Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 113

Thread: Types in Verbal Combat

  1. #1
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Types in Verbal Combat

    "Verbal combat": what a great way to describe argument.

    Anyway, I was contemplating this recently. I think that NTs, particularly those with Ti in the ego, are far more likely to attack the argument, and talk about how the argument is shit, and how the reasoning for the argument is poor etc., than are those who have, for example, Fe or Fi in the ego, who would probably take the attack personally; "you prick!", "stick up for yourself!" etc.

  2. #2
    unefille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    841
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My natural instinct is to analyze the hell out of a person's motivations. If someone's attacked me, my first response is that I pull apart why they're doing that, why they're acting the way they do, what they want to achieve, what they're projecting etc.

    But I don't act on my first instinct. I know a lot of people HATE having their motivations analyzed - and if I'm right, it's often quite a hurtful thing to hear your insecurities thrown at you. That, and philosophy class, where I learnt that the strongest way to attack an argument is on its own grounds, means I usually mimic whatever the other person is doing.

    There are three stages in any argument/attack for me:

    1. I am stunned at being attacked and walk away.

    2. They're irritating me and I'm over my initial shock. Now I'm responding in kind. If they attack my logic, I attack theirs. If they point out my fallacious reasoning, I point out their untenable premises. If they use empirical evidence to falsify what I'm saying, I will research until I have countering evidence. If they scream at me, I will scream back.

    3. Finally, they've broken my patience, my defenses and I've lost my temper and let it out: what I think of them as a person, of their motivations, their insecurities, their character. I give free reign to my instinctive reactions and rip into them as a person.

    Only one person in my life has pushed me to stage 3.
    ()
    3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp

  3. #3
    expired Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    TIM
    Se/Ni sx/sp
    Posts
    4,494
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I disagree. I highly doubt all Fe or Fi ego types react to arguments by being offended and attacking someone personally.
    maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
    maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
    go ask the frog what the scorpion knows

  4. #4
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On this forum, I've rarely argued in an analytical way, because the people I find myself arguing with the most won't listen anyway.

    1) I try to understand if the person I am speaking with will read and take in consideration what I am writing
    2) if 1) = yes, then I will try to write a cogent, both logically and factually correct response
    if 1) = no, then I will either say nothing, or might insult the person if I think he-she is being exceptionally unreasonable (examples: Phaedrus and Niffweed)

    As the argument progresses, I might try to pick logical fallacies in my "opponent" argumentation - although I do not like this style, mainly because I feel like I am on the reatreat when I have to revert to finding fault in other's responses rather than give support to my own points.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    "Verbal combat": what a great way to describe argument.

    Anyway, I was contemplating this recently. I think that NTs, particularly those with Ti in the ego, are far more likely to attack the argument, and talk about how the argument is shit, and how the reasoning for the argument is poor etc., than are those who have, for example, Fe or Fi in the ego, who would probably take the attack personally; "you prick!", "stick up for yourself!" etc.
    No, that is clearly false. NTs with Te in the ego are far more likely to do just that. This is another very obvious example of the fact that you have an incorrect view on what Ti is and what Ti types are like. You have demonstrated this misunderstanding in many posts on various occasions, and this misunderstanding has caused you to mistype some people.

  6. #6
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    "Verbal combat": what a great way to describe argument.

    Anyway, I was contemplating this recently. I think that NTs, particularly those with Ti in the ego, are far more likely to attack the argument, and talk about how the argument is shit, and how the reasoning for the argument is poor etc., than are those who have, for example, Fe or Fi in the ego, who would probably take the attack personally; "you prick!", "stick up for yourself!" etc.
    It depends. A Ti ego type will probably focus primarily on the reasoning (at least in a natural inclination sort of way), and possibly throw in some insults. A Te ego type may come off as more dry and indifferent to the emotional aspect of the argument. An Fe ego type may be more prone to attempting to manipulate the emotional atmosphere in order to make the opponent look stupid or angry. Not that they wouldn't focus on logic (i.e. me, who is most likely INFp, but would focus on logic), but would probably do the emotional manipulation a little more naturally. Once they have pissed off their opponent, revealed their motives, or anything of the like, they have gained control and logic doesn't even matter. Sometimes an Fe ego types emotional games are a compensation for underdeveloped logic functions though. And sometimes a Ti ego type's attempts at Fe games come off as highly miscalculated and silly.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  7. #7
    xyz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    7,709
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't argue, I let the facts speak for themselves.
    "Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities..."

    - Voltaire

  8. #8
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LokiVanguard
    I don't argue, I let the facts speak for themselves.
    What if there aren't enough compelling facts at hand?

    What if you're arguing a personal conviction?

    What if the facts don't matter (i.e. arguing the logic behind something rather than the objective aspects of what it is)?
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  9. #9
    xyz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    7,709
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    What if there aren't enough compelling facts at hand?
    Then find more facts.

    What if you're arguing a personal conviction?
    I can't think of any activity that simulates banging your head against a wall more than arguing personal convictions with someone else.


    What if the facts don't matter (i.e. arguing the logic behind something rather than the objective aspects of what it is)?
    You still need facts for logic.
    "Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities..."

    - Voltaire

  10. #10
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LokiVanguard
    Then find more facts.
    Yes, but you don't always have enough time to keep searching for facts.

    I'm not trying to nitpick, I just thought you sort of over-simplified it.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  11. #11
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    What if there aren't enough compelling facts at hand?

    What if you're arguing a personal conviction?

    What if the facts don't matter (i.e. arguing the logic behind something rather than the objective aspects of what it is)?
    i'll bet he doesn't even get himself into those kinds of arguments. counterproductive for him.

  12. #12
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    my favorite conversations are ones where we discuss some concept indepth going in and out and over and around and through the logic of it all. this is much easier irl because we can bounce all ideas off of each other and each other's ideas and such.

    what irks me is when i realize that the other is going to take offense to something being presented. that slows, if not stops, the flow of the ideas and understanding. if it's someone i know well enuf, i'll preface for them, but i prefer not to.

    this is my natural, normal "know it all" me that some don't like because i'm pretty blunt with my ideas, opinions etc. unfortunately, some take it that i think they should think what i do on a given subject. but that's not what i'm doing. i like to get a lot of ideas "out there" to get the other and me thinking in new directions because anything is possible.

    i can't do this very well on the internet because the ideas and thoughts come too fast to put into words to type them and then wait for a response from someone else. my mind has moved on to 15 other things by then.

    so, here, you guys only see me one way because that's the easiest to do on the internet. putting my own natural logical ideas together happens easier in a conversation or when i write my ebooks, articles, a website or in a coaching session. or in how i organize my thoughts on what i do with my kids, my life...my inner thoughts on things.

    on another note, hubby and i don't really argue. we're so straight up with each other before it gets to that. not that we agree on everything but we are very good at agreeing to disagree without having to argue. come to think of it, others MAY see it as arguing but for us, it isn't. it's us airing things out and we both know it's not personal when we do because we don't attack each other's inner person, inner feelings, character, etc. we care about each other too much in the big picture to do that to the other. so, we air out our thoughts, feelings and ideas on things so we always make sure we're on the same page as we go along together in life, with each other, our family, etc...and then can get on with the business of life, the joy of life together.

    i wish i could do that with everyone. neither of us find friends who we can really do that with. i'll have to work on manifesting that one.

  13. #13
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbmmama
    my favorite conversations are ones where we discuss some concept indepth going in and out and over and around and through the logic of it all. this is much easier irl because we can bounce all ideas off of each other and each other's ideas and such.
    This probably suggests Ti > Te valuing, and possibly Ne.

    what irks me is when i realize that the other is going to take offense to something being presented. that slows, if not stops, the flow of the ideas and understanding. if it's someone i know well enuf, i'll preface for them, but i prefer not to. yeah, I hate that too. People should put aside their petty squabbles over subjects so that productive discussion can prosper.

    this is my natural, normal "know it all" me that some don't like because i'm pretty blunt with my ideas, opinions etc. unfortunately, some take it that i think they should think what i do on a given subject. but that's not what i'm doing. i like to get a lot of ideas "out there" to get the other and me thinking in new directions because anything is possible. Fe valuing probably. A lot of Fe valuers will be more prone to promote ideas, maybe partially to indulge in the Fe atmosphere and get a response, and also to have the clarity of their ideas examined (whereas a Te type's clarity is much more externally-based, so he doesn't feel the need to have it reaffirmed as much). This is just a vibe, but the statement about getting a lot of ideas out there, coupled with the undertone of enjoying exploring a lot of venues in the above post seems to point to valued Ne.

    i can't do this very well on the internet because the ideas and thoughts come too fast to put into words to type them and then wait for a response from someone else. my mind has moved on to 15 other things by then. yeah, lol, sux.

    so, here, you guys only see me one way because that's the easiest to do on the internet. putting my own natural logical ideas together happens easier in a conversation or when i write my ebooks, articles, a website or in a coaching session. or in how i organize my thoughts on what i do with my kids, my life...my inner thoughts on things. Ti/Fe

    on another note, hubby and i don't really argue. we're so straight up with each other before it gets to that. not that we agree on everything but we are very good at agreeing to disagree without having to argue. come to think of it, others MAY see it as arguing but for us, it isn't. it's us airing things out and we both know it's not personal when we do because we don't attack each other's inner person, inner feelings, character, etc. we care about each other too much in the big picture to do that to the other. so, we air out our thoughts, feelings and ideas on things so we always make sure we're on the same page as we go along together in life, with each other, our family, etc...and then can get on with the business of life, the joy of life together. that's good - a sign of a healthy, productive relationship.

