User Tag List

First 10181920212230 Last

Results 191 to 200 of 332

  1. #191
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    Dang I wanted to say more in this thread before it got out of control (too late). So far I think athenian200 is the only one not arguing for his/her type, so based on the sample set of this thread INFJ is the most objective type.

    Anyway this is how I determine what the most objective type is based on this definition. (My bolding.)



    Ok we are looking for an analysis of reality without personal bias. The first thing I have to say is that the introverted functions (Ti,Ni,Fi,Si) all put the focus upon the individual while extraverted functions put the focus upon the outside world, i.e. reality. This makes the extraverted functions more objective than their introverted counterparts (Te more objective than Ti, Se more objective than Si, etc...).

    Now lets compare T vs. F and S vs. N. Even though Fe is more objective than Fi, it is clearly a reflection of a person's internal values. Therefore thinking is more objective than feeling. (Also Magic Poriferan's definition talks about analysis which should clarify further than thinking is more objective.) Now if we compare S to N, sensors see things as they simply are while intuitives interpret what they see. I think it should be clear that Se is more objective than Ne since Se plainly sees reality as it is.

    So according to Magic Poriferan's definition we are looking for a type that views reality without bias (Se) and can analyze it (Ti). Since the unbiased nature is the most important aspect, the most objective type is ESTP, but I'll add that ISTP is a close second.

    As an aside a good case can also be made for ESTJ being the most objective type. In this case though their objectivity comes from their unbiased decision making process (Te). I don't believe this is what Magic Poriferan was referring to in the definition though, so I stick by ESTP as the most objective type.
    Objectivity should be understood to be as being devoid of all bias, not just internal bias. Extroverts are more likely to be enmeshed in external bias, than introverts in internal simply because there will be more on the way of external biases to sink in.

    Ti does not have personal bias in a way that Fi does, the only personal bias it has is for logic. Ni and Si have personal biases towards unconscious perceptions.

    Logic is the path to see the world in as an impersonal light as possible, therefore the most T type is most objective. The personal bias in favor of logic should not be considered a negative factor because such a bias does not preclude us from seeing the world in a fashion independent to our tastes and prejudices. You can think of feelings and tendencies of perception as items enmeshed within our worldview (basically things that we see within our picture of what the world is like), yet logic is outside of it. It is a way to see the world, yet it does not interfere with the vision because it is the vision itself. Logic, as famously known leads us to detach, or remove ourselves from the picture. To be objective means to see the essence without relying on your own perspective. Thus, if you can remove yourself from the picture that renders you objective. T is the property that leads to detachment, therefore it is the most effective path to objectivity.

    Extroverted Thinking is less objective than Introverted Thinking because it is less of a property of T, therefore less removed from the picture. Thus, to be less removed from the scenario means to be less objective.

    The salient factor of objectivity is 'Thinking' the rest have very little relevance. To answer the question of which type is most objective we have to discover what type is in closest affinity with their thinking faculty. An example of this would be that both Extroverted Thinking and Introverted Thinking make decisions based on logic. Personal biases have almost nothing to do with the thought of these two types. We should not even consider the matter. Personal biases you can associate with mostly F, and to a smaller degree with our unconscious perceptions. Therefore the less F the type has, the less he is influenced by his personal biases. S is more biased because it does not have a conscious notion of one's inner thought like an N does. An N can be judicious about what perceptions to gravitate towards because he has a vision thereof. Though the S is almost always forced to accept whatever unconscious tendencies that be. Which is why for instance, we notice SFs are more likely to be superstitious than NFs. STs more than NTs---because the latter are more likely to be judicious about their perceptions. Moreover, Sensing is in closer affinity with our nature, it is a property of our impulse. One that we cannot subdue with our minds. Yet, N is more malleable in that regard because it is more of a property of the intellect, therefore more easily extricable from our natural biases. Thus we more naturally long for food and water (S)--along with further ramifications of such tendencies, this we can do little about. However, we much less naturally long for ideas, for instance materialism over ontological idealism, empiricism over rationalism and so on. We also see that Extroversion, along the lines of Sensing is in closer affinity with our physical nature because extroversion is closer in tune with the external world. Thus, we see that Extroverted philosophers more easily gravitated towards materialism rather than idealism, as they took the external world for granted. The Introverted mind is more malleable because it is closer to the property of the intellect rather than impulse. Here we notice that introverted philosophers had a much easier time concocting a system where the realm of mind held primacy over realm of material entities, or vice versa. Yet Extroverts could hardly imagine the material world being non-existent. This evinces the higher propensity of Extroversion towards inability to extricate from bias, and Sensing along the same path.

    So in summary, what we have is:

    1) Thinking is the primary path to objectivity because it allows for us to remove ourselves from the picture

    2) Attunement with mind/internal focus is the secondary path to objectivity because, as property of the intellect it is more easily controlled by our conscious and thus places us in the position to overcome our natural biases.

