[NT] INTP vs ENTP. War of objectivity!

[Kenneth Almighty]

Something about this kind of reasoning bothers me. Just because INTPs might be more prone to being logical does not necessarily mean that they ARE more logical. Preference cannot and should not be confused with aptitude! I know of an INTP whose Fe is better developed than an ENFJ's, for example.

Michael Phelps might prefer swimming to running, and I prefer running to swimming, yet I'm willing to bet that Mr. Phelps would outrun me any day. Such is life.

I know, I know. That's all a type is: a set of preferences and sweeping generalizations

 

[visaisahero]

I know, I know. That's all a type is: a set of preferences and sweeping generalizations

That doesn't mean it doesn't have value, though!

I personally think everybody would be better off- individually, and subsequently, collectively- if everyone made a concerted effort to confront and wrestle with their inferior functions. Self-aware ENxPs, warm and friendly IxTPs, logical and reasonable ExFJs...

 

[Winston]

Extraverted functions are objective, introverted functions are subjective. Any EXXX is much more objective then any IXXX.

 

[Aleksei]

Extraverted functions are objective, introverted functions are subjective. Any EXXX is much more objective then any IXXX.

Correction: Extroverted judgment functions are objective. perceiving functions are neither, as they don't analyze information.

 

[skylights]

why is NTP more objective than STP?

it would seem to me that Se is more objective than Ne because it's not filtered by "meaning", which is a very personal thing. the basis for the patterns we see is entirely in our heads, even if we see the same patterns and connections as one another. Se is more environmentally and chronologically determined, which removes it from the individual, making it, by definition, more objective.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I'd say you are absolutely correct on that assessment Skylight.

 

[Winston]

Correction: Extroverted judgment functions are objective. perceiving functions are neither, as they don't analyze information.

And why would a function need to analyze information for it to be objective?

 

[Winston]

why is NTP more objective than STP?

it would seem to me that Se is more objective than Ne because it's not filtered by "meaning", which is a very personal thing. the basis for the patterns we see is entirely in our heads, even if we see the same patterns and connections as one another. Se is more environmentally and chronologically determined, which removes it from the individual, making it, by definition, more objective.

Ne and Se perceive the same amount of objective information in different ways, making them, by definition, equal (in their amount of objectivity). There is so subjectivity in extraverted functions just as there is so objectivity in introverted functions.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I know that the INTPs generally have a very strong drive for reaching objectivity, and accuracy and understanding is paramount, though because we have introverted thinking, it's often our own conclusions rather than based solely off what we see. However, I'm not sure if this makes it more subjective, because generally our Ti makes us aspire for accuracy and we always try to make sure our deductions are backed up observable evidence. We analyse information with our Ti Ne and use that to determine whether or not the information is trustable or not.

If there are holes in this, please point them out. I find the functions somewhat difficult to understand.

 

[entropie]

why is NTP more objective than STP?

it would seem to me that Se is more objective than Ne because it's not filtered by "meaning", which is a very personal thing. the basis for the patterns we see is entirely in our heads, even if we see the same patterns and connections as one another. Se is more environmentally and chronologically determined, which removes it from the individual, making it, by definition, more objective.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I don't get it.

 

[entropie]

Pray for that to stay

 

[Zarathustra]

Ne and Se perceive the same amount of objective information in different ways, making them, by definition, equal (in their amount of objectivity).

Proof positive that the notion that INTPs are the most "objective" is complete crap.

 

[skylights]

Ne and Se perceive the same amount of objective information in different ways, making them, by definition, equal (in their amount of objectivity). There is so subjectivity in extraverted functions just as there is so objectivity in introverted functions.

sure, but it's not a matter of just quantity, it's about quality too.

S sees what is; N sees what could be. in other words - what is not, and then what could fill in that blank.

given, both are cognitive functions, so both will be subjective to a certain degree - we don't have reality outside of our minds - but it seems like N takes more steps to get to what it sees. the more steps you take, the more "in your head" it is. the more it has a chance to be influenced by your other, less objective functions.

so perhaps S and N are equally objective, but i don't thinks S types and N types necessarily are.

 

[skylights]

 

[copperfish17]

Proof positive that the notion that INTPs are the most "objective" is complete crap.

That would be one bad apple, your highness.

 

[visaisahero]

It's possible for an ESFP or an ISFJ to be more objective than an ENTP or an INTP.

I may have a preference or predisposition for objectivity, and it may be related to my MBTI type, but it doesn't mean I'm better at it than anybody else.

 

[copperfish17]

It's possible for an ESFP or an ISFJ to be more objective than an ENTP or an INTP.

I may have a preference or predisposition for objectivity, and it may be related to my MBTI type, but it doesn't mean I'm better at it than anybody else.

How people define objectivity is subjective. Hence the irony.

 

[LIND]

1).Objectivity in its pure form cannot be attained by neither type; we are all equipped with a cognitive faculty that impedes us to see things how they are in themselves. Indeed any experience undergoes subjective analysis even if this analysis is based on (objective)the laws of logic. The reason being is that it matters what laws of logic one applies as being the criterion by which we can evaluate objectivity-the selection of such laws precludes pure objectivity.

1a).Why someone may ask"why the distinction between objectivity when it comes to the laws of logic and not objectivity when it comes to experience?"
Experiential events (phenomenology) is as HUme suggests synthetical in nature (available through experience/observation) or Kantian 'a posteriori' whereas the laws of logic are universally valid and a priori/independent to experience.
1b). The tendency is to imitate the latter, namely to analytically deduct objectivity but such thing cannot be accomplished wihotu once again appealing to a criterion which is subjective in nature.

 

[visaisahero]

So... I take it that both of you agree with me that it is not possible to determine "who is more objective" by looking at MBTI types?