• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[NT] NTs: Argument outcome preference

What if your prefered argument outcome?

  • Be right

    Votes: 28 70.0%
  • Have everyone else think you are right

    Votes: 12 30.0%

  • Total voters
    40

Typology

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
167
MBTI Type
epyT
Enneagram
...
Joey Naylor: ...so what happens when you're wrong?
Nick Naylor: Whoa, Joey I'm never wrong.
Joey Naylor: But you can't always be right...
Nick Naylor: Well, if it's your job to be right, then you're never wrong.
Joey Naylor: But what if you are wrong?
Nick Naylor: OK, let's say that you're defending chocolate, and I'm defending vanilla. Now if I were to say to you: 'Vanilla is the best flavour ice-cream', you'd say...
Joey Naylor: No, chocolate is.
Nick Naylor: Exactly, but you can't win that argument... so, I'll ask you: so you think chocolate is the end all and the all of ice-cream, do you?
Joey Naylor: It's the best ice-cream, I wouldn't order any other.
Nick Naylor: Oh! So it's all chocolate for you is it?
Joey Naylor: Yes, chocolate is all I need.
Nick Naylor: Well, I need more than chocolate, and for that matter I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom. And choice when it comes to our ice-cream, and that Joey Naylor, that is the defintion of liberty.
Joey Naylor: But that's not what we're talking about
Nick Naylor: Ah! But that's what I'm talking about.
Joey Naylor: ...but you didn't prove that vanilla was the best...
Nick Naylor: I didn't have to. I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong I'm right.
Joey Naylor: But you still didn't convince me
Nick Naylor: It's that I'm not after you. I'm after them.
[points into the crowd]

That is, if we're taking the traditional defintion of argument here.
 

Cenomite

Systematic chaos
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
623
MBTI Type
ENTP
I'm really surprised at how many people picked option #2.

Anyone who did, could you please explain why?
 

htb

New member
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
1,505
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
If you're not right, the first person who knows the score will point it out to you.
 

01011010

New member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
3,916
MBTI Type
INxJ
I'd want the person to walk away more knowledgeable, unless I was really wrong. Which I can admit to. Thus, I walk away more informed. I prefer clarity and closure, in an honest and direct way.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
As a strategic person I will say: That completly depends on the context of some situation.



I prefer to be direct and blunt, but sometimes you just heve to distort things. So that in the end you will be able to guide person towards facts. Sometimes things are too counter-intuitive/complex for direct approach.
 

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I would rather be right. Winning arguments even if I'm wrong gives me no satisfaction.

Not in my case. If everybody thinks I'm right, and only I know I'm wrong, that's a huge victory, which shows great persuasion skills and charisma. I don't do this often though.

The second option means that you know you are wrong, but through tact have made the other party and your audience think you won.

If they think that I speak the truth and agree with me, I won. 'Truth' doesn't really matter in this case.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't care about winning an argument as much as getting things clarified and understood. Probably a J thing.

No, it's not.
Not in the least.

And if you're going to go there:
I think J's are more inclined to take the Procrustean route, honestly.
P's remain open because they want to be right if a better answer appears.
 

INA

now! in shell form
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
3,195
MBTI Type
intp
Neither for me.

It's not about being right or others thinking I'm right.
I don't give a shit.
I just want to spark a discussion.
To stir the pot.
To get people thinking.
Seeking what is true is what I'm about.
Being "right" sounds dictatorial.
That's bullcrap.

Well said.
I find it irritating when people (self-included) have a cloud of not-reasoned-through yet comforting convictions - particularly when they claim some moral high-ground on that basis. The best outcome is to strip through it, jettison the bull, and save what's good.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
have everyone else think you are right, cuz you ARE right.

* not only are you good at understanding the truth, you understand it to the degree where you make it transparent to others. With a dash of debating skills for persuasion...meaning efficiency in mode of transfer. Hot dayum!
 

juggernaut

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,009
No, it's not.
Not in the least.

And if you're going to go there:
I think J's are more inclined to take the Procrustean route, honestly.
P's remain open because they want to be right if a better answer appears.

Well thank you for the clarification. My statement was based on the oft-observed snideness from Ps regarding Js exacting nature. I definitely do prefer precision over sloppiness (thus the comment about wanting things "clarified and understood"), so if that's "procrustean" then I will happily accept the label.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well thank you for the clarification. My statement was based on the oft-observed snideness from Ps regarding Js exacting nature. I definitely do prefer precision over sloppiness (thus the comment about wanting things "clarified and understood"), so if that's "procrustean" then I will happily accept the label.

