• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

INTPs - why do they love fancy-shmancy snooty debates?

Redbone

Orisha
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Among INTPs there is a love of intellectual discourse to be sure, and many sport a rather pedantic verbiage. For those whose posts favor brevity, and whose spoken words are few, there is no inconsistency (Why not use a single word that represents a sentence or more?). It is the few who choose to sprinkle their long-winded lectures with little gems from their handy-dandy-thesauri who are apt to put others to sleep.

Also, the INTP often misses the point of intellectual conversation (to adequately transfer information), and fails to express himself in a way that resonates with his audience; vomiting his words at the feet of his listeners, so to speak.

Where's the cuffs? Guilty.....
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
You're right, as usual, but the search of fallacies isn't especially associated with INTPs.
As a matter of fact, the vast majority of INTPs here don't even know what a real "strawman" fallacy is, they just use the term inappropriately and for every purpose. It's just a standard, pedantic (but ignorant) way to say they disagree with you. Epistemological figures aren't that easy to understand or master, unless, like you said, you had been professionally trained to recognize them.

And if you ask them the difference between a deduction, an abduction, an induction or a transduction, most of them won't know how to answer it, unless they google it and try to mimick knowledge they don't really possess.

Remember that most young INTPs are just posers.
A strawman fallacy basically means 'missing the point and steaming way past it.' If you said "Abortion is wrong" and I went off on you about how you shouldn't be allowed to control my body and that taking away my rights is far more wrong than abortion, that would be a straw man, because although it's generally implied that people want to stop others from doing things they consider wrong, you never said anything to indicate that this is true for you.

I find that people who accuse others of attacking straw men are generally correct in doing so; it's just that they are often guilty of the same problem, and the one so accused generally won't respond to the accusation by reframing their perceptions.
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
Jesus Christ. Look at the two of you go. And considering what my whole post was about.

This is practically satire material. :doh:

Actually I didn't use any Latin Words. :hi:

kendoiwan - I'll write a reply on your wall if you're interested.:D
 

Helios

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
273
MBTI Type
INTP
A strawman fallacy basically means 'missing the point and steaming way past it.' If you said "Abortion is wrong" and I went off on you about how you shouldn't be allowed to control my body and that taking away my rights is far more wrong than abortion, that would be a straw man, because although it's generally implied that people want to stop others from doing things they consider wrong, you never said anything to indicate that this is true for you.

This is misguided. To commit the "straw man" fallacy is to misrepresent an opponent's position and then proceed to disprove this distortion, whilst claiming that your interlocutor's actual argument has been successfully refuted.
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
This is misguided. To commit the "straw man" fallacy is to misrepresent an opponent's position and then proceed to disprove this distortion, whilst claiming that your interlocutor's actual argument has been successfully refuted.

Right. The misrepresentation is assuming they want to apply their moral ethics to me. The argument against the misrepresentation is "taking away my rights is far more wrong than abortion".

I don't have to explicitly state the misrepresentation, or explicitly claim victory, for it to be a straw man fallacy.
 

Helios

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
273
MBTI Type
INTP
Right. The misrepresentation is assuming they want to apply their moral ethics to me. The argument against the misrepresentation is "taking away my rights is far more wrong than abortion".

I don't have to explicitly state the misrepresentation, or explicitly claim victory, for it to be a straw man fallacy.

Your example was unclear, and I still feel that you remain confused about the fallacy as it is conventionally understood. Committing the straw man fallacy has little to do with either unwarranted assumptions per se or, "'missing the point and steaming way past it'". To commit it is to do something quite specific, viz. what I mentioned in my previous post, or else something closely akin to this.
 

Jonny

null
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
3,134
MBTI Type
FREE
Helios is right, Blairvoyant. I think you were mistaken in your understanding. Nothing wrong with being wrong... unless you're an INTP.
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
fuck you :cry:

p.s. all formal fallacies are based on a common cognitive bias/error. it's unlikely for anyone to commit a strawman fallacy without following the formula I described, even though it might be theoretically possible.
 

Helios

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
273
MBTI Type
INTP
fuck you :cry:

p.s. all formal fallacies are based on a common cognitive bias/error. it's unlikely for anyone to commit a strawman fallacy without following the formula I described, even though it might be theoretically possible.

The straw man fallacy is not a formal fallacy, but an informal one.