    i wish i could do that with everyone. neither of us find friends who we can really do that with. i'll have to work on manifesting that one. You can't have such a special connection with everyone. Otherwise, it wouldn't be so significant
    I'm pretty convinced of you being some alpha or beta, possibly an Fe ego type (the way you described "airing" your thoughts and whatnot seemed more like you were looking for Ti clarity from external sources rather than having definite confidence in it, like I would expect a Ti ego type to do).
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  14. #14
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ...otherwise, i try to avoid arguments with others whom i can tell will start being all feelery and not logical about what is being discussed. and i don't care for when someone attacks me personally from the get go. i know that to go on with the conversation from there won't work. sometimes i will and i'll come back with logic and it sucks because they usually come back with more feelery shit and i come back with more logic and then they don't like that i'm not responding back to their feelings.

    and maybe my idea of logic isn't socionics logic, don't know.

  15. #15
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbmmama
    ...otherwise, i try to avoid arguments with others whom i can tell will start being all feelery and not logical about what is being discussed. and i don't care for when someone attacks me personally from the get go. i know that to go on with the conversation from there won't work. sometimes i will and i'll come back with logic and it sucks because they usually come back with more feelery shit and i come back with more logic and then they don't like that i'm not responding back to their feelings.

    and maybe my idea of logic isn't socionics logic, don't know.
    Yeah, I know. I think this partly has to do with the verbal and emotional aspects of interaction, i.e. you want to keep a clear focus on the verbal accuracy and it pisses you off when someone prioritizes their emotions over that, and it's even more infuriating when they verbally insult you (as opposed to just a negative emotional undertone).

    I'm hesitant to attribute this to a socionics type, though, as I've seen ethical types out-reason logical types on numerious occasions.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  16. #16
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    I'm pretty convinced of you being some alpha or beta, possibly an Fe ego type (the way you described "airing" your thoughts and whatnot seemed more like you were looking for Ti clarity from external sources rather than having definite confidence in it, like I would expect a Ti ego type to do).
    thanks strrrng.

    i'm not sure what i'm looking for this way...but, i'm the one who demanded from my hubby from the beginning that he tell me what he is feeling on things so we can deal with them. i'm the one who takes his feelings and analyzes and structures and clarifies what to do to remedy them. he wouldn't be able to do that to save his life. he's too busy enjoying the moment and lightening the mood.

  17. #17
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbmmama
    i'm not sure what i'm looking for this way...but, i'm the one who demanded from my hubby from the beginning that he tell me what he is feeling on things so we can deal with them. i'm the one who takes his feelings and analyzes and structures and clarifies what to do to remedy them. he wouldn't be able to do that to save his life. he's too busy enjoying the moment and lightening the mood.
    hmm...when you say you demanded him to tell you his feelings on things, were you referring to emotional contexts (i.e. "how does this really affect you?") or just his general disposition on a given situation? Because the former could suggest you taking up the slack on what could be his weak Fi. But then you say you analyze and structure them. Were you just speaking generally? It could make sense for some ethical type to do this, but the structuring analysis would probably be done in a different way than what the conventional definition would suggest. He couldn't what, analyze/understand his feelings to save his life? It seems like he has weak and possibly unvalued Fi. I don't want to make anything out of the last sentence lol, but the stereotype suggests that type of attitude resembles alphas best.

    Ever considered ENTp for your hubby?
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  18. #18
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Wait a minute here. Are we talking about an argument or an attack? If someone attacks me I pick apart their attack and then strike back. Or I'll mock them if I think their attempt is just pathetic.

    But in an argument...that's an argument. There's no need for emotionality; that simply undermines the premise of the debate. If you can be louder or more insulting it doesn't prove your point. Perhaps something important to consider is the affects of sub-type. For instance, you might compare Steve or myself in argument compared to someone like Riddy. Steve and I, Ti-subs, tend to remain uninvested in our arguments on an emotional level outside of emphasizing our intent. We'll argue the point to death, and we may lose patience with people who are totally unreceptive, but we never resort to direct attacks on the individual. Compare that to Riddy, an object-sub, who seems to get caught up in the argument a lot faster, and is a lot quicker to follow along when the argument degenerates to insulting and personal attacks.

    Something to consider?
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    907
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sounds to me your hubby is Ni and Fe valuing. You are helping him focus his Ni and keep him grounded and in touch with you emotionally. Something he surely appreciates. Him being busy living in the moment and 'ligthening the mood' sounds Fe too.

    I like to do what you are doing too. I like to get a lot of ideas out there and reason them through using my 'logic', which just as you say often is misunderstood by other people who take it too literally. But when you are with someone who 'get' what you are saying and the ideas keep coming extremely fast and the other party can keep up with the discussion there are few things better.

