The ESFP "stupid" myth.

[Robopop]

^ The only thing he seems to care about on this forum is INTJ intellectual superiority and he seems headstrong on arguing that. All of us to one degree or another might be guilty of judging someone just based on their outward behaviour, in fact humans do this unconsciously, some of our impressions might be true, but these unfounded generalizations he argues can lead to all kinds of stereotypes.

The thing Lex needs to understand is that MBTI is NOT scientific because it lacks falsifiability and this can cause confirmation bias with how one interprets the test scores.

If he's proud of being a serious hardworking intellectual introvert fine, but he should not so smugly put down others with personalities different from his own.

 

[miss fortune]

What you should be doing is not devoting so much energy to this thread. If you're as capable as you view yourself, then your efforts at self-promotion would be entirely elsewhere. You'd be a pro. It wouldn't even cross your mind to beat your chest here. Or think it's even remotely worthwhile to say you can make more rational arguments than an ESFP or ISFP. Leave it me to laugh at myself on that one in order to laugh at you more. Seriously.. you're fucking breaking my heart. How could an INTJ ever could get so sad that he has to say his logic is better than an ESFP?

so true... if you're that superior why aren't you out fighting the military industrial complex that is controlling our thoughts and behavior through the music of Lady Gaga... or whatever it is you beleive in... or, you know, running it from your own personal fuhrerbunker somewhere...

I've seen your posts around and the conclusion that it's much easier to just poke fun at you and let YOU prove that you're a close minded misanthrope with a stick up his ass who is so desperate to prove that his social dysfunction is worth something that he has to resort to trolling an internet forum with really unprofessional and shaky research on an imprecise topic just to prove that he's better than those people who can actually go out and find a REAL girlfriend!

your response to me earlier is so ludicrous that it doesn't even merit the waste of my time to respond- I explained WHY the research on personality theory doesn't work to you enough, in simple terms, that your weird adherance to the fact that you actually think that one silly little study that wouldn't even fly in a real academic journal is accurate and inability to grasp research biases proves you a very unworthy opponent

now... lick my boots bitch!

 

[MiasmaResonance]

you're so picky you'd throw out the rubies and sapphires in search of diamonds, not realizing that they're gemstones as well :rolli:

 

[One Day]

Lex is a Stormfront user. Stop taking him seriously.

 

[Oaky]

Ah, resurrected this lovely thread without me. How disappointing... I'll contribute.

 

[Robopop]

"Lex will wake up one day, he'll start feeling the need to talk to someone, he'll be hyper aware of everything around his room, he'll be overcome with pure joy and energy,he'll start to go out of his nazi fortress and enjoy his life for once, he'll actually start to think of someone other than himself and then he realizes he's carefree ESFP........Oh Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo."

 

[Lex Talionis]

so true... if you're that superior why aren't you out fighting the military industrial complex that is controlling our thoughts and behavior through the music of Lady Gaga... or whatever it is you beleive in... or, you know, running it from your own personal fuhrerbunker somewhere...

I've seen your posts around and the conclusion that it's much easier to just poke fun at you and let YOU prove that you're a close minded misanthrope with a stick up his ass who is so desperate to prove that his social dysfunction is worth something that he has to resort to trolling an internet forum with really unprofessional and shaky research on an imprecise topic just to prove that he's better than those people who can actually go out and find a REAL girlfriend!

your response to me earlier is so ludicrous that it doesn't even merit the waste of my time to respond- I explained WHY the research on personality theory doesn't work to you enough, in simple terms, that your weird adherance to the fact that you actually think that one silly little study that wouldn't even fly in a real academic journal is accurate and inability to grasp research biases proves you a very unworthy opponent

now... lick my boots bitch!

You haven't proven anything, much less shown me why it wouldn't work outside of your subjective perception. What's annoying is that you'll go around thinking that you've actually "defeated" me or made a valid point.

Whatever, it hardly matters. The fact of the matter is that the dimwitted types are now offended, and any further attempts at reasonable debate are now impossible. Robopop's drivel is not even worth responding to.

That being said, I withdraw from this ludicrous thread.

 

[miss fortune]

and you think that you made a valid point? that's cute!

and it sounds like you're somewhat offended there

Don't worry... we'll send you some billy goats along for a snack soon for your pain and efforts at putting up with us idiots

And, for a truly excellent question, have you ever tried to make a helpful, non defensive, non accusatory or non paranoid post in your history of posting?

remember before hitting that reply button... you said that you're not participating in this thread anymore!!!

 

[Jaguar]

remember before hitting that reply button... you said that you're not participating in this thread anymore!!!

Do yourself a favor and check the person's age.

 

[Oaky]

That being said, I withdraw from this ludicrous thread.

Why are you offended?

Whatever, it hardly matters. The fact of the matter is that the dimwitted types are now offended, and any further attempts at reasonable debate are now impossible. Robopop's drivel is not even worth responding to.

Ah wait...

 

[Robopop]

Lex is just cherry picking the information that supports his prejudice views and ignoring information that goes against it. He is acting like a big ass 8 year old that is incapable of objectivity.

He still thinks MBTI is a proven science and he can make ridiculous sweeping generalizations about people. Lex needs to seriously grow up, I would not expect this even from a 20 year old.

 

[Tamske]

Unless you are born an INTJ, or at the very least born to be predisposed to INTJ thinking, it is an impossibility, I'm afraid. You will forever be relegated to your second-rate position.

But there I beg to differ. While there is probably a correlation between INTJ and intelligence, individual cases may be different. That's always the case with statistics.

