User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 101

Thread: NF Arrogance

  1. #31
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,977

    Default

    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari


  2. #32
    Member doppelganger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    More cherry-picking.

    Convenient of you to separate this block from the part you responded to:

    Since it has not been defined, I can only presume by “NT thinking” or “rationality” you mean things of an intellectual nature. This likely has more to do with intelligence, followed by an interest in such matters. Given that NFs are commonly interested in such matters, then it’s a matter of intelligence.
    I read the first line and it was a straightforward statement. And the next paragraph doesn't change a thing. Interests follow abilities, so if NTs are more interested in the hard sciences, then the question still remains, doesn't that indicate a correlation between type and abilities (or interests)?

    More cherry-picking. I’ve seen many, many others, as I'm sure you have also . The INFx types are almost always in the top 4 types, along with the two INTx type. All the iNtuitives typically average above Sensing types. That one you posted is the only one I’ve ever seen with an ST in the top 4. Most show no correlation with Thinking, only with iNtuition.
    Your assertion was that "there is no correlation between IQ and type". That link, and all of the ones you mention here, show there is a correlation.

    This only means something if you think IQ means something, and if the type test results are remotely accurate (people mistype a lot). Even if you do think it's valid, approaching this as NTs vs NFs seems faulty. The groupings have more meaning as IN vs EN.
    You're the one who mentioned IQ, but now you're arguing IQ doesn't mean anything. Make up your mind.

    Nope, that’s not what I said. Cognition does not equal feeling….."no line between cognition and emotions" refers to ALL cognition, not just the Feeling variety. There is no actual Feeling thought process(es) in reality; it's about the ego, not specific, real time thought processes we use. That was & is my point, which keeps going over your head.

    I spelled it out for you, but you are willfully misunderstanding it, in addition to cherry-picking and inventing strawmen.
    You're the one inventing strawmen. I didn't say "cognition equals feeling". I said if feeling (which is part of cognition) can't be separated from emotions, then how do you know they are different? And you have no answer to this.

    And earlier you said "feeling is evaluative reasoning", but now you say, "there is no actual Feeling thought process(es) in reality; it's about the ego, not specific, real time thought processes we use."

    So where's the clear explanation that "keeps going over my head"?

    And you keep referring to the "ego" but haven't defined it. Yet you berate me for "willfully misunderstanding you"! Makes sense.

    Jung's type is heavily debated, so I'm not sure your point there. I DO think he was INTP, as a side.
    You wrote:

    2. Feeling and Thinking are both rational in Jungian terms. Thinking is impersonal classification and Feeling is evaluative reasoning, assigning of worth, using the human experience as the gauge. Feeling uses emotion more because it is relevant data, but feeling is NOT emotion. In reality, emotion and cognition have no clear line, but in Jung’s theory, the dominant function is the most differentiated from non-cognitive stuff (ie. emotions, memory, fantasy). This makes dominant feeling types possessing of the most rational feeling. What does that mean for dominant thinking types? Since they have inferior feeling, it is not differentiated from emotion, and so they project their emotional experience of the feeling process onto others.

    In short, because an INTP’s use of feeling is irrational and emotional, they assume it is the same for others. This related to misogyny because of the projection aspect - to fear the “other” as something crazy and out of control. That is how we experience our anima or animus, aka, our inferior function.
    You started by talking about Jung and ended by talking about INTPs. I simply asked if you did this because Jung was an INTP? Or because you thought the ENFP was really an INTP? Or what exactly? Why bring INTP and misogyny into a discussion about Jung's theory?!

    I never said a type dooms you to a certain bias, but it does lead to certain dynamics between people that begin to form larger social dynamics. Again, the sarcasm is lost on you. You're the one wanting to narrowly assign traits and abilities to people based on type. You refuse to see this in terms of ego & the visible personality which arises from it, which is really what this typing system is about, not intelligence or skills.
    Again, you haven't said what the ego is, so how can I "refuse to see it"?!

    The ENFP is irrelevant to this now that we've established it was not a personal conversation between you & him...
    However, it's easy to explain his admission - he is not a dominant feeling type anyway. He experiences Feeling as less differentiated than an F-dom, and his dominant function is not a rational one. The observation that ENFPs & INFJs are the most guilty of this supposed undue arrogance may have more to do with them being dominant iNtuitives, not having tertiary Thinking.
    I'm glad to see you share the love with other types and don't lavish it all on INTPs.

    Anyhow, you are the one making the argument here and you are given the burden to defend it. You seem unable to do so.
    Ahem, I offered the idea for consideration--ie, what do you think of this? I didn't say I agreed with it.

    I already explained to you why it doesn’t matter where the claim originated. You have yet to address this, likely because it hits a sore spot with your ego.

    Do your own research. I already told you to read more. I am not your personal reference library. As I first noted, the conversation cannot continue if you do not grasp the basics of this theory.
    The idea of feeling as a rational evaluative function is yours, so the onus is on you to prove it. And until you do, I don't have to address your claims since they are nothing but unsubstantiated assertions.

    Like I said, Jung's ideas haven't been scientifically validated. All of your mumbo jumbo is nothing but speculation.

    So we’re done. Go rile up another type. This topic is tired.
    This is my thread. You're a guest. A very rude one.

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,500

    Default

    E types are more arrogant then I types. N types seem to be more arrogant then S types. T types seem to be more arrogant then F. And I really don't know about P vs J arrogant. I think they are equal in amount of arrogance
    Im out, its been fun
    Likes doppelganger liked this post

  4. #34
    Member doppelganger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    So we’re done. Go rile up another type. This topic is tired.
    Let me note in passing that, unlike you, I didn't resort to insults and insinuations (not that I can't because...). I was a little sarcastic one time or two, but in the circumstances, considering the unsolicited vitriol that you and others have directed my way, I am satisfied with my conduct and have nothing to regret.

    Your point, however opaquely it was put forward, is a simple one. Rational feeling is a function like rational thinking. And F-doms are just as capable of one as T-doms are of the other. Because of this, F-doms suffer from no T-envy, as that ENFP imagines, and there is no such NF arrogance as he describes. F-doms are happy with their evaluative reasoning and don't wish they had NT reasoning instead, or even in greater measure.

    Your point is completely speculative and has no scientific support. And it is contradicted by some NFs who believe there is such a thing as NF arrogance.

  5. #35
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    9,710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stanton Moore View Post
    Despite being a woman, despite being unable to 'think' based on the 'science' of typology(lol), this OA person seems to be able to articulate herself very well, and since any judgement of the degree of another's articulation (positive or negative) is also an implicit judgement on that person's or class's ability to to 'think', then I judge her an excellent thinker.
    But what do I know...
    Just....stop that shit. You have no idea how that one little comment not only invalidates everything you say (even when it's excellent), it makes people want to push you off a cliff.
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.
    Likes Rasofy, doppelganger liked this post

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doppelganger View Post
    Let me note in passing that, unlike you, I didn't resort to insults and insinuations (not that I can't because...). I was a little sarcastic one time or two, but in the circumstances, considering the unsolicited vitriol that you and others have directed my way, I am satisfied with my conduct and have nothing to regret.

    Your point, however opaquely it was put forward, is a simple one. Rational feeling is a function like rational thinking. And F-doms are just as capable of one as T-doms are of the other. Because of this, F-doms suffer from no T-envy, as that ENFP imagines, and there is no such NF arrogance as he describes. F-doms are happy with their evaluative reasoning and don't wish they had NT reasoning instead, or even in greater measure.

    Your point is completely speculative and has no scientific support. And it is contradicted by some NFs who believe there is such a thing as NF arrogance.
    From what I have seen NF does wish they were better at Ti combined with Se, just as I was better at Ne Fi. Enough to be envious, but not in an unhealthy way. Think its more Ne butting heads then has to do with T

    Edit: lmao...aren't N types suppose to get along better with N types?
    Im out, its been fun
    Likes doppelganger liked this post

  7. #37
    ✿ڿڰۣஇღ♥ wut ♥ღஇڿڰۣ✿ digesthisickness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doppelganger View Post
    Let me note in passing that, unlike you, I didn't resort to insults and insinuations (not that I can't because...). I was a little sarcastic one time or two, but in the circumstances, considering the unsolicited vitriol that you and others have directed my way, I am satisfied with my conduct and have nothing to regret.
    You really can't see how your OP may be quite insulting? No, this theory wasn't dreamed up by you, but they were perfectly fine until you showed up and told them all about how some 'expert' is sharing a video about how envious and arrogant they are and how they're not even good at being arrogant. It went further into saying they turn to self-loathing, etc. And, then you shared how some random S sees things and their theory about how the ENFP could be right.

    I can see how it would be insulting, especially to a NF who doesn't think/feel that way at all, showing that it's pure conjecture and straight out of said ENFP's ass.

    The fact that you've gotten different answers to this should be enough for you to see it's not factual and YOU should be letting it go because it's obvious that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. You've gotten your answer. The answer is some think so, some don't. The theory of his doesn't hold up well enough to give it any credence. Period.

    Demanding NFs who should only have to say it's not true for them to prove it is just ridiculous and, yes, insulting. To quote you with one word added:

    Your point is completely speculative and has no scientific support. And it is contradicted by some NFs who believe there is [no] such a thing as NF arrogance.
    ✻ღϠ₡ღ✻
    (¯`✻´¯)
    `*.¸.*'ღϠ₡ღஇڿڰۣ
    •.¸¸. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒჱܓ. இڿڰۣ.¸¸.இڿڰۣ´¯`·.─♥


    Cerebral Artery
    http://www.facebook.com/CerebralArtery

  8. #38
    Senior Member Ene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    ar·ro·gant adjective \ˈer-ə-gənt, ˈa-rə-\
    : having or showing the insulting attitude of people who believe that they are better, smarter, or more important than other people : having or showing arrogance
    Merriam-Webster Online


    Mike has credentials, yes. He specializes in typology and has many valuable things to say, but sometimes, he just rambles, because that's human nature. Sometimes, even professionals say things that are just bull. He is educated, but he is not the supreme authority on any topic. My point is, that there is no such thing as right and wrong arrogance. Arrogance is merely arrogance. At best, it insights tensions and causes divisions. At its worst, it feeds the fires that lead to hatred. As far as I'm concerned, nothing beneficial comes from it, regardless if it is NT or NF style, if there even is such a thing. He probably giggled when he said it because it "seemed like a good idea at the time."
    A student said to his master: "You teach me fighting, but you talk about peace. How do you reconcile the two?" The master replied: "It is better to be a warrior in a garden than to be a gardener in a war." - unknown/Chinese

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...=61024&page=14
    Likes Rasofy, doppelganger liked this post

  9. #39
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stanton Moore View Post
    I think it's a dumb idea, and you're a misogynist.
    Salomé, is that you
    Likes SD45T-2 liked this post

  10. #40
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doppelganger View Post
    The ENFP is really just saying that NFs believe they are just as rational as NTs. That's what he means by NF arrogance. Does anyone think this is true? Do NFs think they are as rational as NTs? NTs certainly don't think they're as good with emotions as NFs.
    I think it depends on what you mean by rational, as well as the individual NFs and NTs in question. If "rational" is meaning adhering to logic, then certainly NTs typically will place more importance on logic and typically will have more skill and experience in thinking in logical terms. However, if "rational" is meaning reasonable, as in using wise and well-honed judgment, then both type groups can be skilled in that area. Also, as others have pointed out, type only indicates preference, not ability. The two often correlate, but it is not necessarily true that an NT will always have better logical reasoning than an NF, or that an NT will be better at dealing with feelings than an NF. Consider a mature ENTP's warm, jovial Fe versus an immature ENFP's unevenly-applied, explosive Fi, or a mature INFJ's insightful, analytical Ti versus an immature INTJ's combative and Ni-restricted Te.

    So, while in general I think it is safe to say that NTs have better logical reasoning on average than NFs, there is some degree of T tendency to assume that people who present emotionally are not good decision makers, which is not necessarily an accurate or well-founded judgment. As a consequence, I think Fs more often are underestimated when it comes to critical thinking and ability to make beneficial and applicable judgments. I also suspect that NFs are not particularly good at being arrogant because it messes with our ability to make accurate intra- and interpersonal assessments, and so if we are arrogant, it tends to visibly backfire on us, whereas it is less likely to impact judgment in an NT's typical realms of focus.

    I have watched NFGeeks only a time or two - I'm not much of a video person - but it's a decent point that arrogant NFs can present their arguments as if they are objective truth when there may be substantial holes in the logical reasoning. But I disagree with Mike and agree with @Ene in that I do not feel there is a "right way" or "wrong way" to go about being arrogant - I don't think much anything beneficial comes of it, no matter who it's coming from. It may take longer for arrogance to impact an NT's reasoning, but they can also be particularly blinded by not fully realizing the F consequences of it - like why it might not be a point of pride or even possible to be "better" at arrogance. Though evidently ENFPs can fall prey to that line of reasoning, too.

Similar Threads

  1. Famous Living NFs
    By Economica in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 144
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 02:33 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Meritorious NFs?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 10:44 PM
  3. [NF] Question for NFs.
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 02-09-2009, 01:24 AM
  4. [NF] NF idealism - patronizing, arrogant, hypocritical, naiive?
    By Kaveri in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 10:39 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