    Sounds like you get a 'crimp' in the Fe when the other is about to take offence/misunderstands where you are going. This often stops me from even trying to open a discussion with other people because I know they won't 'get' what I am going after. If I try the discussion will be slow and ponderous (almost painfully so) and they hardly ever truly get my point in all it's aspects.
    INFp

    If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)



  20. #20
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vero
    Wait a minute here. Are we talking about an argument or an attack? If someone attacks me I pick apart their attack and then strike back. Or I'll mock them if I think their attempt is just pathetic.
    Your reactions to merky (mercutio) in stickam suggest otherwise. He "attacks" you on a regular basis but I don't see you picking apart his logic (which he keeps to himself anyway) or striking back. Don't you consider his attempt pathetic? If so, how come you don't mock him?

    But in an argument...that's an argument. There's no need for emotionality; that simply undermines the premise of the debate. If you can be louder or more insulting it doesn't prove your point.
    Agreed.

    Perhaps something important to consider is the affects of sub-type. For instance, you might compare Steve or myself in argument compared to someone like Riddy. Steve and I, Ti-subs, tend to remain uninvested in our arguments on an emotional level outside of emphasizing our intent. We'll argue the point to death, and we may lose patience with people who are totally unreceptive, but we never resort to direct attacks on the individual. Compare that to Riddy, an object-sub, who seems to get caught up in the argument a lot faster, and is a lot quicker to follow along when the argument degenerates to insulting and personal attacks.
    I think this comparison is hasty and, on the whole, incorrect. I disagree that you and Steve are emotionally uninvested in your arguments - quite the opposite actually. You may not run around like a mentally unstable beta NF, insulting everyone in sight, but you do react emotionally and seem to be offset (both of you) if someone contradicts you with the slightest undertone of aggression. And the fact that you're a Ti sub and Riddy is an Ne sub makes little difference in my mind. What it comes down to is how detached a person can be, and how much confrontation (within reason) they can handle.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  21. #21
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    Your reactions to merky (mercutio) in stickam suggest otherwise. He "attacks" you on a regular basis but I don't see you picking apart his logic (which he keeps to himself anyway) or striking back. Don't you consider his attempt pathetic? If so, how come you don't mock him?
    I think you've missed a large number of my responses then, because I've definitely done more than my fair share of striking back in both the public chat and in PM. Additionally, it has reached the point of becoming pathetic and I have started mocking him. I did it no less than three times last night alone. Guess you weren't paying attention

    I think this comparison is hasty and, on the whole, incorrect. I disagree that you and Steve are emotionally uninvested in your arguments - quite the opposite actually. You may not run around like a mentally unstable beta NF, insulting everyone in sight, but you do react emotionally and seem to be offset (both of you) if someone contradicts you with the slightest undertone of aggression. And the fact that you're a Ti sub and Riddy is an Ne sub makes little difference in my mind. What it comes down to is how detached a person can be, and how much confrontation (within reason) they can handle.
    I think it's fair to say that it offsets us when people are aggressive in their manner, though I would argue that it's because we're not sure what to do with the argument when it becomes emotionally invested on the other side. Or at least that's how it is for me. It's not a matter of how I feel about the argument, rather a matter of how can I redirect this discussion in a more acceptable and neutral direction since this person is obviously not taking to my arguments as expected. I want it to stay on the matter of content, not presentation, and when that's not what happens I'm forced to re-evaluate how to deal with the changing circumstances to the best of my ability. I'm not looking for a pissing match when I argue, I'm looking for a rational discussion between two people.
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  22. #22
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vero
    I think you've missed a large number of my responses then, because I've definitely done more than my fair share of striking back in both the public chat and in PM. Additionally, it has reached the point of becoming pathetic and I have started mocking him. I did it no less than three times last night alone. Guess you weren't paying attention
    I have paid attention on various occasions. Not that I cared to observe it, but I distinctly remember the portion of the chat last night where merky told you how he hated you and pondered why that was so, and you basically sat there, saying nothing, with a flat expression. If you want to deny this, go ahead. I don't care about convincing you that Se (or w/e it is) offsets you; I know what I saw, and cherry picked examples that are unverifiable don't help your case. And I have yet to see you mock him, let alone control the situation in those circumstances. Lastly, if all of what you say is true - that you have struck back directly and mocked him - why does he continue the behavior and why does it still seem to have an effect? Oh well, maybe I'm misinterpreting (even though I have no bias about it) and you're really making him look like an idiot.

    Quote Originally Posted by verO
    I think it's fair to say that it offsets us when people are aggressive in their manner, though I would argue that it's because we're not sure what to do with the argument when it becomes emotionally invested on the other side. Or at least that's how it is for me. It's not a matter of how I feel about the argument, rather a matter of how can I redirect this discussion in a more acceptable and neutral direction since this person is obviously not taking to my arguments as expected. I want it to stay on the matter of content, not presentation, and when that's not what happens I'm forced to re-evaluate how to deal with the changing circumstances to the best of my ability. I'm not looking for a pissing match when I argue, I'm looking for a rational discussion between two people.
    But peoples' "aggressiveness" isn't always emotionally-charged. Sometimes it's just simply aggressiveness with no malicious intent (sx? Se?). And I can understand wanting to redirect the argument to more productive ends; there is no point in wasting energy bickering over nothing.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  23. #23
    I've been waiting for you Satan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Behind you
    TIM
    sle sp/sx 845
    Posts
    4,956
    Mentioned
    137 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mn0good View Post
    I think you've missed a large number of my responses then, because I've definitely done more than my fair share of striking back in both the public chat and in PM. Additionally, it has reached the point of becoming pathetic and I have started mocking him. I did it no less than three times last night alone. Guess you weren't paying attention
    Well, as long as you feel that it's working for you. But something to keep in mind, Vero. If you're putting more energy into something than someone else, you are losing.

