Podcast - Episode 0245 - Different Conversation Styles

22 comments

• 

  • Phillip Jacobs
  • October 2, 2018 at 4:38 pm

  I’ll show you my ego if you show me yours. Oh that’s a healthy ego. Or am I the only one that pees in the shower. I wish I could think of these things when I am actually talking to them. All the best.

• 

  • Graham
  • October 2, 2018 at 1:19 pm

  I’m not sure how I would describe my conversation style. However, I have found that I like to go deep instead of wide.

  In fact, I’ve found that I walk away from an event where I went deep feeling very energized, whereas in a situation where I had to have small talk with a bunch of people I go away feeling almost anxious, like something is missing.

  The other challenge is being able to carry on a conversation. If it’s something that appeals to my dominant functions (Fi-Ne), I can talk all day and into the night with someone, but I get very bored and distracted if the conversation moves to something like sports or whatever.

• 

  • Julie
  • October 2, 2018 at 3:39 am

  What he is describing is the controlling aspect of codependency. He needs to feel he is in control. Highly common in codependency. Nothing to do with personality. The other side of the codependent coin is called dependent. So his conversation partner’s will be forced into a dependent style. He has to feel in control over his entire reality. This stems from insecurity.

• 

  • Izzy
  • October 2, 2018 at 12:56 pm

  As humans we will always have a level of dependancy co-dependancy on others. I think that to say these things has nothing to do with personality is incorrect. I believe that certain personality types are more likely to become controlling (co-dependant) and other types more likely to become dependent on other’s to take control. This is not to say it is not important for each type to integrate the other side of themselves to become healthier and happier.

• 

  • DG
  • October 1, 2018 at 7:15 pm

  I had to laugh at the ENFP vomiting rainbows onto INTJs comment because I actually relate to that to a certain extent, though I find it could really be with any type. I have called a habit of mine “word vomiting” wherein I just completely overshare, usually details about myself.

  Also, I will sometimes come off way too strong and fail to recognize the actual atmosphere and what people may or may not be receptive to. I also have the tendency to go off in lengthy tangents and diatribes, which is essentially sometimes like dumping a bucket of ice water on a person’s head, and they do not really know how to react.

  As a self-preservation subtype I will admit that to do tend to often branch off into topics of “things that can kill you” or “be dangerous” or “terrible things that have happened in general.” This has actually caused people to falsely accuse me of lacking empathy because I have developed a way to distance myself from such topics in the moment so I am not completely overwhelmed by emotion. And that is very jarring to people sometimes.
  My underlying philosophy is that we all need to know about negative things that happen so we can better ensure that these can be avoided, prevented, or worked through in a more constructive manner. But sometimes people don’t realize that I am trying to draw attention to an issue so we can hypothetically or maybe literally work our way around it.

  A good example of this happened a few weeks ago actually. I was in the campus dining hall eating dinner with two very good friends of mine who are INFPs. Being NFPs, we always have a very easy dynamic and flow in our conversations. My male INFP friend was questioning why his mom told him not to put a diagnosis of autism on job application back when he was applying for his first part-time job. I suggested that maybe she wanted to help him avoid the stigma the label often carries so a potential employer would not write him off before getting to talk with him. My INFP friend replied, “But it’s true, so why wouldn’t I.” I very nonchalantly and matter-of-factory said “There’s a huge stigma there. Some people would rather have their kids never receive a vaccine and die than have an autistic kid.” My other INFP friend reacted very viscerally to this. She actually flinched, and you could tell that what I said really dig into her core. She knew that I do not agree with the stigma or think the way I was describing, though I emphasized that just to make sure, but even my simple reminder of something negative really struck her in the core. Maybe as someone with auxiliary Fi, I have an easier job separating myself from that core, and I think my Te really takes over then and gets matter of fact about what is actually there in happening.

  The important thing is that I realized immediately when I crossed the boundary and I made sure my friend was okay. I definitely need to work more on my secondary social instinct and reading the mood more in anticipation for when something like this might come up.

  I also have the tendency to answer hypothetical questions and statements literally. At times, I have gone into lecture mode because I thought the person genuinely wanted an answer and I had a pretty good stab at it.

  I have also tend to subconsciously start diminishing things when I notice people putting them too high on a pedestal. This happens a lot when people talk about the “good old days” and I can rapid fire list plenty of unidealistic events that happened during any era someone wants to peg. I also do this with discussions of public figures, especially political ones where I draw their supposed perfection into question. I think this might have to do with the skepticism of myself as a 6. When I see people blindly putting their faith in an individual or an institution they do not or cannot know on an intimate level, I always endorse caution because I see that as a prime path for getting seriously hurt.

  While that is more negative, I find that I often am the person to bounce between topics. I am often not sure how I do it, but I’m always making connections as I speak in real time. I do this in order to keep it interesting. I also really enjoy listening because I have an innate curiosity about other people and what they are thinking. I find sharing my thoughts and experiences helps most people feel more comfortable sharing their ideas or perspectives. I can personally do this in groups better as I tend to freeze up when in a one to one interaction with someone I do not know well. A group is more appealing to me because there is more potential information sand insights to be gathered and there are more people to help keep the conversation going.

  I also have done quite a bit of work around framing the questions I ask. I don’t want to come off as potentially challenging if I ask someone why they have an opinion I don’t agree with. I find that not repeatedly asking them if they do not give you an answer is the best way to go. My curious nature really wants to know why they see the world as they do, but the person might not have deeply considered the rational or the do not know how to properly express it. I’ve also learned to refrain from placing my experience and disagreement in the question. I subliminally emphasize that my intent is to learn.

  I also always try to find the middle ground when there is a disagreement. I’m fairly good at mediating between opposing factions because I can normally draw from both sides and gain a report with all parties involved. Then the trick is helping the people to see the middle ground, which is difficult and beyond my capabilities at times. This strategy is also useful when I come into contact with a point of view that I disagree with, but I am not in a good position to do so for whatever reasons. Sometimes I will try to deflect to bigger issues that have a degree of commonality to them. One handy tool in political conversations that I have found is to emphasize that another, less controversial issue is more important. I find that most people will agree with you that the government should not take social security money and spend it on other things as that should go to the retired. This can backfire if people actually seem to think the issue on hand is the most important or realize what I am doing, the latter very few people have ever done.

  I also feel that I have a very self-preservation tactic when tensions start flaring or the conversation strays into dangerous territory. In my mind, I slam on the hypothetical breaks and then try to turn the situation into my hall court so that I can change the topic. Many times, I see a conflict brewing and I want to avoid the source of that conflict. I find that my knack for storytelling and recounting things has really helped me in this because it captivated others attention. I know conflict is going to happen, but I sort of throw certain protection mechanisms up around myself and sometimes those around me.

  It is very interesting to think about the little, subliminal intricacies in communication style. I am sure I probably have more that I have yet to recognize.