[Pavane]

On tumblr someone posted this quick little test to determine whether you were INFJ or INTJ based on your stance for disagreeing with the teaching of creationism in schools. I said that I honestly agree with both sides because creationism is not based on scientific evidence, and imposing teachings of religion in public schools doesn't coincide with the doctrine of separation between church and state which would be unethical in my opinion. She told me that I seemed very INFJ just because I agreed with both sides rather than choosing the rationalist point of view alone. So that got me wondering, are you guys ever neutral, indifferent, or devil's advocate on an issue? I find myself in those roles when discussing something I don't really care about or have an opinion towards.



INFJ's are welcome to add input as well. :P

[DesertWind]

I don't think taking a stance on one subject matter would necessarily make you NF over NT (or the converse).

[Fallen Nocturne]

On the subject of Creationism being taught as an 'alternative' to evolution is wrong. By suggesting it as an alternative, you suggest it has as much evidence supporting it as Evolution or The Big Bang... which it doesn't.

Anyway, I rarely take a neutral view on an issue. I can often see the points of both sides, but I'll just have a problem with one of the sides argument. Creationism, for example: I get that some people believe in it, but I don't think belief is enough to justify wasting time on it in a setting for studying science, a field of study which bases itself on the presence of evidence. But I digress.

As you can see, I tend to take a side pretty quickly! I wouldn't have thought that being an INTJ or INFJ would have an effect on whether a person remains neutral or not. I expect it would just effect the reasons they ally themselves where they do.

[Einsteinette]

I don't take arguments as a personal matter and I'm the first one to admit when I'm wrong. That said I have come to the conclusion that arguing with people is pointless so I usually keep my opinion to my self especially when the other person just want to be right regardless of the facts. In general, I usually find my self in a neutral position because life isn't white and black, my sister once told me that arguments with me always end with something like " In theory this opinion is right because *something* but I also understand the opposite opinion because *something else*. "

[Pavane]

On the subject of Creationism being taught as an 'alternative' to evolution is wrong. By suggesting it as an alternative, you suggest it has as much evidence supporting it as Evolution or The Big Bang... which it doesn't.

Anyway, I rarely take a neutral view on an issue. I can often see the points of both sides, but I'll just have a problem with one of the sides argument. Creationism, for example: I get that some people believe in it, but I don't think belief is enough to justify wasting time on it in a setting for studying science, a field of study which bases itself on the presence of evidence. But I digress.

As you can see, I tend to take a side pretty quickly! I wouldn't have thought that being an INTJ or INFJ would have an effect on whether a person remains neutral or not. I expect it would just effect the reasons they ally themselves where they do.

I don't really believe in creationism, but the moral argument that would most likely be made by the INFJ makes sense to me. That's why I agree with it. And I don't think it makes me any less of an INTJ for agreeing with it either.

[crferguson]

You said it was a quick personality test on tumblr... ;P

[J Squirrel]

I love playing devil's advocate. I argue positions I don't believe all the time. It helps me try to see every side of an issue, which is necessary to have an informed opinion. Depending on the issue, there are times when I decide both sides are at least partially right and that I don't really care which side wins.

[christicake]

I do if I have logical reasons to. Also, who cares what she said.

[Spear]

I can't imagine that it would be so easy to discover if you are one or the other by which sides you take on an argument. That would only work both parties are unbiased and the argument is not an age old debate like the one between the church and the state.

[NT the DC]

I answer creationism being taught is schools as it shouldn't happen. Creationism is fine to teach but lets keep that in churches and church related schools. Public schools are supposed to teach sciences not religion and faith, besides it's disrespectful to think that that people in public schools don't have their own beliefs about religion that are not congruent with what is being taught.