# INTJ's/INTP's/ENTP's/ENTJ's Proving Evidence



## Rourk (Feb 17, 2009)

Who is the best? What would be the ranking? Something I noticed. Marino is exceptional at clarifying ideas but is he good at proving his points in an argument? I think the ENTP would be off inventing but then again I consider the ENTP's are often time lawyers. 

I think the INTJ and ENTP would probably rival one another in the fiereceness of the argument. But I don't underestimate the INTP. He is considered the "lawyer" personality after all. 

Who do you think the best lawyer, debater would be based on type?


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

There would be no ranking. You could consider all of the descriptions and place them in a certain order based on perceived strengths and weaknesses, but the people behind the types would defy those with their own sets of strengths and own sets of weaknesses. I don't believe you could assign an order to the theoretical types, even, because they share many of the same strengths and what may be perceived as their weaknesses may be considered a strength by others, which would spiral an endless debate.

INTPs are considered the 'engineers', though. Not the lawyers.


----------



## Marino (Jun 26, 2009)

It depends on the individual's personal knowledge and expertise on the particular subject that is being discussed.


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Marino said:


> It depends on the individual's personal knowledge and expertise on the particular subject that is being discussed.


I agree. My level of confidence in a debate depends largely on how much I know about the subject. If I know my stuff, I go in guns a-blazing. If I don't, I resort to undermining my opponent and making them question themselves without actually giving solid supports for my own argument. Against a weaker opponent, this tactic tends to be effective.


----------



## Marco Antonio (Nov 25, 2008)

hmm...
So lets see..

ENTP is inferential and good at diverting the conversation towards their purpose; that why this guys are incredible at arguing because they take your thoughts and involve them with theirs. It is also subliminal and thus persuasive.

INTP is explanatory and good at categorizing information to clarify it; it is concerned with interconnecting the whole of their ideas to convince. They are good at pointing out discrepancies of concern. This is a powerful tool since they can't be easily fooled.

ENTJ is deductive and good at describing how events develop into cause-effect; this lets them come to effective conclusions that relate to the real concerning point. So they are excellent at retaining and defending any posture whilst naming the substantial evidence.

INTJ is transcendent and good at forecasting results of argumentation. So they are superb at challenging logical consequences and transforming the problem into that which follows their strategy without leaving the confrontational context.

... i will let you guys decide :laughing:


----------



## very bored (Jul 6, 2009)

The issue sounds more like "is the NT a J or a P" because their argument styles sound similar, and the type of the person being *argued against* will probably be the most important factor.


----------



## manicpixiedreamgirl (Nov 15, 2009)

an INFP could make an excellent lawyer if she were passionate about the cause.


----------



## yesiknowbut (Oct 25, 2009)

You're forgetting that people are also listening to the debate, and that the people who are listening will decide who wins the debate, whether they are the jury in a court of law or the audience in a debating chamber. And you don't know what their personality types are......

So in addition to logically proving your argument you need to speak to the emotions of those in the audience, indentify with those that need to be identified with, point out the ramifications for those that are unable to see them, and so forth.

It's more than saying the right words in the right order. You have to look good, sound confident, and if you can, find an emotional sucker-punch to hit people with when it matters.

coi: I'm not a lawyer or a debater but I do public speaking well.


----------



## NastyCat (Sep 20, 2009)

Marino said:


> It depends on the individual's personal knowledge and expertise on the particular subject that is being discussed.


+1

The NTs I know tend to keep their mouth shut when they have little knowledge of the subject matter.

However, when it comes down to something I do know pretty well about, I can be pretty unstoppable.


----------



## Rourk (Feb 17, 2009)

manicpixiedreamgirl said:


> an INFP could make an excellent lawyer if she were passionate about the cause.


 
No kidding. INFP's are brilliant. And their extraverted thinking is solid.


----------



## Rourk (Feb 17, 2009)

NastyCat said:


> +1
> 
> The NTs I know tend to keep their mouth shut when they have little knowledge of the subject matter.
> 
> However, when it comes down to something I do know pretty well about, I can be pretty unstoppable.


 
Isn't that a proverb or a quote or something. "The more one knows, the less one talks." Something like that. I don't know. I wouldn't of said if I did. :crazy:


----------



## NastyCat (Sep 20, 2009)

There probably is... :shocked:


----------



## Jrquinlisk (Jan 17, 2009)

Rourk said:


> Isn't that a proverb or a quote or something. "The more one knows, the less one talks." Something like that. I don't know. I wouldn't of said if I did. :crazy:


"Better to remain quiet and let them think you stupid, rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt."


----------



## Marco Antonio (Nov 25, 2008)

Rourk said:


> No kidding. INFP's are brilliant. And their extraverted thinking is solid.


I'll give you that. My bro studies philosophy and he is really good at reasoning and debating;yet only when some considerable important values are in play.


----------



## KingKong (Jul 26, 2009)

I find that NTP's generally become more frustrated and will go to greater lengths to prove their side while NTJ's will hold off and provide evidence in a more calm but intimidating way. I would choose any NT as my lawyer, but probably shoot for an NTJ in hopes that they would be more focused.


----------



## Ventricity (Mar 30, 2009)

people here keep debating without clarifying many fundamental variables in effect. it is uncertain to me what contest this is about. if it´s about who is best in a debate, then you need to take into account the venue, who and how will the winner be decided? is it a written debate(possible favouring introverts) or a rl debate(possible favouring extroverts)? what subject matter is being discussed, and how complex is it?

i have studied law and participated in a lot of debates, and unlike intjs, intps and entps seems the best in general, as they can easily shift back and fourth and shift strategies in the middle of the debate if needed. intj and possibly entjs usually never talk about stuff they dont have complete control over, so they can suddently come to a halt and start repeating themselves. their advantage is that they are better at communicating and presenting clearer sentences and keeping structure, while entps and intps can be difficult to follow at times (and say some stupid things).

so in a debate with an open answer, intps and entps have more natural abilities to manipulate and strategize, and think out of their comfort zone, and thus would win. on the more complex issues within this, intps would win, loving to play with systems and patterns as complex as possible, and being able to question everything.
intjs and entjs are probably more consistant however.


----------



## backwards (Mar 17, 2009)

what ventricity said. plus. when arguing a case I believe the ENTJs would be best in front of a jury because they often have a better way of presenting their material in a way normal people can comprehend it. I think INTJs would be less suited for it because they often lack confidence in the success of their ideas and thus chose a more common aproach even though they would have gotten better result if sticking to their own idea. I don't really know any INTPs so I can't speak for them. We ENTPs have the major problem when we add a new level to the idea of complex which probably wouldn't work well with a jury. Thankfully we don't use the jurysystem in sweden :tongue:


----------