If you'd like a bigger shovel, I could fetch you one.
;)
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You're right, as usual, but the search of fallacies isn't especially associated with INTPs.
As a matter of fact, the vast majority of INTPs here don't even know what a real "strawman" fallacy is, they just use the term inappropriately and for every purpose. It's just a standard, pedantic (but ignorant) way to say they disagree with you. Epistemological figures aren't that easy to understand or master, unless, like you said, you had been professionally trained to recognize them.

And if you ask them the difference between a deduction, an abduction, an induction or a transduction, most of them won't know how to answer it, unless they google it and try to mimick knowledge they don't really possess.

Remember that most young INTPs are just posers poseurs.

FYP. :p

It was a close-run thing, but I reckon the French ENTP just won the fancy-schmancy snootiness contest.
 

ragashree

Reason vs Being
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,770
MBTI Type
Mine
Enneagram
1w9
FYP. :p

It was a close-run thing, but I reckon the French ENTP just won the fancy-schmancy snootiness contest.

:yes:

I'm wondering now though whether the whole purpose of this thread was to provoke the intps to argue about definitions of logical fallacies.

*Is not biting* ;)
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
^^^It's unfair really. You use those Latin terms way more than me ragashree, you just have high enough Fe to know that this is not the place to it.:D
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
:yes:

I'm wondering now though whether the whole purpose of this thread was to provoke the intps to argue about definitions of logical fallacies.

*Is not biting* ;)

One recognizes the skill of the fisherman at the quality of his baits... :newwink:

Common, litl' INTPs... I know you're salivating...
fish8.gif
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
I've always associated this with INTs - especially INTPs - and can't help to find it meaningless and boring, the very least. Nitpicking kills creativity and constructivity. Debating with the risk of a possible logical fallacy is more worth it than tearing every syllable apart until the goal is lost. Eventually, it all comes down to a handful of nerds mental-masturbating in which nobody's interested in.

You either get the "underlying foundation" or you don't get it. I honestly doubt that such mind games ever get you closer to what you're trying to find out. Well, not with an average mind - I'm not talking about your typical Ti-dom genius.

Perhaps Im speaking as a fellow Ni-dom, but I agree with this quite a bit. I honestly don't see much point in stressing the discussion over the actual content, as Jennifer stated. For me, no content = no discussion. With my tertiary Ti, I do enjoy discussions that involve analyzing concepts and such; but too much nitpicking can literally give me a headache. I often like to reference to Buber's distinction between dialectial and dialogical forms of thinking. Like Buber and many other Ni-doms, I tend to prefer the latter kind.
 
Last edited:

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
The straw man fallacy is not a formal fallacy, but an informal one.

If you'd like a bigger shovel, I could fetch you one.
;)

informal then

I noticed you're steamrolling past my point
 

BlueGray

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
474
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
As a fellow Ni-dom, I fully agree with this. I honestly don't see much point in stressing the discussion over the actual content, as Jennifer stated. For me, no content = no discussion. With my tertiary Ti, I do enjoy discussions that involve analyzing concepts and such; but too much nitpicking can literally give me a headache. I often like to reference to Buber's distinction between dialectial and dialogical forms of thinking. Like Buber and many other Ni-doms, I tend to prefer the latter kind.

I'd have to agree that I as an INTP much prefer the first. The biggest problem I have with the dialogical is that something must dictate when each is better. Once that is known they can be effectively combined.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
I'd have to agree that I as an INTP much prefer the first. The biggest problem I have with the dialogical is that something must dictate when each is better. Once that is known they can be effectively combined.

Are you going by Hegelian dialectics here(thesis, antithesis, snythesis)?
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Perhaps Im speaking as a fellow Ni-dom, but I agree with this quite a bit. I honestly don't see much point in stressing the discussion over the actual content, as Jennifer stated. For me, no content = no discussion. With my tertiary Ti, I do enjoy discussions that involve analyzing concepts and such; but too much nitpicking can literally give me a headache. I often like to reference to Buber's distinction between dialectial and dialogical forms of thinking. Like Buber and many other Ni-doms, I tend to prefer the latter kind.

I don't see why a dialectical approach infers no interest in content. Can you talk more about this? Also, I'd be interested in reading the Ni vs Ti stuff you edited out of your post.

I think dialectical thinking is reflexive for Ti-doms, it's just the process we automatically go through to make sense of anything. It's often misunderstood as nit-picking/argument for argument's sake by other (inferior) types. ;)
 
Top