This is one of the reasons my friend gets annoyed with me - semantics. He is always throwing that term around and saying that my arguments don't count because they're just semantics. How do I improve this problem? Just try to focus less on getting into the fine details of what words mean to individuals?
My apologies to those who are annoyed by this thread, because I know it's a little trivial, but I'm trying very hard to learn how to argue intelligently and be better at talking with thinking types. I've learned a lot about logical fallacies, etc. and have learned not to make emotional appeals or talk in circles, but sometimes I still frustrate NT's and get a little baffled as to what I said that was incorrect or poor arguing.
I am actually quite happy that someone wishes to develop their skills in discussing topics in a thought out way, even if it's for arguments.
I believe that the main thing when it comes to talks I have with others is that they need to be able to fully explain themselves. I can - and do - think about what I say and have the facts to back it up, so I expect the same... when they take a stance on something they are not sure of, it defeats the purpose of sharing information and learning from each other. Miscommunication is anathema to me.
Also... I think that arguing semantics (i.e., small, minute details that involve accuracy of information but not a lot of original thought) with an INTP - for me, at least - might be part of what is slightly irritating. Give them something hypothetical or theoretical to think about and discuss, maybe something that is up their alley in terms of interests. Details that are well known (i.e. grammar) and just a matter of memory aren't that interesting, and I don't care whether I'm right - I just like thinking and coming up with new ideas and ways to view subjects.