• 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] Thriving off of conflict, debates, and/or proving your point?

cogdecree

New member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
248
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
165
STJ's would you consider this a trait that you poses? In more layman terms wanting to prove a certain point in some sort of informal debate?

For example In my first class (international politics), at the end of each session (not enough time in class to talk), I would spend the next 20 minutes bouncing ideas, debating a few, listening to points offered (this is done making me slightly late for my next class). I also research more on specific topics and bring back the topic to discuss after class each day.

My second class (criminological theories, arriving slightly late) allows discussions in class (mistake on her part). About half of the class is spend debating or critiquing the teacher. The teacher herself is not much older than me, but is extremely bias on which theories she likes and or doesn't like, and I end up playing devil's advocate siding on the opposite side on whatever side she picks on a theory.

Anyways, it doesn’t have to be this intense (if you have better stories, more intense than this please, for the sake of greater entertainment share them) but if the general idea of conflict or proving a point, gives some sort of entertainment for you... I’m curious if this is commonly shared with STJ’s.

Thank you
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The ISTJs I know actually hate conflict.

If it's an impersonal affair then it's not much of a problem, the ISTJs I know usually only speak up when there is a major error.
 

cogdecree

New member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
248
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
165
You're wrong.

Well if that is the case, I have the appropriate sig then.

The ISTJs I know actually hate conflict.

I don't like debating if I don't know what I'm talking about, and it usually starts by me critiquing someone else who puts forth a subjective idea (thus more often than not teachers are the ones who feel my wrath, always though, in a professional way).
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Read the edit, it's not always. :)
 

Eagle

New member
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
733
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The ISTJs I know actually hate conflict.

Wow, thank you. Finally someone who realizes the truth.

See one of my blog posts for confirmation.
 

cogdecree

New member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
248
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
165
Wow, thank you. Finally someone who realizes the truth.

See one of my blog posts for confirmation.

To be more acurate, it's more of a love/hate kind of relationship, sometimes frusterating but many times enjoyable, and as I said its mostly with subjective material or topics with no 100% right answer (politics, fiscal systems, social values, etc).

But, if this is truly the case for a majority of STJ's, then I question if either A) if I am one, or B) if I am a unique one.
 

Habba

New member
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
988
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
I have a habit of testing people's logic. I might take up an impersonal role, and question their beliefs and values in different situations, testing how long they'll support their own idea, and if they can see their own faults (if there's any).

An example:

Me and my ISFJ were discussing about the Earth Hour (the thing in which you turned all lights off for an hour), and she wanted to participate (being Fe :)). Well, I started questioning her reasoning, why was it important to participate.

Me: "So, why you wanna join in?"
ISFJ: "Because I care about the environment."
Me: "Sure you do, but is this the right way? I mean, what are you going to do when it's all dark and you can't see anything? Light a candle?"
ISFJ: "Yeah, it will be moody. :)"
Me: "Sure it will be, but do you think it's environmental? I mean, you want to shutdown the sources of light and replace them with new sources of light, that also have to be manufactured, packed in plastic, freighted in stores, brought home and then burned, which will burn oxygen and produce carbon dioxide. I mean, is it really more efficient to change the source of lightning just for an hour?"
ISFJ: "Uh... I don't know... but I think the idea is more important."
Me: "Okay, let's turn off the lights then. :)"
ISFJ: "Yeah, but we'll be at friends' party by then.. I hope they would let us participate the Earth Hour."
Me: "Of course they will... I'll make 'em. ;)"

(And they did, after I asked them to.)

Moral of the story? I test people, even though I would agree with them. I just want to see their reasoning to be able to trust them. It's Extroverted Thinking at work.
 

ArbiterDewey

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
310
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Contesting bullshit I enjoy, but I don't actively search out for conflict. When I was very religious/anti-religious I found I that I enjoyed questioning Christians on their beliefs as to make them aware that if they don't know what they believe, why wear the mantle of anything ignorantly. Also making things logical is a big point I try to emphasize.

On another note, if I'm able to be convinced that I'm wrong (which is no simple task sometimes) I will acknowledge my wrongness and apologize if necessary. Ignorantly carrying on as if correct is pointless, esp. if it's a major discrepancy. I do have a tendency to force weak willed people over to my side of an argument even if it contradicts their original point, however.
 

