relative to me - even losing can be winning --> win.

*flexes mind*

 

[Valiant]

Your ENTJ mind tricks do not work on me!

You're just repeating yourself!

 

[Costrin]

Winning would be relative to me - even losing can be winning --> win.

*flexes mind*

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

I am INTP, and I have a copy of 1984 before me, beware!

You're just repeating yourself!

Provide evidence!

 

[substitute]

When I used to have uh, frank discussions with my ENTJ partner, he would often "win" because I gave up, partly because he was sometimes too dismissive of alternative views, but mostly because I never really gave enough of a shit. But really we argued very infrequently.

When I "won" it was because I was in that kind of mood where I'm just loving the mental and verbal workout of purely having the discussion, and I don't care what it's about or who wins, I just want to keep it going cos it's a platform on which I can sharpen my wits. So whatever the other person says, even if I agree, I'll counter argue it anyway, just to see if I can, and to see what they'll say, to see if I can counter argue it, etc... this tendency is what I think lies at the roots of the common misconception of me "needing to win" - it's not that that makes me refuse to stop pursuing it, it's the fact that I'm enjoying simply being able to work out my ideas and thoughts the way that's best for me: externally.

It can go on forever with an ENTJ though cos they're the ones least likely IME to either back down, or start blubbing and taking things personally. There is a tendency to reductio ad absurdam though... which is annoying, but not as badly as the STJ's do it.

I really love arguing with ENTJs

 

[Kasper]

It can go on forever with an ENTJ though cos they're the ones least likely IME to either back down, or start blubbing and taking things personally.

Amen!

Its fun watching my ENTJ and INFJ siblings get into it, my ENTJ bro goes all emotional while trying to be logical and win at all costs and my INFJ sis gets all objective while trying to consider other people. Particularly amusing when the topic is some humanitarian issue.

 

[pippi]

ENTP would never back down on any points no matter what until they didn't even know what they were arguing about any longer, then they'd start arguing about arguing

INTP would go off on so many tangents that the other person would have no idea what they are talking about and go find someone else to argue with

INTJ would concede the battle to win the war.

ENTJ would win the battle but lose the war.

 

[nozflubber]

ENTP would never back down on any points no matter what until they didn't even know what they were arguing about any longer, then they'd start arguing about arguing

You mean sorta like what this thread turned into?

Congrats LocalJEsus and pals on arguing about arguing! YOU CAN HAS PRIZE

 

[Mycroft]

ENTP: arguing is for people with "convictions"
INTP: arguing is for people whose epistemological framework is lacking
INTJ: arguing is for people who need to get back to work
ENTJ: arguing is for people who crave a delicious knuckle sandwhich

 

[Lady_X]

It's actually not xntp Vs xntj.

ENTP: They'd want to win no matter what.
INTJ: They want to win because they 'know' they're right.
INTP: They know they're right, so they already won regardless of the debate.
ENTJ: I don't know...They would probably lose the debate.

love this...that's funny.

 

[LostInNerSpace]

just curious... in an argument who would be most likely to win? xntj or xntp? and what would be the most likely reason?

i was just wondering because my friend and i are in a debate right now but it seems like its never ending.

It depends on the individuals and the topic. If there is narrow focus on a highly structured topic that the INTJ happens to specialize in, then the INTJ might win. If it's of much broader scope and if the topic is less structured then the INTP might do better. INTJs might be better a focing a point across. INTP might just lose out of boredom.

I didn't see the Xs. ENTJs force the point across. ENTPs force the point across with sweet talk and lots of BS.

 

[yenom]

arguing with an entj=argioing with a brick wall
arguing with an entp=arguing with a troll
arguing with an intp=arguing with an egghead
arguing with an intj=arguing with an dogmatic

 

[Valiant]

You mean sorta like what this thread turned into?

Congrats LocalJEsus and pals on arguing about arguing! YOU CAN HAS PRIZE

Thankz, wat iz prize?

 

[Xander]

Depending upon subject I'd reckon the J would win if it were a concrete "factual" subject and the P if it were an argument relating to more "flexible" matters like philosophy.
(This is assuming that all other factors like smarts, age and so forth are equal.)

 

[Kalach]

Puzzled by this argument. Winning truth? Oughtn't y'all to be comparing your balls?

INTP: sez they have the biggest balls
INTJ: there are balls?
ENTJ: I have a hammer, I do hammer in the morning.
ENTP: got penicillin?

 

[Riva]

INTP - tries to prove his/her theory is right.
annoyed - because your points don't connect the dots.

ENTJ - tries to prove that he/she is right.
annoyed - because you tried to prove that HE is wrong.

INTJ - proves what you said is stupid and make you feel stupid
annoyed -because you just said something stupid.

ENTP -plays on your words. not on the argument. one wrong word in an argument and an ENTP will destroy you. this is actually a characteristic trait. Witty
annoyed -they don't get annoyed because they were not arguing in the 1st place.

 

[callmemigs]

INTJ - proves what you said is stupid and make you feel stupid
annoyed -because you just said something stupid.

Agree with that. That's why failtrolls annoys me more than smartass trolls.

 

[Riva]

Agree with that. That's why failtrolls annoys me more than smartass trolls.

you my friend, just lost me there. could you be kind enough to explain?

 

[Gamine]

I think we all have experiences where an argument or debate ensues and both parties walk away believing they were the true victor. So how about we assume normal human biases in perceiving debate winners? Yes this is going to overcomplicate it if anyone plays, but we all love overcomplicating things. ASSUMPTION!

Using four perception directions...
1) the _____ type in the debate
2) the other _____ type in the debate
3) an objective observer
4) a subjective observer

ROUND ONE: ENTJ VS INTP
If they debated, who would have won through different perceptions? Could we judge a true winner from these?

 

[Mitzy]

either way, i won & made my entj friend bring me a beer from the couch. entp's FTW