    That's one of the reasons I think people shouldn't need to justify themselves.

    I think it's fair to say that it offsets us when people are aggressive in their manner, though I would argue that it's because we're not sure what to do with the argument when it becomes emotionally invested on the other side. Or at least that's how it is for me. It's not a matter
    For what it's worth, Vero, I'm not so great with people getting overly emotionally invested in arguements either. I remember when I was young, that I struggled with people who'd pretty much cry when they didn't get their way. In a way I saw it as cheating. It's like when someone's losing in a game, and they want to throw the pieces away. They should go and pick them up, and return them. And more to the point; they're not handling losing that well.

    And I've found that some people - they like to pretend to be adversely effected, or act as if some terrible sin has been done to them, to try to gain the sympathy of others. And make you out to be "bad" because you're not giving into their ways.

    of how I feel about the argument, rather a matter of how can I redirect this discussion in a more acceptable and neutral direction since this person is obviously not taking to my arguments as expected. I want it to stay on the matter of content, not presentation, and when that's not what happens I'm forced to re-evaluate how to deal with the changing circumstances to the best of my ability. I'm not looking for a pissing match when I argue, I'm looking for a rational discussion between two people.
    I've noticed that arguements with some people can easily get out of hand. A lot of people aren't ready to argue.

    And you know what? I can find it kind of rude for someone to come into an arguement with a lot of background material. I want to keep things simple.

  24. #24
    I've been waiting for you Satan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Behind you
    TIM
    sle sp/sx 845
    Posts
    4,956
    Mentioned
    137 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)

    Default

    Vero,

    For what it's worth I don't tend to hold grudges.

    And you can always adapt your behaviour to improve interactions.

  25. #25
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mercutio
    Well, as long as you feel that it's working for you. But something to keep in mind, Vero. If you're putting more energy into something than someone else, you are losing.
    yup.

    Vero, justifying how assertive you have been doesn't exactly make you out to be in control of the situation. Rather, it makes it seem as though you are trying to convince yourself that you are in control.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  26. #26
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    hmm...when you say you demanded him to tell you his feelings on things, were you referring to emotional contexts (i.e. "how does this really affect you?") or just his general disposition on a given situation? Because the former could suggest you taking up the slack on what could be his weak Fi. But then you say you analyze and structure them. Were you just speaking generally? It could make sense for some ethical type to do this, but the structuring analysis would probably be done in a different way than what the conventional definition would suggest. He couldn't what, analyze/understand his feelings to save his life? It seems like he has weak and possibly unvalued Fi. I don't want to make anything out of the last sentence lol, but the stereotype suggests that type of attitude resembles alphas best.

    Ever considered ENTp for your hubby?
    i was actually thinking me as ENTp and him as ISFp.

    we just got off the phone where he got all emotional, reading between the lines, about something that he has to do with his mom's estate and taxes and the legality of investments and such. i am the one who calms him down that way by explaining the logic of exactly what is meant by the lawyers comments how that affects what he has to do, on and on.

    he is the one who helps me with Si stuff and I help him to see the logical big picture and what actions to take to make those ideas come to fruition.

    he reminds me of a mixture of bg and lv, a sentimental, feel good, have a good time and laugh guy. i'm the analyzer, deep thinker who enjoys him helping me to take life simpler.

  27. #27
    dbmmama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wittmont View Post
    Sounds to me your hubby is Ni and Fe valuing. You are helping him focus his Ni and keep him grounded and in touch with you emotionally. Something he surely appreciates. Him being busy living in the moment and 'ligthening the mood' sounds Fe too.

    I like to do what you are doing too. I like to get a lot of ideas out there and reason them through using my 'logic', which just as you say often is misunderstood by other people who take it too literally. But when you are with someone who 'get' what you are saying and the ideas keep coming extremely fast and the other party can keep up with the discussion there are few things better.

    Sounds like you get a 'crimp' in the Fe when the other is about to take offence/misunderstands where you are going. This often stops me from even trying to open a discussion with other people because I know they won't 'get' what I am going after. If I try the discussion will be slow and ponderous (almost painfully so) and they hardly ever truly get my point in all it's aspects.
    yes, that crimp i get and so avoid certain things with certain people, etc.

    but my hubby doesn't get that crimp, he just blurts shit out without thinking first.