    Thus, we see that the INTP is the most objective type because of property 1--Thinking, and because of the most intense focus inwards. We know that the INTP is the most internally focused type because Thinking is the most 'tough-minded' approach towards decison-making, therefore most intense focus. Thus more internally focused than Introverted Feeling for this reason. And more intensely internally focused than Introverted Intuition, as Introverted Thinking--as a judging function is clearly directed inwards, whilst the Ni 'dabbles'. Conversely, we see with Te of INTJ for example, a stronger external focus than for the Ne of the INTP.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    1)INTP
    2)ENTJ (intense thinking preferrence overrides their external focus, moreover Introverted Intuition, as a property of mind, highly intellectualized--therefore in the position to subdue our biases compensates).
    3)ENTP (Stronger Thinking preferrence than of the INTJ, Ti>Te)
    4)INTJ
    5)ISTP
    6)ESTJ
    7)ESTP
    8)ISTJ
    9)INFJ (Ni--property of mind, plus Ti)
    10)ENFP(Tertiary T)
    11)ENFJ (Ahead of INFP Ti>Te, or in other words Ti is simply more T)
    12)INFP
    13)ISFJ
    14)ESFP
    15)ESFJ
    16)ISFP

    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    So, here we see that T is a salient factor and N(or property of mind, inner focus) only takes over when we have a big discrepancy, comparing a Sensor to an Intuitor. Yet, however, the T factor holds primacy in almost all other situations, as we see that the ENFJ is ahead of the INFP because of the stronger T despite the INFP having a firmer grasp of his/her biases due to introversion.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    *In regards to the lack of objectivity on behalf of Sensation, we should take note of how Sensors are more likely to cling to beliefs they were acclimated to, and at a later point view new notions through the scope of the perspectives they have situated themselves in. Whilst Intuitives are able to 'clear their minds', and tackle new ideas from a fresh perspective. This I argue is by virtue of Intuition being closer to the essence of mind therefore more easily controlled by our conscious intellect.
    "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/

  2. #192
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    Thank you BW, excellent post.

    PT and liquid, you both seem to advocate the view that objectivity is the same as noticing the self-evident facts (S), whereas refining the information (N) is an inherently subjective process. This is nuts.

    A human being would be severely restricted in making objective evaluations in this model. They would only be able to be objective about the blatantly obvious pieces of information, like that of Sweden being a country in Scandinavia - but then, anyone can be objective about it.

    Pt already proposed the idea that objectivity can be independent of accuracy.

    Pt's ST would only be objective by restricting themselves to obvious facts which are mechanically derived and understandable for a strong S. With that restriction, they are hampering themselves by not being able to be objective about issues in the realm of N.

    In the model already discussed, N is something that is created upon the observations of S. The N then includes the ability to make S-kind of observations, making it a more powerful perception function in this sense. N will perhaps make more random errors in S-like issues, and omit some information randomly, but this does not mean that there would be a bias, or subjective factor involved.

    Pt does not equate objectivity with accuracy. There is more variation of perception in the realm of N than there is in the realm of S, but as noted, it doesn't affect objectivity. Perceptions within N are something that N people can discuss within their group, and even communicate to others (S) to some extent. This makes the N perceptions an issue that can be objectively discussed. People can (and do) learn to skill to make expert perceptions on N-like matters which are most devoid of subjective biases.

    By refusing to even state N-like perceptions or to acknowledge their existence, S limit their understanding so much as to render their objectivity of little value. N-kind issues exist, and those who do not recognize them, can't be objective about them. What is the objectivity about the issue when there is no knowledge? Objectivity over a null set of knowledge?

    There is indeed this issue that BW raised about S being the victim of their perceptions. With no way to engage in meta-thinking, thinking about thought, they can not hope to practice self-correcting thought patterns with the virtue of their mind. Thus they must rely on the reality to get their feedback - and their perceptions with S. But then, you remember that the S was lacking in it's scope. They will only get their feedback about obvious items, those that can be seen in the external world, or those simple, agreeable items that are easily handled within the mind.

    This is not to argue that S is only a restricted version of N. S tend to make more observations, they have more speed, accuracy and they probably memorize more often and with better quality. It's just that none of these advantages promote objectivity in any special way.

  3. #193
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Umm... I wasn't arguing for my type either... I did say I didn't think ENTP was objective, and that I didn't really want to be - at least, not in the extreme sense that's being debated. I believe I said that I couldn't see any use for it outside of a chemistry lab, and that an ExTx with no S/N or P/J preference would be the most objective.

    So there. :P

    edit - actually, I think I'll go with ESTP. They're meant to be the ultimate realists, so I've read. I think their judgements would be the most objective, but not the most accurate or ...well, 'good'; I wouldn't want one in charge of my business while I take a vacation, since they're lacking both insight and any great skill at contingency planning, in theory.
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  4. #194
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    Perhaps we should come up with a set of scenarios, and debate which response to each would be the most objective to get a better idea of what we're talking about?
    How about asking people of different types how they'd typically respond to my soccer referee situation? (the bolded part) How would they decide what to do, and what do they think would be the best judgement/decision?
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  5. #195
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    BlueWing:

    When I said that ESTP, ENTJ, or ESTJ was likely the most objective type, I mean in terms of being best at describing/experiencing external reality as accurately as possible, as it is directly known to be, without personal bias. I was using a very specific definition. Don't read too much into the fact that we used the word objective, it seems to have a lot of connotations associated with it that I wasn't considering when I made that judgment.

