Psst yeur J is showing =3
"I find them irresponsible in performing their duties, and irrational when their opinions clash with my own."
This's because the ENTP generally views things from many perspectives at once, then narrows them down systematically. It's not a matter of stubborn refusal, as it is that yeu are stubbornly refusing to accept that ANY perspective OTHER than yeur own is possible, as yeu've already done a good job of showing in the few posts yeu've made so far.
So because somebody looks from many perspectives at once, it is impossible to keep a clear view on the goal? What exactly are you getting at? What so called "perspective" am I failing to consider? Simply because I dismiss erroneous claims that have nothing to do with the topic does not make me ignorant of somebody else's opinion.
You are proving my point right now, by your invective commentary and irrational clinging to your volatile opinions.
Those who can see things from many points of view will invariably notice that yeur lack of capacity to think beyond yeur own already decided upon answer, will be trying to show yeu alternative ways of looking at things.
I've seen you make this bizarre claim several time now, and I am still unsure as to its intended purpose. What is my "already decided" answer? You make it seem as if views spontaneously appear in my mind without any prior research and observation. Does this make any sense whatsoever? Are you serious when you type this drivel?
Looking at something from many perspectives is completely useless when one doesn't know how to draw logical conclusions. No wonder ENTPs like you become so indecisive and make blunders that you later take back (which you yourself have claimed), you are incapable of staying objective and on point!
Yeu, however, are insistant that the first answer yeu came to is already correct, and anything else must be wrong by default. All evidence presented is ignored, or twisted to ensure that it further supports yeur position.
That being said, look at yeur arguments with ENTP's as such:
Yeu have internally decided upon something without considering external information, nor considering even discussing it with anyone; yeu do so logically with the NT, but are so bound to it by yeur excessive J that yeu are incapable of going beyond that decision yeu've reasoned out.
Again, my decisions must be magically implanted into my head.
The ENTP's, on the other hand, will be bouncing their ideas off of yeu, and one of the major things they do, is try to understand all the possible perspectives, and compare the alternative options, and specifically whot's wrong and flawed with the point yeu have.
So this is why ENTPs are frequently flighty and incoherent! You mindlessly strive for different options without any set goal in mind, failing to look at your own analysis properly.
Thank you for clarifying that.
To understand yeur concept, they will chip away at it endlessly and pry it apart; if yeu can hold it up with logic, and proof, they'll believe yeu. If yeu refuse new information or don't take to their nitpicking/prying all that well, they'll consider yeu a closed minded bigot who refuses to see the truth.
No, ENTPs don't just "believe" you when you present them logic and proof, they become passive aggressive and begin accusing you of refusing to listen to them. Typical Ad hominem attacks, which you yourself seem to be very familiar with.
Yeur best way to deal with us, is to be open to explaining yeurself, and especially explaining yeur line of reasoning.
Eh, doesn't this apply to everyone? Clear and logical reasoning is fundamental to proving your assertions.
If there's a supposed flaw provided, provide evidence to support why it's either not a flaw, or why it doesn't matter.
It's funny that you would mention providing evidence, since I've seen many ENTPs accept and present anecdotal evidence without second thought.
If yeu refuse to do that though, yeu'll generally just make yeurself look really bad, and a strong debating ENTP will parade yeu around showcasing yeu to the world as little more than a dancing monkey.
If one doesn't have a clear and rational point, they will invariably "look bad," regardless of who is "parading you around as little more than a dancing monkey."
Of course, with yeur pride and inability to see it from anyone else's perspective, yeu probably won't even realize yeu're being tossed around verbally like a frissbee. Because yeu will assume that because yeu are right, and have provided yeur 'obvious' explaination, that 'obviously' everyone must recognize how right yeu are. When chances are, it's anything but the case.
This is an outright personal attack, and I have no idea where to go from here. It is entirely besides the point, and if you feel like delving into a dull and tasteless battle of pointing out each others' speculated character flaws, I would rather just avoid it.
I ask you once more, what perspective am I unable to consider?
Be wary the debating style of ENTP's, because INTJ's are virtually defenseless against such unless they're conciously aware of the dispairity of debating style. And worst yet, yeu probably won't know when they've considered yeu beaten and are just toying with yeu after that point. So be very, very cautious and think yeur arguments out well, and don't underestimate an ENTP in verbal battle ^.~
INTJs are far from defenseless against the "debating style" of ENTPs, who make a rapid series of non-related deductions in an effort to "blitzkrieg" somebody out of the debate, which after the eventual realization that all of the ENTP's points are irrelevant, slowly turns in favor of the INTJ. ENTPs hold almost no water in longer debates.
I'll give you my hum very general view on intj reasoning: The range is usually small and it doesn't include enough elements, hence it's full of huge logical deadzones. Only works for well defined mathematical problems or in fields were quoting sources of authority can be considered as a remotly correct way to construct a logical argumentation.
Ad hominem, bare assertion, and a straw man!
Well, it is no surprise that ENTPs are the weakest of the four rational types. Look at you lot...
, but he's never phased.
