User Tag List

First 78910 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 98

  1. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by untypable View Post
    There are much more useful ways to invest your intellect than on the MBTI.
    You seem quite intelligent so you must understand what i say.
    Even neuroscience and economics is more accurate than the MBTI.
    Thanks. I do. In everything I become interested in. I devour everything.

    Yea, neuroscience is fun to learn. Economics, not so much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Who is the baited and who does the baiting, imo, becomes subjective after the fact. If/when the entps lose.
    Yea, that wasn't entirely correct on my part. It's probably more that they are aware when others are baiting them and, should they choose to be tugged, allow themselves to be baited in order to net the other.

  2. #82
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    "Types are composite guesses and not exact road maps to the real mental processes of people," then, um...congrats? I've already stated that exact point on numerous occasions, but if you and Nocap think you're somehow breaking new ground or blowing my mind by repeating it, then knock yourselves out.
    Slow down here pervert. In the first place, you'd better be careful where you put those quote marks.

    More relevantly, let it be known that I have only ever asserted that type is, rather than a guess, an exact science. At least you got the modifier right -- it's composite. But it ain't a guess.

    This only further proves to me that your fail to understand.

    It's not just the functions themselves you've misinterpreted, but the very basis of typology.

    Not that any of it matters, I'd just like to make sure you and everyone else understand that had nothing to do with me.
    we fukin won boys

  3. #83
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocap View Post
    Slow down here pervert. In the first place, you'd better be careful where you put those quote marks.

    More relevantly, let it be known that I have only ever asserted that type is, rather than a guess, an exact science. At least you got the modifier right -- it's composite. But it ain't a guess.

    This only further proves to me that your fail to understand.

    It's not just the functions themselves you've misinterpreted, but the very basis of typology.

    Not that any of it matters, I'd just like to make sure you and everyone else understand that had nothing to do with me.
    This only proves to me your fail to understand grammar.


    Quote Originally Posted by untypable View Post
    well, see, there is this girl in another forum (INFP i think) who keeps saying I show strong Fi in my posts. Well then of course everyone has Fi, if people have no fi, wouldn't sex feel like shit? You INFs assume you lknow everything and are making generalizations about things.
    Type theory is not absolute, it cannot explain all forms of human behavior. It only gave a vague explaination about things. You can't apply type theory to all aspects of reality.
    Yes, it's rather irritating when it goes on long enough. The best part is the way they structure their ideas and their natural responses to criticism so that they're able to rationalize the hilarious idea that all opposition to their perfect emotional read is rooted entirely in sensitivity to its total correctness, and therefore the INF's theory becomes its own proof. INFs seem to have a particular brand of arrogance associated with this, to the point that they not only believe in their theories with outrageous and unrealistic certainty, but assume that their theory must be so "obvious" to everyone else that they eventually degrade into repeating "lol I'm sure it's obvious to everyone I'm right", and/or just turning up the rapid-fire psychobabble knob to 11.

    Many types tend to be overconfident in the areas where they know they have natural talents. NTPs are good at logic, so we kind of feel a need to prove it. We get lost in our overconfidence in our known areas of strength and sometimes become unable to accept our own fallibility in these areas, just as INFs (especially, though I'm sure lots of people in other types do this too) become overconfident in their ability to read everyone else's emotions.

    Using these talents is fine; it's just that when you refuse to allow any possible evidence to convince you that you could be wrong about some assumption (or, as in this case, that you may not even have enough data to be making that assumption credibly in the first place), you're crossing the line right over into dogma.

    For other examples, check out Victor and Anja.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    What makes you think Victor is INFP?

  5. #85
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    What makes you think Victor is INFP?
    He could be INFJ. I think someone on my rep wall at some point was guessing INTJ for him, but I don't buy that.

    He shows precisely the same style of overconfidence that you do, for one.

    Isn't it funny how every time I choose not to respond to your lengthy posts, it's because I'm "copping out", and yet every time I do respond, it's because of [insert inane, impossibly certain psychobabble explanation here]?

    I mean, there's a lot to be said for this, "Design my responses so that my theories are totally unfalsifiable, since I've predefined all evidence as pointing to the same predefined conclusion that I really, really want to be true" strategy and all, but...no, actually there isn't. It's just retarded.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    He could be INFJ. I think someone on my rep wall at some point was guessing INTJ for him, but I don't buy that.

    He shows precisely the same style of overconfidence that you do, for one.

    Isn't it funny how every time I choose not to respond to your lengthy posts, it's because I'm "copping out", and yet every time I do respond, it's because of [insert inane, impossibly certain psychobabble explanation here]?
    .... you think he could be INFJ.... You...can see Ni Fe in his posts, where? We have no similar pattern in writing or with what we say or even how we say them, whatsoever. You can't see T?

