• 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.

[MBTI General] Do you ever get "hungry" for a good argument?

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
epistemological, teleological, scientific, or even mathematical?

For me this hunger for an argument feels a lot like hunger for food. I tend to overeat, when I haven't had my intelectual fill.

Anyone have similar issues?

Maybe experienced in a very different way? Use your imagination.
 

htb

New member
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
1,505
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Yes, I do, often; and it's difficult to find people who don't feel personally threatened by competitive exchanges, let alone those who enjoy controversy. An ISTJ recently told me that I "just like to argue," and while disappointed with what was her refusal to continue a minor debate, I took the remark as a compliment.
 

Mercurial

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
93
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
9w6
No. Never just for the sake of arguing. I don't think people need an annexation of my inner conflict.
 

niffer

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,217
MBTI Type
ENfP
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Not quite "argue". Just to rant/debate/speculate...although most of the time I'm fine with just letting things roll around in my own mind so that I can keep improving them until someone brings them up.

It's kind of the reverse of hunger for me...more like a bloating feeling. Like letting out gas...it can build up sometimes and it feels better after it's all out.

:nice:
 

Maverick

New member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
880
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Yes I do but I'm careful to do it with the right kind of people.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
Not quite "argue". Just to rant/debate/speculate...although most of the time I'm fine with just letting things roll around in my own mind so that I can keep improving them until someone brings them up.

It's kind of the reverse of hunger for me...more like a bloating feeling. Like letting out gas...it can build up sometimes and it feels better after it's all out.

:nice:

I actually meant more like this (though the feeling is still hunger).

By argument, I meant:Logical argument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you were to interpret it in the other way, I am hungry to lose an argument. I want to lose an argument not because the other person is more obstinate than I am, but because I clearly see that he or she is right.
 

JivinJeffJones

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
3,702
MBTI Type
INFP
I love a good debate. All of my fondest childhood memories of my INTJ dad were arguments. I don't often get hungry for arguments though, I just enjoy them when they come up. I wave my hands, I raise my voice, I laugh scornfully, smirk dismissively and reductio ad absurdum like there's no tomorrow. But only with certain people in certain environments, where I know I'm not going to permanently offend anyone. I'm especially fond of arguing ridiculous positions and playing devil's advocate. But I have to be reasonably familiar with a topic to enjoy arguing it.
 

Ghost of the dead horse

filling some space
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
3,553
MBTI Type
ENTJ
I dont think seeking for arguments for their own sake, and I do think my discussions evolve into arguments very often. If I challenge groupthink in some way, people often rely on the opinions and conceptions they formed while in group, giving a chance for short discussion. The depth and bredth of arguments in such systems of thought is rapidly handled. Same goes for any thought systems with poor or flawed argumentative power or logical basis. I dont think my discussion partners ever feel humiliated, they just run out of arguments to provide for their case, and are soon forced to operate outside their thought system. They then notice a new point in how their thought system is related to outside world, which is uncharted territory for them, and provides them with a new learning opportunity. I often find in future conversations that the person has studied such new areas after they noticed them.

If someone is interested in handling information gracefully, discussions often evolve into appreciating each others observations, and we handle multiple topics that we appreciate in the same conversation.

If the person presents a good case on some though system I haven't known before, I become an appreciating inquirer and a challenger, but not in the way that I would hold sure that I am right.

If the person presents a bad case of argument to justify actions or a social philosophy I consider distasteful or inefficient, I will go to the end of it the tear that system apart, not the person, tho. It's not an argument, more like moving the lawn or cleaning a closet.

If the a point is being made that is challenging and well-presented but supports an offending conclusion, then I would say that argument starts.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
If the a point is being made that is challenging and well-presented but supports an offending conclusion, then I would say that argument starts.

And in such a conditions I have an intense craving to be presented with an incredibly clear argument to convince me of the "offending" position.

I've been going to an evangelical bible study for 5 years now, looking for such an argument (in the philosophical sense, not in the "shouting match" sense).
 
