User Tag List

First 212930313233 Last

Results 301 to 310 of 373

  1. #301
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    that's cool. i just didn't think the connection between [what's going on in the thread --> we should give up on communicating] really made sense.
    I was the only member that piped up about not locking the thread so I withdrew my original request to keep the thread open due to the ability to find some middle ground. It doesn't mean that other members don't have the right or desire to keep it open, which is also fine.

    But it is disappointing to see comments like "thread leader".

  2. #302
    Senior Member NegativeZero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INxP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    This is obvious and doesn't contradict my "laughable theory." Mostly because people aren't born with their fucking type written in a birthmark on their ass. People have to figure out what type they are, and it's in the process of figuring it out that mistakes happen (either because of (1) lack of self-understanding, (2) lack of understanding of the system, and/or (3) being misguided by poor sources of information about the system.)
    Strawman argument

    You're just rephrasing everything I said. Genetics and early childhood (two things largely, if not completely, out of our control) play a determining role in our personality development; they are the prerequisite, the foundation. Our personality development (growing up, developing interests, experiencing life) plays a critical role in our use of personality functions. Our use of personality functions aggregate to determine our MBTI. Therefore, our MBTI is predetermined to a degree.


    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Your analogy is correct but it's irrelevant to the point you're trying to make about my "theory." Yes, people have preferences. Yes, they're born with them (at least, according to this system). The problem is in detecting what is your preference. The process by which everyone here attempts to do that is indeed open to persuasion by bad sources of information and bias.
    Empty rhetoric

    I readily admitted this and it has nothing to do with what one's functions actually are. A callous jerk could fancy himself to be caring and therefore yield an MBTI with a large degree of Fe but this wouldn't change his typing in actuality. This is an example of bias distorting an MBTI. Determining your MBTI demands much self-awareness and honesty, and can incur some hurtful self-realizations. The key is knowing yourself and being honest with yourself; everything else can fall into place from there based on your reflexive evaluation of behavior, thought process, beliefs, etc. Now, whether or not everyone is capable of this is an entirely different debate. What I'm stressing here is that everyone has a type; there's no gray area when it comes to that and we don't just become different types due to increased usage of our minor functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    I don't think everyone shares your perspective here. Moreover, none of this refutes what I said. That you decided to be an INFP because you're "basically incompatible with life" is your own business, and does not bear on anybody else's process of finding their type.
    So? It's my opinion and wasn't central to the argument.

    Strawman argument

    I didn't decide to be an INFP, first of all. Second of all, I stated barely compatible; of course, some adjust to life better than others. After all, a one-legged man could theoretically beat a bunch of two-legged men in a race, but would that make the skilled one-legged runner any less ill-equipped from the start? No. And besides, it's totally obvious that my journey to reach my type has no bearing on anyone else's process of finding their type. Was this point supposed to service as an argument?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Again, I don't think you can generalize your perspective to all Ns, nor can you generalize these N failings to all of the N types. And yet again, I don't know how you think this is a damning argument against my theory. If I am a "bitter S," it is only insofar as there is rampant misunderstanding about what this dichotomy means.
    What exactly do you think I am expressing about all intuitives? I was not trying to convey that we are no good outside of our presumed niches, but just that our presumed niches do indeed happen to be our strong suits. I will concede that these failings exist outside of the N types, but that wouldn't change an N's inherent proneness to falling victim to that failure.

    There's no misunderstanding on my part; the misunderstanding lies with your presupposing that no one understands the S/N duality and therefore, sensors are dealt an unfair, descriptive hand and written to appear less advanced. Ironically, many assert that sensors have more advantages when it comes to the "real world," so at least the descriptive hands you dealt are not prescriptive.

    The primary problem with your argument is that it rests on a hinge that can be swung either direction; if you'd like to argue that sensors are made out to be stupid, autonomy-lacking robots, then I can argue that intuitives are made out to be worthless, over-analyzers and dreamers.
    MBTI: INxP
    Enneagram: 5w4
    Multiple Intelligence: Linguistic/verbal, intrapersonal.

  3. #303
    Certified Sausage Smoker Elfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    9,635

    Default

    well actually, I wouldn't say that SJs are the "most powerful" as much as the "most accomodated". The structure of schools, most jobs and even government is tailored to the preferences of the SJ. however, if you look at the most powerful people in history, almost all of them are NTs. also, NTs on average make much more monet than the other 3 archtypes. (I've heard that ENTJs make an average of 95,000 a year!)

  4. #304
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NegativeZero View Post
    Strawman argument

    You're just rephrasing everything I said. Genetics and early childhood (two things largely, if not completely, out of our control) play a determining role in our personality development; they are the prerequisite, the foundation. Our personality development (growing up, developing interests, experiencing life) plays a critical role in our use of personality functions. Our use of personality functions aggregate to determine our MBTI. Therefore, our MBTI is predetermined to a degree.

    Empty rhetoric

    I readily admitted this and it has nothing to do with what one's functions actually are. A callous jerk could fancy himself to be caring and therefore yield an MBTI with a large degree of Fe but this wouldn't change his typing in actuality. This is an example of bias distorting an MBTI. Determining your MBTI demands much self-awareness and honesty, and can incur some hurtful self-realizations. The key is knowing yourself and being honest with yourself; everything else can fall into place from there based on your reflexive evaluation of behavior, thought process, beliefs, etc. Now, whether or not everyone is capable of this is an entirely different debate. What I'm stressing here is that everyone has a type; there's no gray area when it comes to that and we don't just become different types due to increased usage of our minor functions.
    I never disagreed with any of this. I still don't know what it has to do with the idea that people on this forum and others mistype themselves because of bad descriptions and bad ideas about what it means to be an N or an S.

    Quote Originally Posted by NegativeZero View Post
    So? It's my opinion and wasn't central to the argument.

    Strawman argument

    I didn't decide to be an INFP, first of all. Second of all, I stated barely compatible; of course, some adjust to life better than others. After all, a one-legged man could theoretically beat a bunch of two-legged men in a race, but would that make the skilled one-legged runner any less ill-equipped from the start? No. And besides, it's totally obvious that my journey to reach my type has no bearing on anyone else's process of finding their type. Was this point supposed to service as an argument?
    You don't decide what you actually are, no. However, finding out your type is a process during which mistakes can be made. Or are you suggesting that nobody ever mistypes themselves? Furthermore, I don't think that any type's ability to be functional in this world is comparable to being the one-legged man in the race. That is nothing other than rationalizing an attitude of victimization using the structure of MBTI.

    Quote Originally Posted by NegativeZero View Post
    What exactly do you think I am expressing about all intuitives? I was not trying to convey that we are no good outside of our presumed niches, but just that our presumed niches do indeed happen to be our strong suits. I will concede that these failings exist outside of the N types, but that wouldn't change an N's inherent proneness to falling victim to that failure.
    I don't think any type is inherently more likely to fail in a given "niche" than others.

    Quote Originally Posted by NegativeZero View Post
    There's no misunderstanding on my part; the misunderstanding lies with your presupposing that no one understands the S/N duality and therefore, sensors are dealt an unfair, descriptive hand and written to appear less advanced. Ironically, many assert that sensors have more advantages when it comes to the "real world," so at least the descriptive hands you dealt are not prescriptive.

    The primary problem with your argument is that it rests on a hinge that can be swung either direction; if you'd like to argue that sensors are made out to be stupid, autonomy-lacking robots, then I can argue that intuitives are made out to be worthless, over-analyzers and dreamers.
    Do you deny that there is systematic incongruity in the way most S descriptions are written in comparison to N descriptions?
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  5. #305
    Senior Member NegativeZero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INxP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    159

    Default

    @Orangey

    Hey, thanks for the quick response.

    I will concede that my one-legged man analogy is a bit extreme, but I was trying to illustrate something clearly. Also, I was not trying to illustrate victimization but rather accommodation: like a previous poster said, SJs aren't necessarily more adept but are definitely more accommodated to function well in a lot of real-world environments. Similarly, a man with two legs is more accommodated to run faster, but can be beaten by a one-legged man in a race if the one-legged man is more adept at running. There are beneficial traits that sensors are more prone to versus intuitives and vice versa. I'm not trying to draw any absolutes, however.

    To answer your question, I do not believe so. I believe the connotation is definitely a bit different, but let's compare the traits of an ISTP to an INTP from similarminds.com.

    ISTP
    INTP

    The traits are pretty similar and I can't notice any serious advantages/disadvantages between the two. INTP seems weirder to me whereas ISTP seems more down to Earth, IMO. You asked about descriptions, however, so let's go with the most popular Google result for MBTI descriptions: personalitypage.com.

    INTP Description - The Thinker
    ISTP Description - The Mechanic

    First and foremost, what hand would you rather have in life? Would you prefer to be a thinker? Or a mechanic? Not trying to assert anything here; I am asking a simple question.

    Secondly, I think ISTPs sound more favorable from that description. At least they're capable of doing things — INTPs are made out to be amoral machines that are only capable of theorizing and pondering while ISTPs are putatively exciting with their attraction to airplanes, motorcycles, action, etc. In fact, from the descriptions alone, it makes you wonder if INTPs are even human.

    Thirdly, although INTPs are associated with more intellectual careers (e.g. philosopher, scientist, mathematician, astronomer, physicist, historian, researcher), how many people grow up to become one of those? Also, is there a company that hires philosophers? Scientists? Mathematicians? Tell me, where can I sign up to be a philosopher and get paid for my thoughts?

    Conversely, a mechanic can be a mechanic just about anywhere. ISTPs are made out to have a more realistic chance of "making it" in the real world, while INTPs are fantasy prone thinkers who cannot adequately deal with reality so instead retreat to science, theories, philosophy, etc.

    Now, I should make a disclaimer here: I don't necessarily believe all of what I just posited above. The point I'm trying to make is that I can whine about sensors as an intuitive and argue that the descriptions are "unfair."

    Hopefully we understand each other a bit better now. Cheers!
    MBTI: INxP
    Enneagram: 5w4
    Multiple Intelligence: Linguistic/verbal, intrapersonal.

  6. #306
    Carerra Lu IZthe411's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    N vs S- Apples vs Oranges

  7. #307
    Another awesome member. Curator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    eNFP
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IZthe411 View Post
    N vs S- Apples vs Oranges
    I hope that ironic statement was on purpose, if it was, I kinda love you a little bit...lol

    Orangey-NegativeZero(with an apple avatar) lol
    You are not powerless, you just need to accept your power for what it is, a part of the whole, no one man can save the world, but you can be a light to those who envelope themselves in darkness, The candle that sparks the inferno.

  8. #308
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Hmm... when I first read N and S descriptions, (before being on here) I figured S and N have different but equal strengths. S would excel in anything more scientific and evidence-based, (such as medicine and research).. where the N may excel in something that requires greater room for theory without necessary use of facts.. (philosophy, writing.) Obviously a person who are strong in both areas would excel in life more than anyone else. These were my own conclusions without reading anything else. When I came on here found that the opinion was completely different... Glad I figured out my type before seeing this mess!
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  9. #309
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Hmm... when I first read N and S descriptions, (before being on here) I figured S and N have different but equal strengths. S would excel in anything more scientific and evidence-based, (such as medicine and research).. where the N may excel in something that requires greater room for theory without necessary use of facts.. (philosophy, writing.) Obviously a person who are strong in both areas would excel in life more than anyone else. These were my own conclusions without reading anything else. When I came on here found that the opinion was completely different... Glad I figured out my type before seeing this mess!
    I'm really sorry you had to come back to the forums only to see this train wreck of a thread. It really could have gone better, and probably should have. But you know how it is... people tend to invest their ego into their type.

  10. #310
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    The way I view the relationship between types and certain career or occupational "niches" is thus:

    [I got this from a site that Eric B posted a while back in another thread, and I thought it was immensely helpful.]

    Functions are an orientation to the world; not discrete sets of concrete behaviors. An individual is, for instance, an Fi dominant person if they have an "emotional investment" in furthering the goal of making their lives congruent with themselves. That is, whatever they concretely do will be in the service of this goal, and other goals will be seen as comparatively less relevant or important. This orientation or perspective does not indicate what behaviors the individual will engage in, nor do individuals that engage in behaviors that can, on the surface, look like keyword descriptions of Fi necessarily do it because they are an Fi type. This leaves behaviors (the things we externalize to the world) completely incompatible with categorization in terms of functions. (Yes, that means we cannot look at a person's speech or writing and detect Fi or Ne or Ni...)

    If we cannot categorize behaviors in terms of functions because ANY functional orientation can lead to the same behavior, then how can we say that any type would be better or worse at engaging in certain types of behavior required of specific professions? Or specific life situations? The only thing we could say is that, given the goal of the dominant functional orientation of different types, there is a chance that they may enjoy certain professions. This does not mean that they would be better at these professions than other types, nor that they would not enjoy nor be skilled at other professions; it simply means that the nature of the profession absent other information about the individual might dovetail nicely with the perspective of their dominant function.

    Thus an ISTJ philosopher and an INTP philosopher may agree on the same theory, and even adduce the same arguments in favor of the theory for academic purposes, but have come to the same point from completely different functional perspectives. The ISTJ philosopher, for instance, may have originally favored the theory because it accorded with other things that he'd read before; ideas with which he was already familiar. The INTP philosopher, on the other hand, may have originally favored the theory first and foremost because it made sense. Similarly, if we throw an ESTP philosopher into this scenario, they might agree with the theory because it matches what they experience as observable reality (while, as you can see, the ISTJ and INTP did not focus on this aspect of it.)

    Coming back around to the issue of it being difficult for Ns in an S world; the only way this claim could be made was if we assumed that functional preference leads to certain specific behaviors (e.g., not bathing one's self regularly or taking care of responsibilities, etc.,.) And the only way we could say it was an "S world" in the first place is if we tied behaviors to functions, which is not a correct use of the theory.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------>

    Also, what's this focus on finding "middle ground?" I didn't know that finding the correct answer was a matter of negotiation.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

Similar Threads

  1. [Enne] Why I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-07-2014, 10:10 AM
  2. [Enne] Even Though I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist...
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-01-2014, 09:42 AM
  3. [INTP] INTP men, how do you behave when you are no longer attracted to a girl?
    By Almari in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-14-2012, 10:29 PM
  4. I forgot what I was going to talk about...
    By Cloudblue in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-09-2010, 03:02 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