I also believe that conflict style isn't fixed for different MBTI types, but can be learned and developed further to desired directions. Also I think culture might have some slight affect on your competing style.
I'm an INTP-T, and honestly I've never really thought about this subject that much until now, so I hope my answer won't be too hastily written or that I've even figured myself out correctly and thus won't give you accidentally wrong data about an INTP individual.
I think earlier my style has been much more avoidant than now. I probably feared something, maybe losing those people, losing their respect for me or sth else, I'm not sure, but now that I've finally got lots of experience of arguing (ehem :D), I don't fear it anymore, it's almost like I've exposed the concequences of arguing, and realised they're not devastating, and far less devastating than consequences of avoiding. Actually the older I grow, the more I see arguing as something very fruitful. As I see the sooner you can solve the problem by a conversation (which often turns to argument) the clearer the air gets: the less time I spend hoarding some ever deepening disappointed feelings with those people. You see, when the last mentioned happens, it kills all good feelings in me for those people little by little away, so better argue right away than too late, after contamination. If the result of the argument is bad then so be it, it still won't be worse than of avoiding and procrastinating until I one day burst, or calmly have to announce irreversibly, that I've had enough.
Causes of my arguments in 99% of cases: Somebody's logic fails in a conversation and I try to calmly correct and inform them, just so the same won't happen again in the future, and they misunderstand me as arguing about the subject itself we were talking about and not about his cognitive or logical or argumentative moves in that sentence, and everything he says from that point on is based on this misconception.
What I do, I still try so hard, actually I have to use absolutely inhumane effort to control myself from snapping when they just keep on saying and saying something that has absolutely nothing yo do with the subject or something they wouldn't say if they understood what I said like s second ago. There have been cases with my boyfriend, who is an ENTJ, that I even ended up hitting him, but that has never happened in solely misunderstanding or logic fail based argument. Instead it has happened always only when he had gotten himself into a super defensively aggressive mood and started hitting me with words, purely absurd offensive words that have nothing to do with reality. I try not to do it anymore and just reinforce once more my supercalmness and super cooperatoveness, but as a expence I've become even more emotionally zombified and distant from him. Yes, I think, unlike INTPs in your list, I try to be as cooperative as possible, that is, in comparison to accomodating, active and even initiative in arguments. That might reflect my generally high appreciation towards activeness, assertiveness, initiativeness and organizedness, that probably didn't come to me naturally.
Also another trait that I've been working on in myself is extrovertism, which also gives some of that assertive vibe.
As a person interested in psychology, I of course dislike any unhealthy problem solving tactics, like withdrawal, denial, avoiding. Instead I aim at both parties' deeper understanding of themselves, their feelings and motives, the situation, possible solutions. Openness, thoroughness and communication is the key! (My way too long text just proves that.)
I also have occasional tendency towards compromises, but when not, I try to convince them in my solution's rightfulness.
People claim me to be competitive, just trying to win the argument but that's a huge misconception. I always listen, and always try to understand, second-guess myself, and try to understand again, being skeptical about my own understanding of them too. That's why when I nontheless eventually end up holding that it's them who have made a logical mistake, I think we can really count on that. Of course I still leave room for skepticism, a little. ;)
Arguing about non-logical issues? Sounds rare to me. What could those even be? Situations where they accuse me of something bad I have done. -> I admit, apologise and promise the solution.
They accuse me of something I don't think was bad, or something I didn't do. -> Protest, explain.
他们所做的坏的背影e to me. -> This is a tricky one. I'm rarely too quick in reacting to this. I might first think whether it's worth bringing up. If not, I might pretend I didn't notice them doing it. If yes, for example if they lied to me, and I want to teach them a lesson once and for all that lying is horrible, I will bring the subject very clearly up, even when it strikes them as a complete surprise that I know that they lied.
By the way, I'm still probably mostly talking about my fights with my ENTJ boyfriend. For example with an Introvert person I would probably be even more avoidant in bringing things up, in fear of hurting them too much.
Even though I've been learning these selfless arguing tactics and giving reassurance to others, especially weak fragile sensitive introverts, I myself still am such a person, which makes me egoistic and too much in need of love and reassurance from others to be able to give these same things to others in need of them.
Just to add, the less I fear losing the person (either due to it being my mother or due to it being somebody for whom I've already lost almost all affection anyway) the easier it is to start a confrontation without thinking about consequences.
Thanks if you made it until here, and feel free to tell me if I don't sound like an INTP. ;)
Yoda (not verified)says...
I also believe that conflict style isn't fixed for different MBTI types, but can be learned and developed further to desired directions. Also I think culture might have some slight affect on your competing style.
I'm an INTP-T, and honestly I've never really thought about this subject that much until now, so I hope my answer won't be too hastily written or that I've even figured myself out correctly and thus won't give you accidentally wrong data about an INTP individual.
I think earlier my style has been much more avoidant than now. I probably feared something, maybe losing those people, losing their respect for me or sth else, I'm not sure, but now that I've finally got lots of experience of arguing (ehem :D), I don't fear it anymore, it's almost like I've exposed the concequences of arguing, and realised they're not devastating, and far less devastating than consequences of avoiding. Actually the older I grow, the more I see arguing as something very fruitful. As I see the sooner you can solve the problem by a conversation (which often turns to argument) the clearer the air gets: the less time I spend hoarding some ever deepening disappointed feelings with those people. You see, when the last mentioned happens, it kills all good feelings in me for those people little by little away, so better argue right away than too late, after contamination. If the result of the argument is bad then so be it, it still won't be worse than of avoiding and procrastinating until I one day burst, or calmly have to announce irreversibly, that I've had enough.
Causes of my arguments in 99% of cases: Somebody's logic fails in a conversation and I try to calmly correct and inform them, just so the same won't happen again in the future, and they misunderstand me as arguing about the subject itself we were talking about and not about his cognitive or logical or argumentative moves in that sentence, and everything he says from that point on is based on this misconception.
What I do, I still try so hard, actually I have to use absolutely inhumane effort to control myself from snapping when they just keep on saying and saying something that has absolutely nothing yo do with the subject or something they wouldn't say if they understood what I said like s second ago. There have been cases with my boyfriend, who is an ENTJ, that I even ended up hitting him, but that has never happened in solely misunderstanding or logic fail based argument. Instead it has happened always only when he had gotten himself into a super defensively aggressive mood and started hitting me with words, purely absurd offensive words that have nothing to do with reality. I try not to do it anymore and just reinforce once more my supercalmness and super cooperatoveness, but as a expence I've become even more emotionally zombified and distant from him. Yes, I think, unlike INTPs in your list, I try to be as cooperative as possible, that is, in comparison to accomodating, active and even initiative in arguments. That might reflect my generally high appreciation towards activeness, assertiveness, initiativeness and organizedness, that probably didn't come to me naturally.
Also another trait that I've been working on in myself is extrovertism, which also gives some of that assertive vibe.
As a person interested in psychology, I of course dislike any unhealthy problem solving tactics, like withdrawal, denial, avoiding. Instead I aim at both parties' deeper understanding of themselves, their feelings and motives, the situation, possible solutions. Openness, thoroughness and communication is the key! (My way too long text just proves that.)
I also have occasional tendency towards compromises, but when not, I try to convince them in my solution's rightfulness.
People claim me to be competitive, just trying to win the argument but that's a huge misconception. I always listen, and always try to understand, second-guess myself, and try to understand again, being skeptical about my own understanding of them too. That's why when I nontheless eventually end up holding that it's them who have made a logical mistake, I think we can really count on that. Of course I still leave room for skepticism, a little. ;)
Arguing about non-logical issues? Sounds rare to me. What could those even be? Situations where they accuse me of something bad I have done. -> I admit, apologise and promise the solution.
They accuse me of something I don't think was bad, or something I didn't do. -> Protest, explain.
他们所做的坏的背影e to me. -> This is a tricky one. I'm rarely too quick in reacting to this. I might first think whether it's worth bringing up. If not, I might pretend I didn't notice them doing it. If yes, for example if they lied to me, and I want to teach them a lesson once and for all that lying is horrible, I will bring the subject very clearly up, even when it strikes them as a complete surprise that I know that they lied.
By the way, I'm still probably mostly talking about my fights with my ENTJ boyfriend. For example with an Introvert person I would probably be even more avoidant in bringing things up, in fear of hurting them too much.
Even though I've been learning these selfless arguing tactics and giving reassurance to others, especially weak fragile sensitive introverts, I myself still am such a person, which makes me egoistic and too much in need of love and reassurance from others to be able to give these same things to others in need of them.
Just to add, the less I fear losing the person (either due to it being my mother or due to it being somebody for whom I've already lost almost all affection anyway) the easier it is to start a confrontation without thinking about consequences.
Thanks if you made it until here, and feel free to tell me if I don't sound like an INTP. ;)