Actually, that's not what I am talking about.

Usually the point of being "J" is being closure-oriented.

Being closure-oriented means that completing the task and/or having a functional solution is the priority.

Thus, at least from an NTP perspective, to reach closure we see J's reaching premature conclusions on things that cannot actually be concluded yet, for whatever reason. NTPs are more interested in the nuance; in that respect -- the details of the conceptual -- we are more fastidious. I suppose if you're wielding Te, you can be very fastidious in the external details... but you'll lop off the conceptual aspect in the process of achieving your goal.

THAT's what I meant. Your talk of "fastidious" isn't really in the same area I was discussing, I don't care that much about the external details except as far as they impact the rigor of the conceptual framework and then they become important.
 

INA

now! in shell form
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
3,195
MBTI Type
intp
The P/J sloppiness/precision comparison is odd. I don't think of J as more precision, but rather more of a drive to decisiveness, which IMHO doesn't necessarily mean more precision. If we are looking at getting the precise understanding of something, the P's relative lack of drive for/commitment to decisiveness could well mean greater precision (of input) at the expense of decisive action. It's where you implement your understanding that J would seem to be better at precise outcomes.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
As the two above posters say, I can (as INTP) be quite precise. This type of perfectionism can result in never reaching a conclusion/decision as the details are not quite "right" or I think there is more information out there to be gathered.

So I dither and don't actually get anything done.
 

forzen

New member
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
547
MBTI Type
INTJ
I'd like an argument to end in a closure, i hate one's that ends in a cliffhanger.
 

juggernaut

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,009
Actually, that's not what I am talking about.

Usually the point of being "J" is being closure-oriented.

Being closure-oriented means that completing the task and/or having a functional solution is the priority.

Thus, at least from an NTP perspective, to reach closure we see J's reaching premature conclusions on things that cannot actually be concluded yet, for whatever reason. NTPs are more interested in the nuance; in that respect -- the details of the conceptual -- we are more fastidious. I suppose if you're wielding Te, you can be very fastidious in the external details... but you'll lop off the conceptual aspect in the process of achieving your goal.

THAT's what I meant. Your talk of "fastidious" isn't really in the same area I was discussing, I don't care that much about the external details except as far as they impact the rigor of the conceptual framework and then they become important.

Well, that was what I was talking about. I'm afraid you've misunderstood me as much as I've misunderstood you. I'm interested in getting precise definitions that I can work with to figure out the right course of action. Diddling around with details that muddy the issues isn't a route to precision that I understand. Give me what I need to make a decision. I can modify it if more data/information becomes available later.

I suppose it may be "a forest for the trees" difference rather being more or less "fastidious" (though I don't believe that would be a choice of words I'd have choose here). Please remember I wasn't commenting on the P tendencies, I have no subjective experience with that. From what I understand regarding all of this stuff, ENTJs don't usually have trouble with overlooking the "conceptual aspect". You can say a lot of nasty things about us but that's probably a fairly inaccurate statement. On the other hand, I have seen a number of NTPs get so mired in detail that they forget what they were even doing in the first place. The fact that there ever was a conceptual framework available is completely lost in the so-called search for precision. To those of us on the outside, it looks like a lot of farting around. :)
 

INA

now! in shell form
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
3,195
MBTI Type
intp
That "fastidiousness" of perception and description goes a long way towards innovation. Being concerned with what's true rather than just what works is what gives birth to conceptual frameworks in the first place, and the "data that comes available later" provide routes for fine-tuning and specialization. Implementation-focus is for those who give a hoot with what works now over what could work.
 
Last edited:

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I just want to be heard and understood. You can do whatever you want with the information, I don't care. I will argue until I think that you've listened and absorbed. Usually that involves some sort of concession: I don't agree with you, but I understand where you are coming from, or I concede that point, or whatever. I also don't end it until I do the same for the other person.
 

CJ99

Is Willard in Footloose!!
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
582
MBTI Type
ENTP
I'm really surprised at how many people picked option #2.

Anyone who did, could you please explain why?

I picked option two because its the only option in which i'm wrong which is far more interesting and enlightening than being right.
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
I just want to be heard and understood. You can do whatever you want with the information, I don't care. I will argue until I think that you've listened and absorbed. Usually that involves some sort of concession: I don't agree with you, but I understand where you are coming from, or I concede that point, or whatever. I also don't end it until I do the same for the other person.

+1

I don't engage an any debate or argument where one party is trying to prove the other party wrong, and not hearing or acknowledging what they're actually saying.
 
Top