    Overconfidence isn't related to type, it belongs to the character of the individual. And you don't show the same kind of overconfidence that we do? lol Careful now.

    It IS funny that you don't respond to my lengthy posts since my lengthy posts were created for your lengthy posts. I mean, I was only being polite. And has it been every time that I psychoscrabbled you? You're being selective here. I did it after a point.

    What I find most funny is that I asked you a simple question and you chose to bring me into the answer. lol You couldn't even answer a simple question as a stand alone. I asked you what made you think Victor is an INFP-- what made him, not made him because he's similar to me-- did you forget that along the way to the post box?

    Please stop.

  7. #87
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    I don't have to see Ni Fe in his posts to think he might be INFJ.

    I think you cling too strongly to precise functional orders. How exactly was I supposed to take the statement about ENTPs not having Te? What about people who don't have one of the predefined Xi/Xe or Xe/Xi combinations as their first two functions? What if he's Ni/Fi or Fe/Ne or Fi/Ni or some other combination? MBTI doesn't seem to account for these possibilities, and yet each time someone doesn't fit one, you seem to be implying that they can't be that type.

    I don't put much stock in MBTI's rigid functional orders for each type. They are seriously flawed. When I refer to Victor as INFP, I mean only four things about his preferences, stated below. I'm not claiming any specific functional orders, because I think that part of MBTI is pretty useless. It's silly to assume that eight functions with 40,320 ordered possibilities would only occur in sixteen distinct orders. I've noted that several people on the site list their types as something like "Ni/Ti" or various other orders that, according to MBTI's functional orders, are impossible. I don't buy it.

    Personally, my functions from strongest to weakest seem to go something like Ne, Ti, Te, Fi, Ni, Fe, Se, Si. Those are rough guesses because we're working with a very imprecise "science" here, but really, how do these four-function orders in MBTI (like Ne-Ti-Fe-Si for ENTP) even explain use of the other four functions? Reading up on explanations of functions, it seems very implausible to me that the other four go totally unused. What is the justification here? Are the other four functions all weaker than the listed four? Are they all in between the first two and the last two? What happens when someone's functions don't line up with prescribed orders at all?

    To clarify, this is all INFJ (for example) means to me:

    1) Those whose prefer introversion become less energized as they act: they prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. People who prefer introversion need time out to reflect in order to rebuild energy.
    2) Those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. They tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from the unconscious mind. The meaning is in how the data relates to the pattern or theory.
    3) Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with the situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the situation to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit, considering the needs of the people involved.
    4) Judging types prefer to "have matters settled." They're prone to being more decisive and more likely to have plans, etc. etc.

    I'm sure you know all of this, but this is why I'm weary of your constant functional analysis and accompanying overconfidence in its use or accuracy. You're trying to use typology as more than a system of generalized guesses, and it doesn't work. You think you've proven all kinds of crazy theories simply by stating that your guesses must be correct because x type never exhibits y function, and you've convinced yourself of some serious total nonsense because of it. Who's the one stereotyping here? If real functional priorities of real people followed the theory this closely, we wouldn't have so many different kinds of people within each type. (You've used this functional order dogma to justify almost all of your type-theory points thus far.)

    Victor also sounds INFx to me in his mannerisms and writing style. It's a function of knowing people who identify or test as INFP/INFJ and creating a kind of composite understanding of the personal styles they often use to interact with the world. Here are my observations about him, off the top of my head:

    --Extremely abstract; all of his posts are based on free form association between the most unlikely connections, because he thinks that's the best way to explore ideas. N
    --Very personal values-focused (this one is called Fi, right?), seems especially offended by concepts of violence. His rant about guns in the obscenity thread struck me as very idealistically NF.
    --So dislikes hard logical rules in discussions that he openly states that logic is not a good way to respond to him. F
    --His writing style and diction show a kind of fascination with the beauty of language and its many possibilities for doing good of some sort; I get this vibe from INFPs in real life a lot.
    --He seems open to abrupt changes in ideas and will let conversations wander in whatever direction seems natural. He doesn't seem to approach his conversations with much of a particular direction in mind; in fact, he makes a point of stating that he rarely intends one. This seems pretty P, now that I think about it.
    --He has obvious talents for people-reading, but is a little overconfident in his ability to do it (characteristically INFx.)
    --I'm going with INFP because he doesn't seem to match the level of energy or personal style of most of the ENFPs I know. Maybe he is ENFP; I don't know. Maybe he's some other type that gives off an INFP image when he posts on this online forum. The key here is that I don't know for sure because I'm not a psychic, and if Victor were to correct any of my above observations about him, I would be forced to allow that, given the severe dearth of real, useful information that any of us actually has on him, he is the authority on his own mental processes, not me or you or anyone else. That's just a fact of life.

    I once snap-typed him as an INFP who really wants to be INFJ. Maybe this is right; maybe not. If he were to take the time to explain his inner mental and emotional motivations to me, I certainly would not sneer at this gesture by insisting that I know his personality functions better than he does. Regardless of background in typology theory, you must eventually accept that people know themselves better than you know them.

    Of course I see flashes of T in his writing sometimes; it's just dominated by N and F functions most often. INFPs can have Fe and Ni as high priority functions. Jung never actually said anything about the functional orders for particular types; he mainly just explained their existence and gave basic definitions for them. MBTI is written as a four-independent-variable average of behavioral and perceptual patterns, and it's already a bit shaky. It may be based on Jung as source material, but the two systems aren't intended to be mixed purely with perfect results. Don't make it even worse with such rigid functional order interpretations.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  8. #88
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    On another note:

    Zarc, did you notice the descriptions on besttypefit.com are all written in first person by people themselves to describe themselves?

    That has an important implication, because it prevents any of the negative aspects of any type from being explained. It usually takes an outside party from a different perspective to point these things out, and when I talk about ENTPs, I've learned enough about the complaints others have about my type to use objective, third person statements to explain our (perceived) negative tendencies.

    Qre, if you're still hanging out:

    Doesn't zarc's insistence upon attributing every minor thought and action to particular functions kind of fly in the face of what you were saying last week on the prejudice against sensors thread? After considering it for a while, I think you had a good point on that--any given thought or action or opinion could be a result of many different functions, and is probably the result of several working in concert, in most cases.

    Zarc, you've been rather vocal about your confidence in your Ni and things that you "just know." It may be threatening to your self-image to suggest that this high priority function could be mistaken (or it may not; I don't know you), but you're really stretching to force my behaviors into the one little particular box that you wish to believe is where they belong. Maybe, you're actually just letting Ne run wild and then using Ti to force internal logical consistency. Maybe this is all a function of Fe because using typology to help people understand themselves is really high on your ethical priorities list. Hell, maybe this is primarily Se+Fi; I could justify that one too if I were willing to go out on a serious limb and fabricate something about you being really upset by the whole exchange and getting territorial as a result.

    What I'm getting at here, zarc, is that you can attribute virtually any thought/action/opinion to any function if you try hard enough to find a way to make it fit. Without the wealth of data, insight and context that comes only from spending a lot of time communicating with a person in real life you're still just playing a conjectural parlor game (as Jung himself once called the use of typology without significant personal context.) You're the only one here that seems to believe you have powers of supernatural accuracy in this area.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    I haven’t been feeling well but it was nice to have a good laugh so early in the morning.

    I wasn’t saying he couldn’t be INFJ b/c there is no Ni Fe in his posts.. I was teasing you because you wouldn’t be able to notice or know what they are. And that our styles are different because he and I as individuals are different-

    Quote Originally Posted by simulateword
    Very personal values-focused (this one is called Fi, right?)
    Yea, that's Fi. That being said...thanks for fleshing your idea of Victor’s type more. But uh I find it yet funnier still lol that you just keep reinforcing yourself as being unable to answer a simple question as a stand alone, never mind that I told you to stop bringing people into it (including moi) and your constant gripes. Did you forget that along the way to the thought box? Couldn't you just have answered me about his type and not mention what I've said about unrelated things through it? So, if what I've said hasn't proven much to you regarding type, what I am proving is that your eyes aren't listening to the words being spoke, s'why you keep hearing something else.

    Hey, since you seem to like that typelogic site. ESFP profile: “Almost every ESFP loves to talk. Some can be identified by the twenty minute conversation required to ask or answer a simple factual question.

    (lol ^That’s what inspired my good laugh-- And whether or not you are ESFP or ENTP or XXXX doesn't matter, I just found it funny cuz I remembered it. So relax.)

    I mean only four things about his preferences, stated below. I'm not claiming any specific functional orders, because I think that part of MBTI is pretty useless. It's silly to assume that eight functions with 40,320 ordered possibilities would only occur in sixteen distinct orders.
    Do you know that those four little letters aren't the prefs themselves but are a summation of all the prefs of functions and how they're expressed within that particular type? ... You find it easier to rely on "four prefs"... When those "four letters" you keep mistaking as the prefs alone ARE related to the functions but IN preference to how they're expressed in one's type (yea, said it twice JIC JIC). So even though you've misunderstood the whole thing, wouldn't it be be sillier to assume that relying on four letters is better than eight ranging functions?

    Y'know... Assuming eight functions could have a multitude of possibilities occurring = Ne) in a structured and distinct format = Ti)

    Ne = generating possibilities and connecting the relations between them
    Ti = creating a logically structured framework

    I think you cling too strongly to precise functional orders.
    Those are rough guesses because we're working with a very imprecise "science" here, but really, how do these four-function orders in MBTI (like Ne-Ti-Fe-Si for ENTP) even explain use of the other four functions? Reading up on explanations of functions, it seems very implausible to me that the other four go totally unused. What is the justification here? Are the other four functions all weaker than the listed four? Are they all in between the first two and the last two? What happens when someone's functions don't line up with prescribed orders at all?
    I do not cling to precise functional orders. ...if you had fully comprehended any of my other posts, you’d have gotten that. You’d have read me say that we express ALL of the functions in various ways but our awareness of them is incumbent upon what we’re doing in the moment and our familiarity of the environment which activated them, in positive, neutral and negative ways.

    Hmm, funny you call it "science" as I hadn't thought to think of it that way (confusing us again?). We're not working with rough guesses here, everything is precisely made out to be used correctly. Our comprehension determines whether or not we get it and then how well we put it into practice. But speaking of science, if you don't know the properties of what you're trying to use, you might blow things up.

    On that note...
    How exactly was I supposed to take the statement about ENTPs not having Te?
    I already explained it in the post you “offically” didn’t care to answer. Didn’t officially care to read either? Stop being selective with your reading and what you choose to say about it. Comprehend first. Read this carefully:

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc
    He keeps taking everything literally and at face value. Take for instance him saying that I said ENTPs have no Te in their system.
    As for "They don't have Te in their system." -- I was referring to both the 4 top functions for ENTP(Ne Ti Fe Si) and Te itself-- Te creates systems. Ti creates frameworks.
    Top 2 are more readily used, the third partially so, the fourth worst of all when unaware that you're accessing it (..). The other 4 have the most variation in how they're accessed and used. Get it now? I’m not saying they don’t have Te their system or that everything is 'strict'. If you don’t....

  10. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulateword
    Zarc, did you notice the descriptions on besttypefit.com are all written in first person by people themselves to describe themselves?

    That has an important implication, because it prevents any of the negative aspects of any type from being explained.
    ... the profiles on bestfittype were written in 1st POV, yes, glad you noticed--- but not by the people themselves. They were made by Type Experts (I already said this to you way back when-). Excerpts taken from their book. Oi v. More of that face value stuff. So, no, it doesn’t prevent any negative aspects being explained. They just didn’t focus so much on negative aspects probably because.... the rest are in their books.

    To clarify, this is all INFJ (for example) means to me:

    1) Those whose prefer introversion become less energized as they act: they prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. People who prefer introversion need time out to reflect in order to rebuild energy.
    2) Those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. They tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from the unconscious mind. The meaning is in how the data relates to the pattern or theory.
    3) Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with the situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the situation to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit, considering the needs of the people involved.
    4) Judging types prefer to "have matters settled." They're prone to being more decisive and more likely to have plans, etc. etc.
    Thanks for copying and pasting all that, instead of explaining in your own words. Just shows you understand what the lyrics are but you don’t know their meaning. There's a better game show for that.

    And lastly. You ignored one of my other posts in where I said in response to your wanting my knowledge and experience with it verses my conjecture about reading you:
    Quote Originally Posted by zarc
    You're right. This is where I erred. I see that now. I'll just provide the info. And you can take it or leave it, mold it or beat it around. But at least it won't be based on my subjective opinion of you. You can figure that out for yourself.
    You want me to respect your feelings regarding your thoughts, I have and I keep them in mind. You keep bringing it up that I'm psychoscrabbling you when I've STOPPED several posts back but you seem incapable of letting it go- about me and others. I asked you once to leave people out and you said you would if I preferred that. But you've continuously forgotten, I just haven't mentioned it 'til now because it's starting to wear thin. One more time, "Please stop." Aside from all that, I don't care to explain type anymore to you because you've proven too a hard case to justify reasonable investment beyond what I've already put in. So, look at the link I gave you before if you seriously want to learn more from people who are right or learn on your own with your own sources. Good luck with whatever you choose.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] INTJ vs ENTP
    By cj1122 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-11-2016, 02:55 PM
  2. [MBTItm] STEM INTP VS INTJ VS ENTJ VS ENTP
    By Cryonium in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-14-2013, 09:44 AM
  3. [NT] INTP vs ENTP. War of objectivity!
    By Magic Poriferan in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 10-20-2010, 12:18 PM
  4. [ENTP] ENTP Men vs. ENTP Women
    By BlahBlahNounBlah in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 07-10-2009, 12:29 AM
  5. enfp vs entp
    By findthejake in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 12-23-2007, 12:53 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