[NT] Puzzles

[Sentura]

I agree that logical people would initially have better results working with rationality.
However, they can still develop their subjective side in order to get good result in working with people, also. It's a learning process. (Think of it as talent vs. patience and hard work. Just because something is your forte, doesn't mean other people can't learn it.)

a) i don't believe in talent. i believe in passion, and passion goes hand in hand with the interpretation of the instructions. in fact, i would say passion is the drive most people have, but not all follow. if they did follow it though, i wager you'd see a lot less stress and much more life quality from those same people.

b) yes, you could essentially have a person teaching themselves how to act in what isn't their area, and yes they could perhaps become mediocre at it. they will at all times be limited by their dominating functions, and it will work against them. so, for however much practice you have, you function will always drag you either towards your goal (again, if it is your passion) or against it (if you're trying to pull something that isn't really you).

All people are made up of both the rational and the subjective. (This is kind of obvious. Feelers can still do math problems, and thinkers still have feelings.)

The "skills of this caliber" may be weak to begin with, but one can develop them just as one can develop any part of their brain. Even if it's subconscious. (Explained further below.)

i think i explained this pretty well above, but just to recap: if it's not in one of your dominant fields, you will most likely suck at it, you won't like it, and you'll become miserable. therefore, i would consider it ignorant not to take the hint.

Your understanding of other people may be subconscious, but as you said earlier, everyone speaks a different language. How do you know that the "instructions" are subconscious for everyone? Where are you getting this from?

oh, i am getting this from a certain median i have extracted from several if not all great personas throughout recorded history. i haven't been the first to mention this connection either, but most others would refer to it as "the collective unconscious" or something similar.

me personally, i don't believe it's a collective unconscious, i think of it more as a set of instructions imprinted in genes that are later compiled into information by the mind. then again, i might just be silly, since this isn't technically possible. :rolli:

the notion of different languages for different types of people is used to decipher these instructions in whatever manner the specific mind for a specific person think is most beneficial. i mean, why else would it do it?

Everyone is a person.
All people are both subjective and objective. (explained above)
Therefore, rational people can relate to subjective people, and vise-versa.
Thus, everyone can communicate effectively with people. It doesn't matter what part of the brain they use to do it, since everyone functions differently anyways.

Being a feeler doesn't mean you can automatically relate to everyone.
Perhaps the midwestern redneck you're talking about would respond better to the OP. You don't know. Everyone relates to different people, despite the subjective/objective difference. Maybe it's the midwestern redneck who needs advice. You don't know this.

i never argued that point. look at my type, i'm at a split between ENFP and ENTP, because i am a bit touchy feely emo and a bit cold crunching jerk; if anything, i am the living proof of that both sides can have either functions. but that doesn't mean they're equally good at using them.

generally it seems like you want to argue both usage and strength as two variables, but you keep putting them together under one roof. are you sure you're not INFP?

 

[nocebo]

The point isn't to make the inferior functions as strong as the dominant ones, but to have them play their own part in aiding your communication with people. This requires you to use them a bit.

Any underdeveloped type will have problems communicating.
Any developed type will be able to communicate efficiently.
Giving good advice is about communication, and therefore developed types of any temperament can do it well.

That's my only point, and it's the one you're missing.

i think i explained this pretty well above, but just to recap: if it's not in one of your dominant fields, you will most likely suck at it, you won't like it, and you'll become miserable. therefore, i would consider it ignorant not to take the hint.

This is silly. Your dominant function is just your preference.
It doesn't mean you hate the inferior ones, or that you can't use them if necessary.
(I enjoy using Fe in situations that require it. I'm Ti dominant because my important decisions are led by it. It's my preference.)

generally it seems like you want to argue both usage and strength as two variables, but you keep putting them together under one roof. are you sure you're not INFP?

Usage leads to strength.
I think that's the foundation of the Myers Briggs theory, but I'll have to look it up again. (I'll post sources by tomorrow if I can find them.)

As for my type... it's not really relevant? But.
No, I'm not entirely sure. (Sometimes I score as NeTi, and the test is also not made for people with mental disorders.)
However, I think TiNe is most accurate for now.

 

[Sentura]

The point isn't to make the inferior functions as strong as the dominant ones, but to have them play their own part in aiding your communication with people. This requires you to use them a bit.

Any underdeveloped type will have problems communicating.
Any developed type will be able to communicate efficiently.
Giving good advice is about communication, and therefore developed types of any temperament can do it well.

That's my only point, and it's the one you're missing.

i'm not missing the point. i have taken it into consideration, and, based on empiric results, have found that an inferior function manifests itself the best within the realm of a dominant function... as a counterposition in thinking.

personally i think you've giving MBTI types a bit too much credit. i can definitely see the Si working in you, so i'm going to cut this discussion short. i don't argue with INXPs out of principle; or well, at least for as long as you can't understand the difference between judging character or analysis and deducting proof.

 

[nocebo]

My argument is supported!
And the portions that I did not have sources for, I said so!

Common now, bb. Don't quit on me.
We can work this out together.

 

[Sentura]

My argument is supported!
And the portions that I did not have sources for, I said so!

Common now, bb.
We can work this out together.

i see. statements such as, "this is silly" are always well supported with arguments. i mean, imagine how much worse off the world would be if people didn't say, "this is silly". we might have had something such as, oh i don't know, public teleportation? world peace? virtual reality? but those ideas are silly! silly people who think they can just come up with new ideas without them being judged. :rolli:

no thanks, i prefer learning and teaching to defining and judging. maybe one day you can learn that too.

 

[nocebo]

I've never judged you or the situation or your argument, dear.
These are your personal beliefs, and I respect them.

"This is silly" was my opinion. It was not supporting my argument.
There is support throughout the rest of the post.

 

[Sentura]

I've never judged you, dear.
These are your personal beliefs, and I respect them.

"This is silly" was my opinion. It was not supporting my argument.
However, it doesn't mean that other information was lacking.
There is support throughout the rest of my post.

i see no reason for personal judgments in arguments, but this is apparently where we differ. and so, i conclude this business.

 

[nocebo]

It clearly says, "I never judged...." :/
But okay. Tootles, mate~!

 

[therationaledge]

i was hoping he would. then he'd learn that it isn't his place to give advice to people.

I get this wierd feeling like...oh I don't know, that you don't have any idea whether I should or shouldn't and are somehow assuming I can't, with no history of my past experiences or the outcomes of them.
Not too often did people actually follow my advice, but when they have, and followed it exact, its worked.

Just because I am not touchy feely about it doesn't mean I don't see what people should do for maximum happiness. I may sound cold and impersonal, but thats because human interaction is as predictable as anything else, and I see the different sociatal "rituals" and what they mean.

What I'm curious about now is why exactly you are argueing so vehemetly? Personal attachment to the arguement? Do you think that people that are touchy feely are better advisors? Do you consider yourself to be one of the aforementioned touchy feely advisors?

the question is not what you are fighting to prove, but why are you fighting to prove what you are trying to prove? I find that unless someone is just a misanthrope, they don't generally feel the need for some complete stranger to fail utterly (not to mention saying they wished I scarred people with my advice), and I don't get that from you.
Its personal. So either I have offended you from a post before, p'haps you thought me too cocky or whatnot, or I am just a proxy for someone/something else that offended/hurt you, for example a person you don't like that thinks like me. I have noticed you have posted that in this thread and others you don't like argueing with INTP's. So, biased you are. Also, you very well are probably an ENFP, and the only ENFP I know doesn't like argueing with me because he trusts his feelings, and is wrong oh-so-often and is being prideful.

My guess is it was the "usefull comment" post, and you don't like being called dumb. The ENFP I know also has a complex with people thinking he is dumb. Connection perhaps? And I saw your little debate with whats-his-name on your profile... you do not especially like people thinking your wrong do you? I can't blame you. Uppity humans how dare they.

Were you ever....hurt by an INTP?

 

[Sentura]

I get this wierd feeling like...oh I don't know, that you don't have any idea whether I should or shouldn't and are somehow assuming I can't, with no history of my past experiences or the outcomes of them.
Not too often did people actually follow my advice, but when they have, and followed it exact, its worked.

Just because I am not touchy feely about it doesn't mean I don't see what people should do for maximum happiness. I may sound cold and impersonal, but thats because human interaction is as predictable as anything else, and I see the different sociatal "rituals" and what they mean.

i'm sure 9 out of 10 psychologists would agree. :rolli:

What I'm curious about now is why exactly you are argueing so vehemetly? Personal attachment to the arguement? Do you think that people that are touchy feely are better advisors? Do you consider yourself to be one of the aforementioned touchy feely advisors?

the question is not what you are fighting to prove, but why are you fighting to prove what you are trying to prove? I find that unless someone is just a misanthrope, they don't generally feel the need for some complete stranger to fail utterly (not to mention saying they wished I scarred people with my advice), and I don't get that from you.
Its personal. So either I have offended you from a post before, p'haps you thought me too cocky or whatnot, or I am just a proxy for someone/something else that offended/hurt you, for example a person you don't like that thinks like me. I have noticed you have posted that in this thread and others you don't like argueing with INTP's. So, biased you are. Also, you very well are probably an ENFP, and the only ENFP I know doesn't like argueing with me because he trusts his feelings, and is wrong oh-so-often and is being prideful.

My guess is it was the "usefull comment" post, and you don't like being called dumb. The ENFP I know also has a complex with people thinking he is dumb. Connection perhaps? And I saw your little debate with whats-his-name on your profile... you do not especially like people thinking your wrong do you? I can't blame you. Uppity humans how dare they.

i have nothing personal against you. the arguing i did was mostly playful banter coupled with me arguing my own theory. however, i see that my intention was lost on you. so much for your "talent" with people, eh.

but yes, you're right that there is a sort of personal attachment to this discussion: i've been working on a theory about how people would respond to pursuing interests that influence them with passion. i'm willing to bet that no matter how well you do, you won't ever do as well as a NF in the field, particularly people with dominant intuitive functions. prove me wrong.

but... ah, read below.

Were you ever....hurt by an INTP?

no, i just consider them annoying. it's like you can't assert you own intuitive functions and override it with too much logic or sensing. i don't like arguing with you because of the same reason. you always think you're right, and there's no way to convince you otherwise except for a perfect logical statement.

that is unfortunately not how the world works, and your rigidity only acts like a logical bureaucracy that prevents your from understanding; rather than the integrity and delving information you think it gives you.

 

[therationaledge]

Eh, we are at a kind of deadlock with one regard. I stated a theory I could never prove as I don't know you. You said that it was wrong, but you very well wouldn't be the most unbiased of person to decide. People tend to have a rather...biased opinion of themselves.


This is the problem I come across alot. You don't ever come right out and try to figure someone out at first, and ussually not to their face. Because in my experience they will always disagree unless your horoscoping them. (Only listing good things and glossing over the bad).

And so you say it is nothing personal, even though you said that you hope I scar people with my advice to learn a lesson that I should accept my place as a non-advice giving INTP? Your right, thats friendly as hell.

And notice how you state that it isn't personal against me, and my talent is non-existant, and then say that it is personal, just against INTP's.
But at the same time, all you know about it me is that I am INTP, and you don't like INTP's. And I insulted your first post, because it was useless.

But anyway. I will respond to any further posts, but I feel in my heart this thread is dead as far as my purpose for it. Rest in Peace, Puzzles.

 

[Sentura]

Eh, we are at a kind of deadlock with one regard. I stated a theory I could never prove as I don't know you. You said that it was wrong, but you very well wouldn't be the most unbiased of person to decide. People tend to have a rather...biased opinion of themselves.

yeah, i wonder why. maybe because they know themselves better in their behavior, but don't know themselves well with their mind? at least most don't.

but actually, you're wrong. it's not a deadlock. it's a defeat on your side since you cannot prove your theory. and that's just what i wanted you to admit.

And so you say it is nothing personal, even though you said that you hope I scar people with my advice to learn a lesson that I should accept my place as a non-advice giving INTP? Your right, thats friendly as hell.

call it neutral then. i meant well, but you don't care. this should also be enough of a statement to not label me an ENFP (even though you INXPs oh so love to label and define me :rolli.

And notice how you state that it isn't personal against me, and my talent is non-existant, and then say that it is personal, just against INTP's.
But at the same time, all you know about it me is that I am INTP, and you don't like INTP's. And I insulted your first post, because it was useless.

i don't care that you insulted my first post. i mean, it was insulting in the first place. why wouldn't you retaliate? why wouldn't anyone?

the whole premise of me writing in this thread was to prove an INTP (you) wrong. i consider it a personal achievement, since you are perhaps the people with the most rigid beliefs. an achievement somewhat along the lines of taking down a tank with your bare hands. i should get some fat medals for that.

But anyway. I will respond to any further posts, but I feel in my heart this thread is dead as far as my purpose for it. Rest in Peace, Puzzles.

less , more victory trumpets please.

and yeah, i'm taking this so far just so you can learn to be less rigid in your beliefs.

 

[therationaledge]

Ugh. This is pointless.

Your mom.

That has about as much point to anything else I could say, because at the end of the day its not going to change a damn thing, except one fancied up troll gets his lulz.

 

[nocebo]

Um. How are INTPs the most rigid of all types?
Yes, Si is a judging function, but it's tertiary. (being a dominant TiNe means we prefer perception, anyways...).

The hypocrisy is really thick here.

1)You attacked me for not supporting my argument, and yet you go on and on without supporting anything.
Making up statistics like "i'm sure 9 out of 10 psychologists would agree." and vaguely describing some "empiric results" doesn't stand against anything said here.

2) You claimed that I give MBTI too much credit, but then you used it to justify how every single INTP could not become a successful counselor. wtf

You don't have the right to call anyone judgemental. Seriously.
I agree with the OP that this conversation is pointless.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Ehm, if I am rigid to anyone, it's because they deserve no less than that.

I'm not rigid at all by nature. Everyone that believes INTP's are rigid, because INTP's are always rigid towards them, is probably stubborn beyond the point of stupidity and brings that rigidity to him/herself.

 

[Sentura]

it's funny that only INTPs defend this point, whereas it has been stated by numerous members in the XNTP argumentation thread.

but you guys don't seem to understand: i don't say this to piss you off. i say this because it's something i believe you need to change. i have seen this with virtually every INTP i have come across (INFPs have the same, but lack the logical arguments), and it's just annoying. having one perspective in a situation is just not enough, but you do nothing to try and learn newer perspectives.

i find it weird that everyone else can understand this whereas you can't. i think you label everyone "stubborn beyond the point of stupidity" on beforehand, until they can prove otherwise. but by the time you finally accept their statements, they've become sick of you and your "lack" of argumentation skills.

try to look at yourself, at what position you're taking, and at what you're saying in arguments. i'm not saying this to be mean, i'm saying this because i lack good discussion partners. and until you can teach yourself these things, it's just not worth bothering with any of you.

The hypocrisy is really thick here.

it's not hypocrisy, it's a double standard. i will promptly apologize for this once i see change coming from at least 1 INTP.

this is really my last resort for trying to speak with INTPs. otherwise might as well not bother with you, which would be a shame. the ball is in your court, INTPs.

 

[Fluffywolf]

this is really my last resort for trying to speak with INTPs. otherwise might as well not bother with you, which would be a shame. the ball is in your court, INTPs.

The ball is square. :/

Really though, you assume we are rigid, but like I said, the main reason why INTP's are rigid towards you, is because your 'theories' and arguements aren't sound. They're assumptions based on a clearly limited experience pool.

I am -always- eager to learn more things, change my point of view when proven wrong and such. But you're asking us to change our viewpoints to hypothetical assumptions based on jack shit. Ofcourse we're rigid then. For us to change our viewpoints, we need something solid. Not thin air.

Now, if that's what you mean with rigid. You're absolutely right. But don't dare say we're rigid even when proven wrong.Or when at fault. Because that is a load of bullshit.

 

[Sentura]

Now, if that's what you mean with rigid. You're absolutely right. But don't dare say we're rigid even when proven wrong.Or when at fault. Because that is a load of bullshit.

Eh, we are at a kind of deadlock with one regard. I stated a theory I could never prove as I don't know you.

:rolli:

Really though, you assume we are rigid, but like I said, the main reason why INTP's are rigid towards you, is because your 'theories' and arguements aren't sound. They're assumptions based on a clearly limited experience pool.

I am -always- eager to learn more things, change my point of view when proven wrong and such. But you're asking us to change our viewpoints to hypothetical assumptions based on jack shit. Ofcourse we're rigid then. For us to change our viewpoints, we need something solid. Not thin air.

that's one thing, even though i disagree on the notion that everything can be proven logically. the other is the assuming that everything is "jack shit", and openly stating your opinion in a discussion. you don't seem to understand that discussions are supposed to bring arguments and not opinions about "jack shit". i don't care what your opinions are, and they only serve to give me less merit to you for any illogical argument you may have (and you do have some).

since i have seen this from both INTP and INFP, i'm thinking it's rooted in Si. but then again, MBTI was never perfect, so it may just be a coincidence.

 

[Fluffywolf]

:rolli:



that's one thing, even though i disagree on the notion that everything can be proven logically. the other is the assuming that everything is "jack shit", and openly stating your opinion in a discussion. you don't seem to understand that discussions are supposed to bring arguments and not opinions about "jack shit". i don't care what your opinions are, and they only serve to give me less merit to you for any illogical argument you may have (and you do have some).

since i have seen this from both INTP and INFP, i'm thinking it's rooted in Si. but then again, MBTI was never perfect, so it may just be a coincidence.

If you don't care about our viewpoint then what is your problem with us not changing our opinion?

Look, I can respect your opinions, but you're stating here that we don't change our opinions. Which is untrue on many levels. That doesn't mean we don't respect other peoples opinions, but since you are -attacking- our opinions, I ofcourse defend them.

 

[Sentura]

If you don't care about our viewpoint then what is your problem with us not changing our opinion?

Look, I can respect your opinions, but you're stating here that we don't change our opinions. Which is untrue on many levels. That doesn't mean we don't respect other peoples opinions, but since you are -attacking- our opinions, I ofcourse defend them.

i do care about your viewpoint, i don't care about your subjective judgments that serve only as derogatory to the opposition's arguments. they serve no purpose and are thus irrelevant.