With correlation I mean: if you take all INTJ types and eg. (to keep to the original topic) all ESFP types, probably there will be a higher percentage of INTJs possessing the "intelligent" talent. But this is neither a law nor a moral thing. There are stupid INTJs. Some ESFPs are smarter than some INTJs.

And *some* INTJs need to get their Fe out from the deep-freezer. It's possible to discuss intelligence without calling anybody second-rate.
The narrow definition of intelligence is a two-edged sword, Lex. You may pride yourself on possessing that talent (I would dare to do that, too); but if you get your pride only from being intelligent in the narrow sense of the word, you'll have a narrow base for your pride. Place intelligence among the other talents, call the other talents by their right name, and respect them all.

 

[Aleksei]

But there I beg to differ. While there is probably a correlation between INTJ and intelligence, individual cases may be different. That's always the case with statistics.

With correlation I mean: if you take all INTJ types and eg. (to keep to the original topic) all ESFP types, probably there will be a higher percentage of INTJs possessing the "intelligent" talent. But this is neither a law nor a moral thing. There are stupid INTJs. Some ESFPs are smarter than some INTJs.

This is more or less exactly my argument since the very beginning. It is a statistical reality that Ns have higher IQs than SJs who in turn have higher IQs than SPs as a group, but individuals within that group may have higher IQs than that (Clinton: ESFP). being part of a given type doesn't diminish (or raise) your individual worth.

So Lex is being as retarded as his opponents (or more), which is why I want nothing to do with this thread.

 

[miss fortune]

:rolli: but the stats on an inexact theory are nothing to take as accurate! Everyone lies! that's why half the board ends up changing their type after spending a few months here!

really... I wish that ptgatsby was here to put some serious nerdiness behind the stats since my approach is too ExxP-ish for some people (aka too "stupid")

and jag... 20 is too old to be that much of an idiot... at least I didn't pull out the line "yeah? you think I'm stupid? why don't you say it to my face, fucker?!"

 

[Aleksei]

:rolli: but the stats on an inexact theory are nothing to take as accurate! Everyone lies! that's why half the board ends up changing their type after spending a few months here!

That argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny, unless people are pretending to have a lower IQ than they do, or pretending to be Sensors when they're really intuitives. The opposite trend would yield the conclusion that either Intuitives are more common than they actually are, or higher Sensing scores, and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Not that it matters, because studies on the matter don't rely on self-reporting. They were made on test groups based on psychologist-administered examinations, on people who most likely do not know enough about typology to not like the idea of Sensing (being concrete and detail-oriented is innocent enough). If I did a type-IQ study based on online IQ test and self-reported type, then you could accuse me of being unscientific.

 

[miss fortune]

explain this?

it makes perfect sense- I'd say most of the population is mistyped... typing is too highly subjective to make an accurate objective study of... unless you were making a study on the manner in which people perceive themselves (which does not equal the way that the person actually thinks or behaves)

 

[Ming]

You haven't proven anything, much less shown me why it wouldn't work outside of your subjective perception. What's annoying is that you'll go around thinking that you've actually "defeated" me or made a valid point.

Whatever, it hardly matters. The fact of the matter is that the dimwitted types are now offended, and any further attempts at reasonable debate are now impossible. Robopop's drivel is not even worth responding to.

That being said, I withdraw from this ludicrous thread.

But Lex, I've fallen in love with you! What should I do?

*Oh my withering heart cries for every moment of your beautiful and logical words; oh my pretty, you should fall in this brilliant bath of sunshine. Oh let me embrace thee!*

 

[Aleksei]

explain this?

It's simple: Your theory yields the opposite result of what you're trying to argue.

Before I get into more detail, let's lay some basic groundwork, just to be sure we're on the same page. You are assuming that Sensors are more likely to be mistyped as Intuitives than the other way around, correct?

 

[miss fortune]

for a definition of intelligence, from Mainstream Science on Intelligence

A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings — “catching on”, “making sense” of things, or “figuring out” what to do.

This definition doesn't solely mean that INTJs, or Ns either, are more intelligent or have the functions for higher intelligence... especially the parts about learning from experience and comprehending one's surroundings (especially with being as oblivious to ones surroundings as plenty of Ns on the board complain about being!)... and an ESFP learns from experience MUCH more frequently than the stereotypical INTJ

Most of what is discussed above is related to the strength and ability to use Ti and Te properly... and thinking abstractly can be done by either a Sensor or Intuitive- even though SOME intuitives like to think otherwise :rolli: We all have sensing and intuitive capabilities (your inferior is Se, I beleive... which means that it IS a part of your personality!)... just like being able to take in the info from your surroundings and analyze it is a Se trait, and learning from experience falls heavily into the category of the Si database storing past experiences for future use... anyone is capable of working on their lesser used functions to become a more complete person (THAT INCLUDES FE AS WELL!!!)... meaning- to be able to fully cover the qualities needed for intelligence, one must develop their Sensing AND Intuition both... which goes back to my theory that balance is awesome

 

[miss fortune]

It's simple: Your theory yields the opposite result of what you're trying to argue.

Before I get into more detail, let's lay some basic groundwork, just to be sure we're on the same page. You are assuming that Sensors are more likely to be mistyped as Intuitives than the other way around, correct?

not necissarily- there's actually a thread around here somewhere as people testing as Sensors because those traits are more widely valued in their communities (i.e. black women testing as ESFJ instead of as an N because those are the GOOD traits)

The younger people who tend to feel like outsiders or "special" are more likely to test as N because that explains it all to them... not the fact that they're younger and younger people rarely feel like they fit into society properly