O

Oberon

Guest
epistemological, teleological, scientific, or even mathematical?

For me this hunger for an argument feels a lot like hunger for food. I tend to overeat, when I haven't had my intelectual fill.

Anyone have similar issues?

Maybe experienced in a very different way? Use your imagination.

I never enjoy arguments, but I frequently find myself in them. The surest way to make me give up on an argument and walk away is to make me think that you're arguing for the sake of argument.

When and if I debate it's always over topics in which I have a definite point of view, and I debate in support of that point of view. When people oppose me in a debate, I naturally assume that they're doing the same. It's a foolish assumption, I've discovered, but I repeatedly do it because it's my default state. I want to talk about things I care about; I want to work with ideas I really believe in. I want to come as close as I can to the truth.

Using debate skills to play a mind game is, to me, as exciting as watching paint dry. If I ever post a message to anyone quoting Captain Picard saying "Romulans...it's always a chess game with them," you'll know they've struck this nerve.

I've learned, too, that debate on the internet is frequently not debate, but rather a process of striking a succession of poses for millions of up-late-at-night readers to admire. I don't much care for that either.
 

Sahara

New member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
927
MBTI Type
INFP
I enjoy debates, I am always seeking likeminded to people, or near enough to thrash out certain subjects. My mating ritual lol pretty much involves heady debates, argueing, challenging my ideas and me theirs, the more intelligent the man, the more intrigued I will become, I lose total interest when someone has no debate skills, or no willingness to touch certain subjects.

I will even play devils advocate with a friend who already agrees with me, or me with her, just to debate and ensure an idea goes through me properly, if I can;t debate a topic often enough, then I can;t get to a final resolution on it.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I never enjoy arguments, but I frequently find myself in them. The surest way to make me give up on an argument and walk away is to make me think that you're arguing for the sake of argument.

:yim_rolling_on_the_

No....! Do you realize that sometimes in personal conversation (not here on the forums, but in correspondence I've seen where ideas get "debated"), you come across as trying to stir up conflict in order to have some excitement?

Sigh. It's a wonder people haven't wiped each other off the globe, considering how easy it is for us to misconstrue each other.

When and if I debate it's always over topics in which I have a definite point of view, and I debate in support of that point of view. When people oppose me in a debate, I naturally assume that they're doing the same. It's a foolish assumption, I've discovered, but I repeatedly do it because it's my default state. I want to talk about things I care about; I want to work with ideas I really believe in. I want to come as close as I can to the truth.

My goal is to ensure a clear picture of the problem (which then leads to a more accurate/clearer solution) by making sure that all possibilities are adequately represented. I usually "fill in" with the viewpoint being underrepresented.

The best way to find the weaknesses in a line of reasoning is to challenge it; if it survives, then it was worthy, and if not, then it deserves to be abandoned.

But I know this comes across as playing devil's advocate sometimes, even though my intentions are not [um, usually!] to do that.

I've learned, too, that debate on the internet is frequently not debate, but rather a process of striking a succession of poses for millions of up-late-at-night readers to admire.

Well, that's true.
 

Ghost of the dead horse

filling some space
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
3,553
MBTI Type
ENTJ
People weasel out of discussions too easily by saying that it would constitute an argument. Yet this much-feared "argument" can be just a method to (attempt to) arrive at a good conclusion, as in adversarial judical systems where legal representatives of the both parties fight for their client's cause.

For someone who thinks that "people can say anything they want", I can see a point why they would avoid an argument. If people dont voluntarily adhere to reasonable debating rules and they dont trust others to do so, who would bother?

