People Ever Been Stuck In A "I'm Right, You're Wrong" Conversation?

I think many here are afflicted with this condition:

http://happiness-project.com/happiness_project/2012/06/ever-been-stuck-in-an-im-right-youre-wrong-conversation/

ive noticed that that particularly manifests itself when dealing with incredibly subjective topics (music and film tastes, etc.)

  On 7/3/2012 at 4:57 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

ive noticed that that particularly manifests itself when dealing with incredibly subjective topics (music and film tastes, etc.)

I don't really think that's true.

Oh yeah, I do this.

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:06 PM, luke viia said:

Oh yeah, I do this.

No you don't

You're doing it wrong.

I do notice that I use that style sometimes in a passive-aggressive way when talking to people. *cries*

I never get stuck in that kind of conversation because I don't really care about people being wrong. I know I'm right, I know you're wrong, this conversation is not going anywhere, let's talk about something else

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:12 PM, ThatSpanishGuy said:

I never get stuck in that kind of conversation because I don't really care about people being wrong. I know I'm right, I know you're wrong, this conversation is not going anywhere, let's talk about something else

When I say that to my girlfriend things only get worse.

i dunno how relevant this is, but i'm an INTP and i've noticed that most of the other INTPs i meet do this as well. i think we're effectively trying to debug conversations as we have them.

watmm knows the difference between righter & wronger

It occurs here sometimes, but the nuances of it vary. I'd say when it's trolling or sarcasm doesn't count. Also, a lot of people have time to articulate their views when typing up responses or actually engage with others in discussion. So I wouldn't say it's rampant on WATMM, but it shows up, especially in long debate threads.

I definitely have a close family who does this all the time IRL. I've learned to just play along and tune it out, especially on the phone. Even when it's super friendly conversation where he agrees 100% with a statement, he sometimes has to re-word it or flip the phrasing in a way that makes it seem like: a. I needed to be corrected and/or b. that it was his statement to begin with. It's quite annoying and it's very amplified during debates, which I just try to avoid altogether now. I try not do it myself, or at least apologize when I come off that way initially.

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:19 PM, luke viia said:

i dunno how relevant this is, but i'm an INTP and i've noticed that most of the other INTPs i meet do this as well. i think we're effectively trying to debug conversations as we have them.

Yeah same, though I think this article simplifies it too much. It's less about winning a conversation I think, because really, who gives a shit about winning. But more or less a way to examine statements and your own initial logic to see if there are any flaws or aspects that haven't been thought of. Coming to an agreement over this process with the other participant is usually the outcome I find, which I enjoy, even when my initial thought process was incorrect.

LEARNING!!!!!!!!

often I agree out of sympathy, even if my guts are turning and vice versa..

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:36 PM, compson said:

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:19 PM, luke viia said:

i dunno how relevant this is, but i'm an INTP and i've noticed that most of the other INTPs i meet do this as well. i think we're effectively trying to debug conversations as we have them.

 

Yeah same, though I think this article simplifies it too much. It's less about winning a conversation I think, because really, who gives a shit about winning. But more or less a way to examine statements and your own initial logic to see if there are any flaws or aspects that haven't been thought of. Coming to an agreement over this process with the other participant is usually the outcome I find, which I enjoy, even when my initial thought process was incorrect.

 

LEARNING!!!!!!!!

agreed. the article was humbling in the sense that it helps drive home how annoying this can be for other people, but i really enjoy when the person i'm conversing with can do this.

Seems to me that he/she is just describing people who always disagree with you just for the sake of disagreeing. I like to believe that I find such behavior relatively easy to detect and walk away from.

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:52 PM, luke viia said:

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:36 PM, compson said:

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:19 PM, luke viia said:

i dunno how relevant this is, but i'm an INTP and i've noticed that most of the other INTPs i meet do this as well. i think we're effectively trying to debug conversations as we have them.

 

Yeah same, though I think this article simplifies it too much. It's less about winning a conversation I think, because really, who gives a shit about winning. But more or less a way to examine statements and your own initial logic to see if there are any flaws or aspects that haven't been thought of. Coming to an agreement over this process with the other participant is usually the outcome I find, which I enjoy, even when my initial thought process was incorrect.

 

LEARNING!!!!!!!!

 

agreed. the article was humbling in the sense that it helps drive home how annoying this can be for other people, but i really enjoy when the person i'm conversing with can do this.

yeah as intp i like to make sure things are said accurately, but i try not to be a dick about it. im not great at conversing, so obtaining accuracy is sometimes the only thing drawing me into a discussion.

I'm an ENTP and I do this all the time, especially with family. I've actually tried to stop recently, but the annoying thing is getting accused for it when you're not doing it at all because you do it so much. I'm usually pretty subtle about it, though, so only the people close to me really notice. What's also annoying is when someone else does it a ton and you want to call them out on it but then you're like "that would be hypocritical lol".

"PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS REPLY NO EVEN WHEN THEY MEAN YES"

q: hi, sup, are you goin home?

a: no, i'm going home

q: we are here today...

a: no, no, no, we are here today...

my conversation style is to wait until somebody says something that i can twist around into something funny.

  On 7/3/2012 at 5:06 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 7/3/2012 at 4:57 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

ive noticed that that particularly manifests itself when dealing with incredibly subjective topics (music and film tastes, etc.)

I don't really think that's true.

i see what you did there.

woman in the OP is maybe just stupid and/or always wrong

Sometimes I disagree with something that I support just for the sake of argument. I helps me find flaws in my own arguments

Being an animal lover (the non-PETA type), especially so with reptiles, I get in arguments (not to the point of belligerance) about snakes. I am wholeheartedly convinced that there is no vertebrate in this world that is as universally accepted as "better off dead."

Best argument I had was waking up one morning on a camping trip in south Florida. A curious man who was at the camping site started to inquire what we were searching around the site for that morning. We told him frogs, turtles, snakes, etc. He then made it a point to go on a rant about how snakes are embodiments of the devil. Each and every one of them. They all deserve to die and he has always gone out of his way to kill every snake he sees. Because he felt it was his duty as a Christian to rid the world of evil. As my friends and I had a very peaceful (but ignorant on his part) conversation trying to argue that snakes are just another animal with a place in this world, the man kept reiterating how no snake will let you go by without attacking, most are "poisonous", yadda yadda yadda. There was seemingly no way we could convince him otherwise. Til a racer came out into the open (it had been one of those abnormally cold nights for December in south Florida) and we picked it up off the ground to show the man. Surprisingly, the snake did not make a single attempt to bite (honestly, surprising because racers, while harmless, are eager to bite in defense and not always the best ambassadors for their kind). The guy kept arguing that we were "in for it" and whatever for about 15 minutes as we took photos right beside him, posed the snake as we wished, and then ushered it back into the brush. The guy was amazed and seemed like his opinion might have changed a little.

However, being the pessimist I am, I can't help but think that he just returned to his old ways after we left.