ENTP and INTP wars

[XiaoXing]

I agree with her. As long as your point is right, screw what others think, go for the jugular to win, by whatever means possible.

I disagree. I have friends who argue in this style, and they do it badly.
They leave people confused as to why they just agreed.

If you're going to convince people, you need to do so in such a manner that they can tell people why they found your argument more credible than your opponents'.
Not just "oh, well, they sounded like they knew what they were talking about".

...
...
I just realised, that post would make so much more sense if I'd slept first.
/endstupididiot

 

[secretsmile]

INTP may prove more personable and creative

>

ENTP is smarter and would probably win any debate with INTP.

But then that might be a given since I married an INTP.

 

[Shai Gar]

Yeah... I don't do it badly.

You argue however your audience takes it best. That's the way to win.

 

[slant]

Type is irrelevant to such a question.

 

[Duty]

See, my particular conundrum is I'm very big into spreading the word of reason. I think a lot of the world's problems stem from poor decision making. When you have that belief, you can't misrepresent it by making poor arguments that have a good conclusion...you become sort of a hypocrite.

I don't think it's right to accept a false premise to convince someone of a true conclusion. When you do that you just replaced a false conclusion while inserting/reinforcing another. It's the build-up of false conclusions combined with stubbornness about them that causes so much wrong in the world.

So although we may bring people closer by convincing them of something good with bad reasoning, we can't fix the problem with that. Although it is idealistic to think all people are going to be good decision makers, it is about living in what Kant called "the Kingdom of Ends." It is the most moral to live in such a way as to help facilitate the world to becoming perfect, even if it never will.

 

[TaylorS]

the biggest vice of INTPs is getting into a Ti-Si cycle of circular reasoning and confirmation bias, not using their Ne to test their own beliefs and instead cherry-picking data to "prove" their beliefs. ENTPs on the other hand, with dominant Ne and auxiliary Ti will tend to twist logic to fit their "brilliant ideas" (hence the fallacy-filled arguments a poster described) and use their tertiary Fe to cover up the bad logic with emotionally-appealing sound-bites.

 

[la boheme]

Last night I watched two friends. ENTP and INTP males, debate an abstract issue. ENTP had already formed his argument and opinions and INTP kept trying to poke holes in it. INTP was more creative in argumentation, but ENTP was smarter.
It was kind of like watching an open cage match. ENTP paused to think a bit, but I think he was tripped up by some of INTP's non-sequetors. Anyways, I admit to being biased, since I like ENTP more, and have known him longer.
But his argument also made sense. And, for the record, INTP did get ENTP to re-consider his opinion, seriously, on another topic.
It was very entertaining. INTP had this smirk on his face the whole time as ENTP grew stoic, obviously challenged and wanting to win. I'd never seen him like that before, probably because usually in a debate he has the upper hand being an uber-smart person.
I came to the conclusion that although, INTP may prove more personable and creative, I think ENTP is smarter and would probably win any debate with INTP. Thoughts?

It depends on the details, but if you assume the two are equally matched--same IQ, education, experience, etc--then the INTP will win simply because his Ti is better developed and a debate is nothing more than who has the better argument.