It needs exhaustive knowledge of all the biases and logical fallacys to debate "perfectly". For example, straw-man fallacy, true scotchman, argumentum ad hominem, argumentum ad baculum, etc are such flawed debating tactics that intuitively (yes, N) feel good to some, but not to others. Not everyone is in the position to prove such point invalid, even if they were dead sure that something doesn't match up. Having bad experience of previous debates, and not the debating skills of a layer, many reasonable people decline from starting an "argument".
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
I would say so, but only if I can do so without hurting anyone. There are times I just want to look at a statement/idea, reveal every flaw I see, and then have the person reveal all the flaws they see, until neither of us see any flaws in the other's argument, because then it makes the most sense. This is how I refine ideas, but people often either tire of it or get offended, so I try to avoid it when I'm worried about the other person's feelings or my own regarding the matter, but sometimes I can't help saying something critical about a personal matter, and that's when things go south...
 

alexkreuz

New member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
35
MBTI Type
INTP
when i was younger i enjoyed logical debates just for the stimulation of it .. but as i got older and more deliberate in my opinions and thoughts and began to attempt to explain them with goals in mind and find that they are not understood or immediately critiqued without proper consideration given, i find myself more frustrated and drained by the experience than energized ..

i think it depends on my intent .. if its an impersonal BS subject then i can go in logical loops forever and ever .. but if its a personal or other intimate subject, i find myself easily frustrated when i feel as if logical rebuttal does not give proper consideration ..

so no, i prefer sunshine, butterflies, and green tea on a rolling green hill ..
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
when i was younger i enjoyed logical debates just for the stimulation of it .. but as i got older and more deliberate in my opinions and thoughts and began to attempt to explain them with goals in mind and find that they are not understood or immediately critiqued without proper consideration given, i find myself more frustrated and drained by the experience than energized ....

Is it really just for "stimulation"? I thought it was part of the pursuit of truth.

Analyzing, constructing and de-constructing arguments is, I would say, the main Critical Thinking skill.

I try to be careful to only focus on the arguments, and not
make things personal, but I am not always successful.
 

alexkreuz

New member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
35
MBTI Type
INTP
Is it really just for "stimulation"? I thought it was part of the pursuit of truth.

Analyzing, constructing and de-constructing arguments is, I would say, the main Critical Thinking skill.

I try to be careful to only focus on the arguments, and not
make things personal, but I am not always successful.

Just for stimulation .. To see if you can "out-logically-think" another .. No intention whatsoever to pursue greater truth ..

Hmm I know what you're saying but I've always found the discourse on the internet to be on a sub-par level .. Not a level I'd consider going to when pursuing truth .. When pursuing truth I usually stick with encyclopedias, books, articles, journals, etc.

I loath debates (read personal bias) because more often than not I see two parties more concerned with making their point of view known and imposing the dominance of their point of view, rather than opening their point of view to critique in order to better understand positive and negative aspects of their own point of view.

Also like you said, considering I'm not too big on the feeling aspect, its usually when i TRY to not make things personal that they get personal. :steam: My attempt to not make things personal is inversely proportional to my making things personal :doh:
 

lastrailway

New member
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
508
when i was younger i enjoyed logical debates just for the stimulation of it .. but as i got older and more deliberate in my opinions and thoughts and began to attempt to explain them with goals in mind and find that they are not understood or immediately critiqued without proper consideration given, i find myself more frustrated and drained by the experience than energized...

What he said. That said, I can still enjoy a good "heated" conversation, be it debate or argument or whatever, but only in very random circumstances and with people who get the spirit and don't take anything too personal (that is, extremely few people I know)
 
O

Oberon

Guest
The best way to find the weaknesses in a line of reasoning is to challenge it; if it survives, then it was worthy, and if not, then it deserves to be abandoned.

That's the way to bet, generally, I suppose...but I would hate to run across a capital-T Truth, have someone question it, and then discard the idea just because I wasn't perceptive enough to give the appropriate defense. I'm not going to judge my ideas by my debating skills; it's not fair to the ideas. I don't think fast enough on my feet to be able to do that.

And likewise, I don't think being glib or clever ought to substitute for being wise. Many a time I have argued against a thesis I have later adopted. This has very little to do with who won or lost the argument.
 
Top