  28. #28
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbmmama
    i was actually thinking me as ENTp and him as ISFp.

    we just got off the phone where he got all emotional, reading between the lines, about something that he has to do with his mom's estate and taxes and the legality of investments and such. i am the one who calms him down that way by explaining the logic of exactly what is meant by the lawyers comments how that affects what he has to do, on and on.

    he is the one who helps me with Si stuff and I help him to see the logical big picture and what actions to take to make those ideas come to fruition.

    he reminds me of a mixture of bg and lv, a sentimental, feel good, have a good time and laugh guy. i'm the analyzer, deep thinker who enjoys him helping me to take life simpler.
    Makes sense. I see Ne being a better fit for you than Ni, based off of the way you seem to abstract things.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  29. #29
    cunnilingus epilepsy inducer
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,429
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Intuition: Bringing up alternative perceptions ("you didn't think of it this way!") and different possibilities that sort of though a wrench in the opponents argument. I think Ni would probably try to bring a feeling of doubt to the mind of the person arguing, you would feel uncertainty. Ne would probably make you feel like you’re thinking of something in the completely wrong way, you would feel lost. Not sure if there is a difference in the examples.

    Ethics: Character assassination, general bickering and bitching (Se as well).
    Se: Politics, name dropping and group influence bullying (including ethics).

    Both Se and Ethics seem to be in the same area.

    Logic: Displaying the sheer force of your amazing reasoning powers. Forces people to see things your way (if you can prove they're wrong) and forces people to be humbled. See Expat and phaddy.

  30. #30
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leckysupport View Post
    Intuition: Bringing up alternative perceptions ("you didn't think of it this way!") and different possibilities that sort of though a wrench in the opponents argument. I think Ni would probably try to bring a feeling of doubt to the mind of the person arguing, you would feel uncertainty. Ne would probably make you feel like you’re thinking of something in the completely wrong way, you would feel lost. Not sure if there is a difference in the examples.
    seems like that's something how it works here as well.

    Ethics: Character assassination, general bickering and bitching (Se as well).
    Se: Politics, name dropping and group influence bullying (including ethics).
    maybe, i think this also applies to some STs, so i wouldn't place it solely in the realm of ethics and sensing (although it doesn't seem like you were.)
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  31. #31
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    I have paid attention on various occasions. Not that I cared to observe it, but I distinctly remember the portion of the chat last night where merky told you how he hated you and pondered why that was so, and you basically sat there, saying nothing, with a flat expression. If you want to deny this, go ahead. I don't care about convincing you that Se (or w/e it is) offsets you; I know what I saw, and cherry picked examples that are unverifiable don't help your case. And I have yet to see you mock him, let alone control the situation in those circumstances. Lastly, if all of what you say is true - that you have struck back directly and mocked him - why does he continue the behavior and why does it still seem to have an effect? Oh well, maybe I'm misinterpreting (even though I have no bias about it) and you're really making him look like an idiot.
    See you're doing it. You're building up to a manner of speaking that is directed in an aggressive (and heading towards an offensive) manner. And now I feel obliged to try and put it on track to where we're objectively discussing our observations. Unfortunately I don't think you're willing to accept my argument in this case regardless of how I word it. So I'll simply say this: I dealt with the issue of Merky's negative and aggressive behaviour towards me in the manner which I felt best undermined him an his attempts to offend me. So, I chose not to respond while he went on and on because there really wasn't much point. I had people defending me anyways. A response on my behalf would simply feed into him. But throughout the night I mocked him in jest alongside Justin and Maria for his attempt at hurting me, because it has become pretty pathetic. Attacking him directly is a waste of my energy. It's more enjoyable and productive for me to return his favour by undermining him indirectly.

    But peoples' "aggressiveness" isn't always emotionally-charged. Sometimes it's just simply aggressiveness with no malicious intent (sx? Se?). And I can understand wanting to redirect the argument to more productive ends; there is no point in wasting energy bickering over nothing.
    And in what way is my desire to keep a discussion neutral emotionally charged either?

    Quote Originally Posted by mercutio View Post
    Well, as long as you feel that it's working for you. But something to keep in mind, Vero. If you're putting more energy into something than someone else, you are losing.

    That's one of the reasons I think people shouldn't need to justify themselves.
    That's the way I look at it. I wonder which of us is putting in the most energy, lol.

    For what it's worth, Vero, I'm not so great with people getting overly emotionally invested in arguements either. I remember when I was young, that I struggled with people who'd pretty much cry when they didn't get their way. In a way I saw it as cheating. It's like when someone's losing in a game, and they want to throw the pieces away. They should go and pick them up, and return them. And more to the point; they're not handling losing that well.