    Feeling is a pattern in other people and in yourself that you infer, not part of reality itself. But you certainly couldn't say that Feeling doesn't impact how we react to things, or that it isn't part of how they are perceived. Therefore, in order to truly understand a situation involving people, it's an aspect that must be considered.

    Intuition is similar, except that the patterns that are inferred actually do (or can) reflect reality to some extent. Sometimes it is the only way we can understand an aspect of reality too complex (or even impossible) to observe directly. Intuition is in fact only based on the way our minds interpret reality and its patterns, but we can't perceive reality directly, outside our minds, so it is a necessary aspect of our own understanding of reality. Even a Sensing type can't take in information without inferring some kind of pattern onto it to make it understandable to themselves, even if it's only the bare minimum possible.

    If you asked me which type was most logical, I would say INTP, followed by ISTP. If you asked me which type was most aware/perceptive of meaning/patterns, I would say ENxP, followed by INxJ (possibly vice-versa if we're dealing with things that are purely abstractions/concepts such as the experience of the way ideas themselves are perceived). But I was asked objective, which simply means most aware of all that can be directly known about the literal object without further processing.

    Remember I don't think objective in this case means logical, intelligent, rational, or meaningful, which would all be different types in my opinion.

    I'm actually beginning to think, though, that in order to be as objective as possible, one would have to consider all aspects of our perception of reality as fully as possible to get the most information out of our perceptions. I'm not sure which type would find this easiest, though.

  6. #196
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    BlueWing:

    When I said that ESTP, ENTJ, or ESTJ was likely the most objective type, I mean in terms of being best at describing/experiencing external reality as accurately as possible, as it is directly known to be, without personal bias. I was using a very specific definition..
    Do you meant the concrete physical world, as Santu said facts? In that case the ENTJ does not belong there. Introverted Intuitors tend not to be well aware of their physical environment.

    Otherwise, INTPs have the top on understanding the world. As they are the supreme system builders, Einstein, Aristotle, Spinoza are the case in point. Understanding the world free from bias is a property of primarily Thinking. INTPs excell at this more than other types because their thinking is the most intense.
    "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/

  7. #197
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Well... That narrowed definition didn't narrow much.
    I will say this; by the definition of "objective" that I spefically put forward for this topic, it does become clear to me that S's are more objective.
    I still, however, question why the J is going to be the objective one.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  8. #198
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    I would agree that a P is probably more likely to be objective- the "decisive" qualities of Judgers are going to cut into objectivity IMO.

    -forgive me for diving in without taking any cheap shots as seem to be the custom in this thread. Magic Poriferan, you're a doodie head! There. Now I feel better.
    The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
    -anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii

  9. #199
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    I would agree that a P is probably more likely to be objective- the "decisive" qualities of Judgers are going to cut into objectivity IMO.

    -forgive me for diving in without taking any cheap shots as seem to be the custom in this thread. Magic Poriferan, you're a doodie head! There. Now I feel better.
    With Te, they can constantly and impersonally evaluate an external situation to see if it meets a particular standard of truth. Theoretically, it only considers objective data presented about the situation in a uniform fashion. Whether people who should have Te actually use it the way it should theoretically work is another question altogether, however. It often comes across as "pushing" things towards results, sometimes forcing things into particular patterns.

    I was thinking more about the theoretical definitions of the functions, not how they work in tested examples of types.

  10. #200
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I will say this; by the definition of "objective" that I spefically put forward for this topic, it does become clear to me that S's are more objective.
    Wondering why, I search a bit and found this on the second page..
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I was wondering which was most objective in practice.
    It's contrary to the impression I got from your original post, where you asked about objectivity without the qualifier "in practice".

    The understanding of the concept of "practice" in this forum (as everywhere) is already biased by the subjective views of S; they tend to hold a veto power on what is considered real. With their tendency to deny more complicated things, we can never promote the real, actual N perceptions to the status they rightfully deserve.

    The only practical thing with S world-view is that they practically deny the validity and merits of N; as this happens all over, it is a part of our practical reality

    You may then find what is "objective" in the "practical" issues in the commonly accepted sense, but it isn't very practical to do so.

    Who has determined that S practice objectivity in their selection of what is considered "real" or "practical"? They repeatedly demand simpler and more mechanical explanations than appropriate for the things being explained. It can't possibly be that one would get a realistic, objective view of the world with the intellectual habits like that.

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] INTP vs ENTP
    By Doctorjuice in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-01-2013, 12:24 PM
  2. INTP vs ENTP
    By Doctorjuice in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-31-2012, 06:43 PM
  3. INTP vs ENTP
    By Mr. Sherlock Holmes in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 11-04-2010, 02:22 PM
  4. INTP vs ENTP
    By Amargith in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 08-27-2009, 12:56 PM
  5. [NT] INTP vs. ENTP
    By Synarch in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: 01-05-2009, 08:47 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