Snow Turtle

New member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
1,335
I don't thrive off debates especially not conflicts. However I'm usually hanging around the middle ground and will try to convience others to join me in the center. Suffice to say I don't really have any strong opinions as I keep on looking for both sides of the arguement.
 

swordpath

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
10,547
MBTI Type
ISTx
Enneagram
5w6
The ISTJs I know actually hate conflict.

If it's an impersonal affair then it's not much of a problem, the ISTJs I know usually only speak up when there is a major error.

That's me pretty much. I reserve judgment and criticism for only the times that I feel it's necessary. I don't put my business out there too much. I like to avoid conflict if I can.
 

Shadow

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
453
MBTI Type
INTJ
I do argue, but it's not for the sake of arguing. I do have strong opinions and when I argue it's usually to defend them because I see them as being logical and right. Like you say you like arguing about 'subjective' topics, but I would consider that I know my point of view on those topics and only a clear, rational and objective argument will sway me on those. I will also argue against opinions/expressions of thought which I see as being logically and rationally flawed.
I don't like being devil's advocate. I will pick up on what people are saying and argue the opposite for the sake of it when I'm in a mood and they're annoying me. I wouldn't do it to someone I was in a good mood with.

I don't like conflict, but if someone aggressively engages me in one I will take it up and leave it when I've decided upon an exit strategy where I think I've gained the upper hand.
 

d@v3

Perfect Gentleman! =D
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,830
MBTI Type
ISTJ
The ISTJs I know actually hate conflict.

If it's an impersonal affair then it's not much of a problem, the ISTJs I know usually only speak up when there is a major error.

:yes: However, I'll do it to annoy someone if they are irritating me. :devil: Other than that, I really don't like one-on-one conflict. :peepwall: Of course, also if someone imposes their view on me that violates one of my values I will defend myself.

I try to avoid fighting with words. Why? Because in 10 minutes your going to end up right where you started- unless of course someone walks away. :)

ESTJ's on the other hand.... have a tendency to :steam: (obviously not all of them)
 

Halla74

Artisan Conquerer
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
6,898
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
My Dad, ESTJ, 72 year old retired Army Colonel is the DARK OVERLORD of conflict!

I have seen him chew people out my whole life. When he determines someone has screwed up and is need of an ass chewing - LOOK OUT. He goes for the jugular immediately and takes no prisoners. I've seen him deck a few people too, so physcial conflict is fine by him too. :rofl1:
 

Condor

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
109
MBTI Type
ISTJ
I don't like debating if I don't know what I'm talking about, and it usually starts by me critiquing someone else who puts forth a subjective idea (thus more often than not teachers are the ones who feel my wrath, always though, in a professional way).

I don't try bring anyone to my point of view. Quite frankly, my point of view is mine. If someone wishes more information to make up their own mind all they need do is ask and I'll explain what I think or what my reasoning is/was. If they feel it's flawed, I'll listen to what they have to say and decide. If they're correct then I'll incorporate the change and move on. If not, then I'll simply thank them for their opinion and move on. No need for conflict. :)
 

cogdecree

New member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
248
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
165
I have a habit of testing people's logic. I might take up an impersonal role, and question their beliefs and values in different situations, testing how long they'll support their own idea, and if they can see their own faults (if there's any).

An example:

Me and my ISFJ were discussing about the Earth Hour (the thing in which you turned all lights off for an hour), and she wanted to participate (being Fe :)). Well, I started questioning her reasoning, why was it important to participate.

Me: "So, why you wanna join in?"
ISFJ: "Because I care about the environment."
Me: "Sure you do, but is this the right way? I mean, what are you going to do when it's all dark and you can't see anything? Light a candle?"
ISFJ: "Yeah, it will be moody. :)"
Me: "Sure it will be, but do you think it's environmental? I mean, you want to shutdown the sources of light and replace them with new sources of light, that also have to be manufactured, packed in plastic, freighted in stores, brought home and then burned, which will burn oxygen and produce carbon dioxide. I mean, is it really more efficient to change the source of lightning just for an hour?"
ISFJ: "Uh... I don't know... but I think the idea is more important."
Me: "Okay, let's turn off the lights then. :)"
ISFJ: "Yeah, but we'll be at friends' party by then.. I hope they would let us participate the Earth Hour."
Me: "Of course they will... I'll make 'em. ;)"

(And they did, after I asked them to.)

Moral of the story? I test people, even though I would agree with them. I just want to see their reasoning to be able to trust them. It's Extroverted Thinking at work.

I do such as well, make them lay down the foundation of their thoughts

Contesting bullshit I enjoy, but I don't actively search out for conflict. When I was very religious/anti-religious I found I that I enjoyed questioning Christians on their beliefs as to make them aware that if they don't know what they believe, why wear the mantle of anything ignorantly. Also making things logical is a big point I try to emphasize.

On another note, if I'm able to be convinced that I'm wrong (which is no simple task sometimes) I will acknowledge my wrongness and apologize if necessary. Ignorantly carrying on as if correct is pointless, esp. if it's a major discrepancy. I do have a tendency to force weak willed people over to my side of an argument even if it contradicts their original point, however.

Most of my debates are reactive, to something I don’t agree on.
I do argue, but it's not for the sake of arguing. I do have strong opinions and when I argue it's usually to defend them because I see them as being logical and right. Like you say you like arguing about 'subjective' topics, but I would consider that I know my point of view on those topics and only a clear, rational and objective argument will sway me on those. I will also argue against opinions/expressions of thought which I see as being logically and rationally flawed.
I don't like being devil's advocate. I will pick up on what people are saying and argue the opposite for the sake of it when I'm in a mood and they're annoying me. I wouldn't do it to someone I was in a good mood with.

I don't like conflict, but if someone aggressively engages me in one I will take it up and leave it when I've decided upon an exit strategy where I think I've gained the upper hand.

I’m not sure if I made this clear enough, but these debates and conflicts are usually in good spirits, and thus it’s a battle of logic, with out hurting others feelings or what not.


:yes: However, I'll do it to annoy someone if they are irritating me. :devil: Other than that, I really don't like one-on-one conflict. :peepwall: Of course, also if someone imposes their view on me that violates one of my values I will defend myself.

I try to avoid fighting with words. Why? Because in 10 minutes your going to end up right where you started- unless of course someone walks away. :)

ESTJ's on the other hand.... have a tendency to :steam: (obviously not all of them)

Haha, Where I live my view is the minority view, maybe that’s why I’m in more debates. And there isn't any insults flying around, or raised voices.

My crime theories teacher, out of 40 to 50 theories, she only likes 3, and she makes this quite obvious when she teachers, and I find this annoying, so I agree with fire with fire on this aspect.


My Dad, ESTJ, 72 year old retired Army Colonel is the DARK OVERLORD of conflict!

I have seen him chew people out my whole life. When he determines someone has screwed up and is need of an ass chewing - LOOK OUT. He goes for the jugular immediately and takes no prisoners. I've seen him deck a few people too, so physcial conflict is fine by him too. :rofl1:

I just thought that this one was funny, nice post


I don't try bring anyone to my point of view. Quite frankly, my point of view is mine. If someone wishes more information to make up their own mind all they need do is ask and I'll explain what I think or what my reasoning is/was. If they feel it's flawed, I'll listen to what they have to say and decide. If they're correct then I'll incorporate the change and move on. If not, then I'll simply thank them for their opinion and move on. No need for conflict. :)

More often than not, I’m defending my views, since this is on subjective topics, there is chances of turning peoples opinions here, especially on these topics.
 

Take Five

Supreme Allied Commander
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
925
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
I do like debates. I classify people into two groups generally. People who are "with it" and people who are fools. I will not debate or argue with fools unless I need to in order to assert authority. I like to argue (not fight) but I always do a cost/gains analysis before deciding whether or not to do it.
 

cogdecree

New member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
248
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
165
I do like debates. I classify people into two groups generally. People who are "with it" and people who are fools. I will not debate or argue with fools unless I need to in order to assert authority. I like to argue (not fight) but I always do a cost/gains analysis before deciding whether or not to do it.

I think that sets the tone for my enjoyment of debates. I'm not hunting people down, and I am in an educational setting, and since this these debates cover subjective material,, you can't argue right or wrong, you argue over pros/cons.
 
Top