    And I've found that some people - they like to pretend to be adversely effected, or act as if some terrible sin has been done to them, to try to gain the sympathy of others. And make you out to be "bad" because you're not giving into their ways.
    That's how I feel about it too, and how I feel about acts of aggression in argumentation. We're taught how to do it and how to recognize it in competitive debate, and it's a tool for emotionally manipulating the argument. While that's fun to do in competition, when I'm discussing things with people regularly I want to keep it on a very neutral playing field in order to keep the discussion pure. I want it to be about the logic and about the argument and about intellectual discovery. It's like a dirty taint to me when my the purity of my discussion is ruined by someone using emotionally manipulative tacks in argument. Aggression (whether backed by emotional intent or not) is an emotional tool.

    I've noticed that arguements with some people can easily get out of hand. A lot of people aren't ready to argue.

    And you know what? I can find it kind of rude for someone to come into an arguement with a lot of background material. I want to keep things simple.
    You find a lot of things rude, haha. I find a measure of background knowledge important to a discussion, but when it gets too bogged down in details that aren't really relevant to the overriding theme of discussion, then it gets tiresome to deal with.
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  32. #32
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    Your reactions to merky (mercutio) in stickam suggest otherwise. He "attacks" you on a regular basis but I don't see you picking apart his logic (which he keeps to himself anyway) or striking back. Don't you consider his attempt pathetic? If so, how come you don't mock him?
    Sorry, the bolded made me . Merk pretty much just likes to disturb shit. He's never trying to make a point other than repetitively demonstrating his continued asshat-esque doucheclownery.

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    I know what I saw, and cherry picked examples that are unverifiable don't help your case. And I have yet to see you mock him, let alone control the situation in those circumstances. Lastly, if all of what you say is true - that you have struck back directly and mocked him - why does he continue the behavior and why does it still seem to have an effect? Oh well, maybe I'm misinterpreting (even though I have no bias about it) and you're really making him look like an idiot.
    You've missed out on very specific and highly relevant situations, Nick. One example that immediately springs to mind was merk's whole 'non-sexuality is offensive' spiel. Vero picked that a part quite completely. Whether or not that has an effect on merk's behavior is beside the point. He comes off as the kind of person who will do what he likes regardless of what anyone thinks, even if they're making convincing points.

    But peoples' "aggressiveness" isn't always emotionally-charged. Sometimes it's just simply aggressiveness with no malicious intent (sx? Se?). And I can understand wanting to redirect the argument to more productive ends; there is no point in wasting energy bickering over nothing.
    I agree that it isn't emotionally charged, but no malicious intent? We are talking about the same guy, right? And how can you talk about not wasting energy when merk doesn't respond to reasoned points then hanging on the fact that the person on the receiving end of his ego jerkfestival doesn't 'waste their energy' in doing something that history has shown to prove ineffective? How would that be remotely productive?
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  33. #33
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mercutio View Post
    Vero,

    For what it's worth I don't tend to hold grudges.

    And you can always adapt your behaviour to improve interactions.
    Ah, and there's the heart of the issue. You see nothing wrong with your behaviour, and likewise, I see nothing wrong with my behaviour. And so neither of us will adapt.
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  34. #34
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vero
    See you're doing it. You're building up to a manner of speaking that is directed in an aggressive (and heading towards an offensive) manner. And now I feel obliged to try and put it on track to where we're objectively discussing our observations. Unfortunately I don't think you're willing to accept my argument in this case regardless of how I word it. So I'll simply say this: I dealt with the issue of Merky's negative and aggressive behaviour towards me in the manner which I felt best undermined him an his attempts to offend me. So, I chose not to respond while he went on and on because there really wasn't much point. I had people defending me anyways. A response on my behalf would simply feed into him. But throughout the night I mocked him in jest alongside Justin and Maria for his attempt at hurting me, because it has become pretty pathetic. Attacking him directly is a waste of my energy. It's more enjoyable and productive for me to return his favour by undermining him indirectly.
    No, I'm not trying to be offensive or offset you at all. Stop being such an alpha NT, lol. It's not a coincidence this counter-phobic aversion to any form of direct confrontation has been most prominent among ENTps and INTjs, ime, and frankly, I'm tired of it. Maybe your Fi polr makes you overly-paranoid about others' motives, and you're weak Se makes you vulnerable to direct attacks from Se types, I don't know. Just stop presuming to know what I'm doing just because you're scared of a little intensity. And lol @ ur rationalization about how you reacted to merk. I don't particularly care about the details; every time I have observed the comical interaction, he has seemed in control. This is a matter of opinion, and I won't be convinced otherwise. And the fact that you tried to justify it continuously only reaffirms my belief.

    And in what way is my desire to keep a discussion neutral emotionally charged either?
    It's the fact that you can't handle it when it gets charged. Anyone can and should desire a neutral, rational discussion; it's just that some people know how to handle it when things get intense, and others don't.

    That's the way I look at it. I wonder which of us is putting in the most energy, lol.
    Judging from this thread, I'd say you are. Merk has made one post which addressed the issues concisely. You have made multiple posts which, for the most part, consist of rambling rationalizations and justifications. Again, he's not expending energy - or extra energy at least. You are expending a lot energy defending yourself, lol, so it's obvious who's "losing" here.

