User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 63

  1. #11
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Have you ever read the book?

    Please, tell me how Zarathustra could be an extrovert, and how all 16 types are equally likely...

    Then also tell me how Zarathustra was not a certain picture that Nietzsche had of himself...

    Then tell me that Nietzsche was not an INTJ 5w4...

    If anyone is engaging in self-soothing and aggrandizement in this thread, it's you...

    I'm sorry if you've been unable to figure out how to use typology wisely.

    But there's no need to vomit your problem on everybody else.

    I'm guessing you're an INFP...

    :rolleyes2:
    Typology is no more telling about a person (or in this case, a fictional character) than is astrology. Both systems describe surface features only. Nothing about who a person actually is, what they believe, how they act or should act, whether they are ethical, fair, critical, fearful, bold, believe in justice or eugenics, etc. Nothing at all about the details. Nothing. Only uncritically accepted homilies, and the occasional criticism, to make it appear to be scientific…
    Typology is fully open to interpretation because it is completely vague. The human ego needs validation, so chooses to find those it admires as similar to itself, as you did above. That you have decided to use this ‘logic’ to choose my type for me only reinforces my argument that you live in a world of stereotype, which are by definition, interpretations and not based in experience or reason.

  2. #12
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    Typology is no more telling about a person (or in this case, a fictional character) than is astrology. Both systems describe surface features only. Nothing about who a person actually is, what they believe, how they act or should act, whether they are ethical, fair, critical, fearful, bold, believe in justice or eugenics, etc. Nothing at all about the details. Nothing. Only uncritically accepted homilies, and the occasional criticism, to make it appear to be scientific…
    Typology is fully open to interpretation because it is completely vague. The human ego needs validation, so chooses to find those it admires as similar to itself, as you did above. That you have decided to use this ‘logic’ to choose my type for me only reinforces my argument that you live in a world of stereotype, which are by definition, interpretations and not based in experience or reason.
    INxP.

    Probably INFP male.

    And can't figure out his type.

    No offense, but your perspective is really not all that intelligent or thought-provoking.

    It's extremely simple, and is one consideration of many that goes into my overall view of the value, utility, and soundness of typology.

    But keep convincing yourself that it's the paramount perspective, so that every time you visit a typology forum at which you have over 1,400 posts, you can get your little fix of feeling superior to everybody, without really having to say or do anything intelligent at all.


  3. #13
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Anyway...

    Back to the discussion about the Ubermensch.

    Preferably among people who actually know their fucking Nietzsche.

  4. #14
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Innately does having a leading cognitive role of F make one more doubtful of any typological or categorical approach to humanity-given the F functions can gather a huge amount of complex data on another person almost instinctively? Thus anything as simple at a category would seem insufficient and too simplistic to describe what is "seen".

  5. #15
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    Innately does having a leading cognitive role of F make one more doubtful of any typological or categorical approach to humanity-given the F functions can gather a huge amount of complex data on another person almost instinctively? Thus anything as simple at a category would seem insufficient and too simplistic to describe what is "seen".
    I think that's part of it.

    I think you also get the Fi (and even Fe -- especially with INFJs) "snowflake effect" -- i.e., everyone's unique and uncategorizable.

    And then, on the negative side, I think Fs tend to have a weaker thinking side, and so their thoughts on the matter can be rather simplistic. Then, based off this simplistic understanding of the theory, they write it off. A more robust thinking side would instead beckon them to build a more advanced model or understanding of the theory.

    I'm presuming he's an F, cuz you hear that moral indignation in his voice?

    You mentioned something similar with an ENFJ lab director, I believe -- she'd get morally offended by, like, lab measurements, or something.

    Easy way to distinguish the INFPs who can't figure out their Ji function: that tone of moral indignation.

  6. #16
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    But keep convincing yourself that it's the paramount perspective, so that every time you visit a typology forum at which you have over 1,400 posts, you can get your little fix of feeling superior to everybody, without really having to say or do anything intelligent at all.

    Look in the mirror and say this over and over.

  7. #17
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    Look in the mirror and say this over and over.
    oooooooooooooooooo....

    buuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnn.

    Should we start up a game of "I'm rubber, you're glue" too?

    Why don't you try bringing something insightful to the table, as opposed to hackneyed skepticism about the veracity of typology.

    Also, you evaded my earlier questions about Nietzsche and 'Thus Spake Zarathustra'.

  8. #18
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    You haven't talked about Nietsche yet. Only typology.

    Oh, you're simulatedworld, back from the dead. Protecter of typology and head preist.

  9. #19
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    You haven't talked about Nietsche yet. Only typology.
    Actually:

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    If you consider Zarathustra (from the book) the prototype for the Superman, I don't see how you could go with INFJ (at least exclusively)...

    That character had to have been an INTJ (likely 5w4).

    Jesus, however, was likely an INFJ, and, in my opinion, Nietzsche would probably consider him closer to the Ubermensch than almost any other historical figure...
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    That is the essence, in my opinion, of what Nietzsche was talking about with the Last Man.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Have you ever read the book? [this question was to you, nebbykoo]

    Please, tell me how Zarathustra could be an extrovert, and how all 16 types are equally likely...

    Then also tell me how Zarathustra was not a certain picture that Nietzsche had of himself...

    Then tell me that Nietzsche was not an INTJ 5w4...
    Oh, and Nietzsche is spelled with a "z".

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    Oh, you're simulatedworld, back from the dead. Protecter of typology and head preist.
    No.

    I actually take a more nuanced and skeptical perspective on typology than does Sim.

    But both of us are able to see someone who doesn't really know what they're talking about, and has a boring, trite perspective on the matter.

  10. #20
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    From the three categories given at the beginning I say infj. I wouldn't say 'T' because I think Fe is more associated with charisma.

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. The Madmin Blog
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 05:40 AM
  3. Eileen (to the left)
    By Eileen in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 07:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO