User Tag List

First 91011121321 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 235

Thread: Stupid NTs

  1. #101
    Senior Member LostInNerSpace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,027

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    There's a frustrating drop off in expressive power for this model, perhaps right at the most interesting point. (Or at least it's the interesting point once one has gone some way into the model and started wanting more.)
    That's why I like the profiles. Not just one profile but the collection of profiles by different authors. Each adds a little more color to the overall picture. I also like things such as the balance test I look earlier. I know I'm not a stereotypical typical INTP. I know I have the capacity to be much more extroverted and I even know when that will happen. I resisted because I had a good sense for what you were trying to do.

  2. #102
    Senior Member TSDesigner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    No wonder FPs like saving the forests/trees .
    Which type likes to save the whales?

  3. #103
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Werl... a friend likes to test his girlfriends. One of them took the test three times, different result each time, none of them ISFJ, which is what I believe she fits.
    Not surprising. The repeatability of MBTI results is dismal.

    But anyway by "strongly functional" I meant something like "actually works, delivers the goods".
    Consciously delivering and unconscously delivering are two different animals.
    You are assuming what you are conscious of, is actually accurate.
    Don't think I'm picking on you, I include myself in that statement I just made!

    We can't be 100% certain what functions are actually "delivering the goods."
    There's an unconscious factor at play.
    I own to being a believer. I like function orders that pair an e with an i. I like the idea that using one kind of function will preclude easy simultaneous use of some others--like for example someone trying to say they use Ti and Fi at the same time doesn't seem right.
    So you are looking for what seems "right," rather than what might actually be true.
    I won't touch that with a 10-foot pole
    I'm content too with the idea that the lower in the function order, the more mentally costly it is to maintain conscious use.
    What could be "costly" for one person, may not even phase another at all.

    The thing that bugs me however is, I guess, the lack of really personal expressive depth. [...]

    So for example, I'd guess there'll be some IRL correlation between being NT and being intelligent, but it seems like MBTI really doesn't have the juice to genuinely say why (or why not). Or what, or how. The really interesting parts of the person, as far as MBTI goes, are left up to accidents of birth, environment, and who the hell knows what else.
    Years ago there was a Wendy's commercial with a little old lady in it.
    She got her face right up into the camera and yelled: "Where's the beef!?"

    That damn commercial just popped into my head, talking about MBTI.

    There's no beef. No substance. No depth.
    Not to this NT, anyway.

    I'm not sure what you are after from typology,
    but there are others out there.
    And the results exist for perfectly functioning human beings,
    to have any order of functions.

    Thinking restrictively by suggesting or "liking" the functions to alternate:
    E/I/E/I or I/E/I/E, is unfair in my opinion.
    I'm a truth-seeker.
    What I like or don't like should not be relevant.

    At the risk of sounding cliche: Imagine other possibilities.
    I have no problem imagining any function order for anyone.
    I don't view people's function order existing like a prefabricated home.

  4. #104
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Not surprising. The repeatability of MBTI results is dismal.
    That, I assert, is because people are retards.

    Consciously delivering and unconscously delivering are two different animals.
    You are assuming what you are conscious of, is actually accurate.
    N'actually, I was going with the idea of functions working by themselves, mostly subconsciously. And I know I take that as a default position just because I have no idea where Ni products come from--it's easy to think all functions do most of their thing by themselves.

    So you are looking for what seems "right," rather than what might actually be true.
    I won't touch that with a 10-foot pole
    Hey, c'mon! It's not like I have to prove stuff that comes out the a priori. That's only if I want others to believe it too.

    What could be "costly" for one person, may not even phase another at all.
    Well yeah. And for whatever that person has higher in their function order, they'll be even less phased. /Article of faith.


    Here's the beef:

    I believe I can feel when one function is more consciously present than another. Obviously they're all present, but being dominantly present to active consciousness is a different thing. I'm aware of having and using Ni, Te, Fi and Se. I'm not really very aware of an order of preference, except I do know Ni is far easier than conscious Se, and that Te comes to the forefront when I'm doing anything communicative and, to use a metaphor, sometimes it speaks for Ni and sometimes it speaks for itself. And I know to call all of these things by their MBTI names because their orientation feels obvious and while their actual functional nature isn't obvious without some MBTI education, modest primitive ideas of feeling, thinking, sensing and intuiting seem to key in nicely. (Go Team A Priori! What did that even mean?!)

    That's about as far as MBTI takes me. Discussing function dynamics would be interesting, actually probably really helpful, but still something feels absent. Something maybe about how preference comes to be.

    I wonder if that's where the missing depth lies, in the question of the origin of preference. If there was an answer to were it all came from, and maybe how it, I guess, continues to sustain its own generation, then--why, by jingo, that'd be a personality theory worth something! I guess.


    Is that the key: a theory of origin of preference?

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    entp
    Posts
    1,190

    Default

    Stupid NTs
    whatuwant

  6. #106
    Senior Member Hendo Barbarosa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    197

    Default

    I lol'd

  7. #107
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    That, I assert, is because people are retards.
    You should come out of your shell and speak your mind.


    Hey, c'mon! It's not like I have to prove stuff that comes out the a priori. That's only if I want others to believe it too.
    HA!

    I believe I can feel when one function is more consciously present than another. Obviously they're all present, but being dominantly present to active consciousness is a different thing. I'm aware of having and using Ni, Te, Fi and Se. I'm not really very aware of an order of preference, except I do know Ni is far easier than conscious Se, and that Te comes to the forefront when I'm doing anything communicative and, to use a metaphor, sometimes it speaks for Ni and sometimes it speaks for itself.
    Yep. I hear all that, and like your metaphor.

    Is that the key: a theory of origin of preference?
    I don't have to know the origin.
    But I don't much care for anyone who claims all XXXX have a function order of:

    1
    2
    3
    4
    and so on.

    I don't mind anyone suggesting X,Y, or Z may be true.
    But claiming something is true, and making money off that lame-assed claim, is a whole different ball game.
    At least to me, it is.

  8. #108
    Black Magic Buzzard Kra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    912

    Default

    I'm glad that I learned about Jungian studies on cognitive function before I learned about MBTI, and not the other way around.

    MBTI is like any other tool in that it has it's own uses for self-development. But, like some of you expressed, I also get the impression that it is often misused. Hell, I've misused it before, and it's akin to using a phillips-head screwdriver to drive a nail in some cases.
    Function Activity:
    Ni > Te > Ti = Fi > Ne > Si = Fe > Se

  9. #109
    Senior Member Hendo Barbarosa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    197

    Default

    I don't think it's possible for one to come out of one's shell on the internet.

  10. #110
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kra View Post
    I'm glad that I learned about Jungian studies on cognitive function before I learned about MBTI, and not the other way around.
    As did I.

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] Are there any NT/NFs you would consider "stupid?"
    By Scorquendo in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-11-2011, 06:27 PM
  2. [NT] How can an NT be stupid?
    By goodgrief in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 05-20-2010, 03:59 AM
  3. [NT] Do NTs ask stupid questions?
    By Haphazard in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 05-08-2008, 08:27 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