    That's how I feel about it too, and how I feel about acts of aggression in argumentation. We're taught how to do it and how to recognize it in competitive debate, and it's a tool for emotionally manipulating the argument. While that's fun to do in competition, when I'm discussing things with people regularly I want to keep it on a very neutral playing field in order to keep the discussion pure. I want it to be about the logic and about the argument and about intellectual discovery. It's like a dirty taint to me when my the purity of my discussion is ruined by someone using emotionally manipulative tacks in argument. Aggression (whether backed by emotional intent or not) is an emotional tool.
    This I interpret as a rationalized cop out for your inability to deal with direct confrontation in a competent manner. Debating takes skill, right? Well, guess what? There's an art to aggression and confrontation, too. It's not all about emotional insults; self-control, perceptiveness and other tactics come into play heavily. So stop dismissing it as if you're to good for it on your high pedestal of reason and objectivity. It's similar to people who say that fighting/war is bad, classless or immoral, when in reality, it is sometimes a necessity and more often than not, simply can't be avoided.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  35. #35
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mune
    Sorry, the bolded made me . Merk pretty much just likes to disturb shit. He's never trying to make a point other than repetitively demonstrating his continued asshat-esque doucheclownery.
    No offense, but it's not a coincidence that an INFj is making this post.

    You've missed out on very specific and highly relevant situations, Nick. One example that immediately springs to mind was merk's whole 'non-sexuality is offensive' spiel. Vero picked that a part quite completely. Whether or not that has an effect on merk's behavior is beside the point. He comes off as the kind of person who will do what he likes regardless of what anyone thinks, even if they're making convincing points.
    Maybe so. I'm not saying Vero is incapable of picking apart arguments - quite the opposite actually. I'm saying that psychologically Merk seems to have the upper hand, overall.

    I agree that it isn't emotionally charged, but no malicious intent? We are talking about the same guy, right? And how can you talk about not wasting energy when merk doesn't respond to reasoned points then hanging on the fact that the person on the receiving end of his ego jerkfestival doesn't 'waste their energy' in doing something that history has shown to prove ineffective? How would that be remotely productive?
    You're right, engaging in that type of situation isn't productive. The wasting energy I was referring to was Vero's behavior in this thread. And I doubt Merk had malicious intent, lol, he just likes to gauge people. Haven't you read any of his posts? He goes into quite some detail about this.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  36. #36
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    Fi ego/Ne cre = not liking assholes
    Taking notes.

    I'm saying that psychologically Merk seems to have the upper hand, overall.
    If by that you mean shitting on people and being unconcerned with people except as objects he can play with, then I'm with you.

    And I doubt Merk had malicious intent, lol, he just likes to gauge people. Haven't you read any of his posts? He goes into quite some detail about this.
    I have and this overwhelmingly leads me to the conclusions I've already expressed. Just because someone doesn't care that they're attacking someone doesn't mean the injury is an accident.

    As for Vero wasting energy here, if she has something to say and wants to say it, how is that wasteful? Because you disagree with what she has to say?
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  37. #37
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mune
    Taking notes.
    FiNe = labeling people assholes for differences in communication.

    If by that you mean shitting on people and being unconcerned with people except as objects he can play with, then I'm with you.
    This demonstrates the emptiness of debating this with you, and reinforces how the conflicting relationship affects things.

    I have and this overwhelmingly leads me to the conclusions I've already expressed. Just because someone doesn't care that they're attacking someone doesn't mean the injury is an accident.

    As for Vero wasting energy here, if she has something to say and wants to say it, how is that wasteful? Because you disagree with what she has to say?
    She's wasting her energy because she's actually arguing why she's in control. If she actually had control of the situation, she wouldn't have written paragraphs rationalizing how she stood up to merk, lol.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  38. #38
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  39. #39
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [quote=strrrng;411508]FiNe = labeling people assholes for differences in communication.[quote]

    lmao! Dude that's actually kind of funny! Read my motivations more plz. k thx.

    This demonstrates the emptiness of debating this with you, and reinforces how the conflicting relationship affects things.
    Yep, pretty much. I don't even think it's necessarily a conflicting relationship, but I agree there sure as shit is a lot of conflict.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  40. #40
    Éminence grise mikemex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Third Planet
    TIM
    IEE-Ne
    Posts
    1,631
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I hate discussing with Fe/Ti types. They rarely care about the discussion; they are generally more concerned about "winning" it. It's fairly classical when it comes to SEIs and ILEs. You can even notice how the SEIs here introduced the "+1" expression, etc.

    I specially hate when they throw what they think is a "devastating" argument and won't allow you to even reply to it, starting to scream and such. I bet it usually happens when such an argument creates a Fe connection and they don't want you to break it; even if they don't really ever cared to check whenever the argument was that great in the first place.
    [] | NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)

    You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life.
    - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •