User Tag List

First 949575859606169 Last

Results 581 to 590 of 770

Thread: INTP Central

  1. #581
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    That was one of the most painfully obvious setups, but it had funny moments. Keep trying, though. You'll get there.
    That wasn't funny.

  2. #582
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    That wasn't funny.
    I wasn't trying to make you laugh.

    meh

    Of course NTs are funny and mac is funny, but some social dynamics get really old and dysfunctional. There is a point it stops being funny and becomes like regurgitated vomit.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

    I want to be just like my mother, even if she is bat-shit crazy.

  3. #583
    Member the soulless one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    esfp
    Enneagram
    6
    Socionics
    SEE
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    I wasn't trying to make you laugh.

    meh

    Of course NTs are funny and mac is funny, but some social dynamics get really old and dysfunctional. There is a point it stops being funny and becomes like regurgitated vomit. And no that isn't funny either.
    Especially when it's built around some pseudo-psychology which somehow causes people to think that if they fall under some arbitrary classification of personality that somehow these abstract distinctions actually mean something like that 'NTs' lack emotions, 'NFs' are emotional, stupid clods, and so on, which are all built on half-assed stereotypes which look like they came out of some grade school social disarray, and quite frankly, as an onlooker, it's really embarrassing for all of its infantile logic and subsequent infantile behavior.

    But I guess I prefer going by my own standards and not trying to be someone some test tells me I am...

    As for INTPc, just another web forum with a default atmosphere you are expected to abide by like most any web forum where by hanging around often enough and long enough, you begin to adopt that way of thinking without realizing how different your thought pattern might be if you just backed off and did things your own way.

  4. #584
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the soulless one View Post
    Especially when it's built around some pseudo-psychology which somehow causes people to think that if they fall under some arbitrary classification of personality that somehow these abstract distinctions actually mean something like that 'NTs' lack emotions, 'NFs' are emotional, stupid clods, and so on, which are all built on half-assed stereotypes which look like they came out of some grade school social disarray, and quite frankly, as an onlooker, it's really embarrassing for all of its infantile logic and subsequent infantile behavior.

    But I guess I prefer going by my own standards and not trying to be someone some test tells me I am...

    As for INTPc, just another web forum with a default atmosphere you are expected to abide by like most any web forum where by hanging around often enough and long enough, you begin to adopt that way of thinking without realizing how different your thought pattern might be if you just backed off and did things your own way.
    Considering that NTs, by definition, attribute to themselves qualities like "I often have difficulty expressing my emotions" and NFs things like "People almost always know what I'm feeling", I think 'stereotype' is not an accurate descriptor.

  5. #585
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blairvoyant View Post
    Considering that NTs, by definition, attribute to themselves qualities like "I often have difficulty expressing my emotions" and NFs things like "People almost always know what I'm feeling", I think 'stereotype' is not an accurate descriptor.
    You do realize that if your claim is true, it follows that every true NT describes him or herself as a person who struggles to express emotions and every NF describes him or herself as an emotionally attuned person. When you say NTs by definition do X, it follows that if someone is an NT, they do X. If you follow the naive, Keirseyan account of an NT, your claim would be more likely to be be true as part of his definition of an NT includes a personality feature of an individual who is emotionally reserved. However, one has compelling reasons to impugn the conceptual integrity of that notion. However, you also stated that the NT people describe themselves as having the quality X, not even Keirsey made such an outrageous assertion, he only maintained that NTs have the quality X. Furthermore, Not all prominent authors define types as hard and fast, immutable personality features, many, such as Carl Jung and Leonor Thomson see type as a collection of psychological inclination and in some cases behavioral tendencies rather than full blown personality characteristics. Despite Keirsey's immense popularity with the laymen, he garnered very little support among serious researchers. In other words, there is no reason to think that all true NTs even have the personality feature of being reserved, even less is there a reason to think that all true NTs 'attribute' that quality to themselves.

    What does this mean? A temperament oriented theory of type implies that being an NT at best may lead a person to have an inclination to be emotionally reserved, and the temperament of NF leads one to have an inclination to be emotionally attuned. Similarly, the fact that someone is an extrovert means that they at best may have an inclination to be loud, but it does not guarantee that every extrovert is loud. \There is a big difference between merely having a tendency to develop a personality feature and actually having the personality quality in question.

    As disconcerting as this may sound, but typology-central is much less committed to the pious cause of making grandiose and far-reaching inferences about characters of large groups of people on the basis of vague, unsupported, arbitrary and often incoherent personality descriptions than INTPc is.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  6. #586
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    You do realize that if your claim is true, it follows that every true NT describes him or herself as a person who struggles to express emotions and every NF describes him or herself as an emotionally attuned person. When you say NTs by definition do X, it follows that if someone is an NT, they do X. If you follow the naive, Keirseyan account of an NT, your claim would be more likely to be be true as part of his definition of an NT includes a personality feature of an individual who is emotionally reserved. However, one has compelling reasons to impugn the conceptual integrity of that notion. However, you also stated that the NT people describe themselves as having the quality X, not even Keirsey made such an outrageous assertion, he only maintained that NTs have the quality X. Furthermore, Not all prominent authors define types as hard and fast, immutable personality features, many, such as Carl Jung and Leonor Thomson see type as a collection of psychological inclination and in some cases behavioral tendencies rather than full blown personality characteristics. Despite Keirsey's immense popularity with the laymen, he garnered very little support among serious researchers. In other words, there is no reason to think that all true NTs even have the personality feature of being reserved, even less is there a reason to think that all true NTs 'attribute' that quality to themselves.

    What does this mean? A temperament oriented theory of type implies that being an NT at best may lead a person to have an inclination to be emotionally reserved, and the temperament of NF leads one to have an inclination to be emotionally attuned. Similarly, the fact that someone is an extrovert means that they at best may have an inclination to be loud, but it does not guarantee that every extrovert is loud. \There is a big difference between merely having a tendency to develop a personality feature and actually having the personality quality in question.

    As disconcerting as this may sound, but typology-central is much less committed to the pious cause of making grandiose and far-reaching inferences about characters of large groups of people on the basis of vague, unsupported, arbitrary and often incoherent personality descriptions than INTPc is.


    You're going waaaaaaaaaaay too far with this. People who make those selections on the MBTI will come out as either T or F respectively. That is what I mean by 'by definition'.

  7. #587
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blairvoyant View Post


    You're going waaaaaaaaaaay too far with this. People who make those selections on the MBTI will come out as either T or F respectively. That is what I mean by 'by definition'.
    Your assertion was that the claim that NTs are emotionally reserved is not stereotypical. By making this claim you've posited a definition of an NT, in other words you said that a certain characteristic is not a mere stereotype but a true description of something called 'NT'. Now you're merely changing your position by saying that you were discussing how people test on an MBTI assessment rather than the problem of definition of type. Your contention would have been plausible if you distinguished between a person's MBTI test result and the concept of type, yet you didn't, instead you've just declared adherence to the vague and incoherent Keirseyan personality theory that recognizes no difference between a person's test results and their type. As we may notice, he has a test in the beginning of his book that 'determines' which of his personality profiles describes you!
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  8. #588
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Your assertion was that the claim that NTs are emotionally reserved is not stereotypical. By making this claim you've posited a definition of an NT, in other words you said that a certain characteristic is not a mere stereotype but a true description of something called 'NT'. Now you're merely changing your position by saying that you were discussing how people test on an MBTI assessment rather than the problem of definition of type. Your contention would have been plausible if you distinguished between a person's MBTI test result and the concept of type, yet you didn't, instead you've just declared adherence to the vague and incoherent Keirseyan personality theory that recognizes no difference between a person's test results and their type. As we may notice, he has a test in the beginning of his book that 'determines' which of his personality profiles describes you!
    Actually, my contention is more plausible if one does not distinguish between one's MBTI test result and the concept of type. Which makes sense considering there is no scientific basis for any other interpretation.

    You seem to have forgotten that MBTI is a test.

  9. #589
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blairvoyant View Post
    You seem to have forgotten that MBTI is a test.
    A test is one thing that is associated with a definition of MBTI, but not the only thing. As you may notice, after you take your test, you're asked to review a number of lengthy profiles that supposedly describe your personality. Such profiles make ambitious theoretical claims that do require a great deal of abstract reasoning and reference to psychological research. Typically Keirsey and other MBTI enthusiasts who write online profiles are not merely discussing a test, they tend to assert that the test offers insight into the human mind and behavior. Because MBTI enthusiasts commonly talk about more than just a test when they use typological terms, the onus is on you to specify that a test is all that you have in mind when you use the term MBTI. As a general principle when you use an expression in an unconventional manner, you ought to specify what you mean otherwise it will be interpreted in a very common-place sense. Since virtually no MBTI author refer to MBTI as just a test, it stands to reason that the conventional interpretation of MBTI is a collection of views on personality that purports to explain human thought and behavior.

    Your original post should have been stated as follows: people who test as NT on a personality test describe themselves as emotionally reserved.

    The claim above differs significantly from the proposition that NTs by definition describe themselves as emotionally reserved because NTs are typically described as people who have certain personality qualities rather than people who merely received an 'NT' code on their Myers Briggs Type Inventory.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blairvoyant View Post
    Which makes sense considering there is no scientific basis for any other interpretation..
    There is no scientific basis for framing 'MBTI as a test' either because doing so entails a misrepresentation of MBTI.The most sensible move is rejecting MBTI altogether and recasting typology in Jungian terms or that of more rigorous modern researchers such as Thomson.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  10. #590
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Because MBTI enthusiasts commonly talk about more than just a test when they use typological terms, the onus is on you to specify that a test is all that you have in mind when you use the term MBTI.
    It's not my fault if you have an unrealistic understanding of what the MBTI instrument actually entails.

    As for the profiles, they also include statements such as "has trouble expressing emotions" or "is very expressive of emotions", so I don't know why you would bother addressing that if your goal is to prove me wrong?

    P.S. I'm going to start only reading the first sentence of each of your paragraphs if you're going to say the same thing over and over in each of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    There is no scientific basis for framing 'MBTI as a test' either because doing so entails a misrepresentation of MBTI.
    No, it doesn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    The most sensible move is rejecting MBTI altogether
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    and recasting typology in Jungian terms
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    or that of more rigorous modern researchers
    Yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Fiv...onality_traits

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    such as Thomson.
    No.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTP] The _Other_ INTP Central
    By Kenneth Almighty in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 01:02 PM
  2. INTP central transfer
    By rubygirl31p in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 04:06 PM
  3. Why MBTI Central when we have INTP Central?
    By Tonks in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-03-2007, 08:55 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