[ENTP] 50 Famous ENTPs

[Jaguar]

If type is a measure of values and preferences, how can it be that someone could prefer the abilities of Sensors but actually be an iNtuitive?

Think.

 

[simulatedworld]

Think.

Well I'm well aware that this can happen; it just contradicts her previous statement. This is a Ti thing; you prob wouldn't understand, but I guess I'll try out of sheer altruism.

She said that:

1) Type is a measure of preference/values, so someone who prefers Sensing skills would, by definition, be a Sensor.

But she also said that:

2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive.

Ya see the contradiction there?

 

[Jaguar]

This is a Ti thing; you prob wouldn't understand, but I guess I'll try out of sheer altruism.

You're right, I don't understand nonsense.

She said that:

1) Type is a measure of preference/values, so someone who prefers Sensing skills would, by definition, be a Sensor.

But she also said that:

2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive.

Ya see the contradiction there?

Just because you see a contradiction, doesn't mean it exists.
#1 is true.
#2 is true.

Pop Quiz: How can a homosexual man prefer a heterosexual woman but still be homosexual?
I assure you, there is no contradiction there either.

What one prefers, is not necessarily who they ARE.
Preferences can easily be taught, if not downright pounded into people's head.

An intuitive can choose S as their preference.
A sensor can choose N as their preference.

They can "prefer" whatever they damn well please.
But it doesn't mean it's who they are.

This is why putting so much effort into typing other people is absurd.
I agree with Katsuni 100%.
Only the person can type themselves.

 

[Frank]

Only the person can type themselves.

Agreed.

 

[Asterion]

You're right, I don't understand nonsense.



Just because you see a contradiction, doesn't mean it exists.
#1 is true.
#2 is true.

Pop Quiz: How can a homosexual man prefer a heterosexual woman but still be homosexual?
I assure you, there is no contradiction there either.

What one prefers, is not necessarily who they ARE.
Preferences can easily be taught, if not downright pounded into people's head.

An intuitive can choose S as their preference.
A sensor can choose N as their preference.

They can "prefer" whatever they damn well please.
But it doesn't mean it's who they are.

This is why putting so much effort into typing other people is absurd.
I agree with Katsuni 100%.
Only the person can type themselves.

MBTI is based on what you prefer though isn't it? I think the distinction, is that you may prefer sensing at one point, but you only prefer it because of peer pressure... so really, you don't exactly prefer sensing, you've always naturally prefered intuition.

 

[Argus]

You forgot me on this list.

 

[simulatedworld]

You're right, I don't understand nonsense.



Just because you see a contradiction, doesn't mean it exists.
#1 is true.
#2 is true.

Pop Quiz: How can a homosexual man prefer a heterosexual woman but still be homosexual?
I assure you, there is no contradiction there either.

What one prefers, is not necessarily who they ARE.
Preferences can easily be taught, if not downright pounded into people's head.

An intuitive can choose S as their preference.
A sensor can choose N as their preference.

They can "prefer" whatever they damn well please.
But it doesn't mean it's who they are.

This is why putting so much effort into typing other people is absurd.
I agree with Katsuni 100%.
Only the person can type themselves.

What a donk play. You've just pointed out that type is not determined by preference, which falls exactly in line with my point that "type is determined by preference" and "we can prefer a process not associated with our type" cannot simultaneously be true.

Listen n00b, this is an obvious definitional problem. If you're going to define type as whatever the person's true ability is, you can't then turn around and also say that type is determined by preference. Duh.

If you don't agree with the idea that type = preference, then fine, but surely even you don't have such tunnel vision that you can't see the obvious conflict here.

You've insisted repeatedly that "TYPE IS A QUESTION OF PREFERENCE NOT ABILITY!!!" in any number of threads, and now here you are directly contradicting that.

I happen to agree that type is more dependent upon your strongest natural abilities than upon which abilities you prefer to use, but the quoted post obviously contradicted itself by simultaneously claiming that:

1) Type is determined by preference, and
2) One can prefer an off-type function.

Only one of these can be true--evidently you've chosen #2 (which I agree with), but you've also missed the point, which is simply that both cannot simultaneously be true.

I think they have this class called "Critical Thinking" for this kind of shit, buddy.

 

[StrawMan]

What one prefers, is not necessarily who they ARE.
Preferences can easily be taught, if not downright pounded into people's head.

An intuitive can choose S as their preference.
A sensor can choose N as their preference.

They can "prefer" whatever they damn well please.
But it doesn't mean it's who they are.

I thought that in MBTI-typology who the person is, and his "preference" are kind of defined to mean the same thing? An intuitive person can choose to pay attention to sensory data more, but in (his) ideal world would still like to intuit most of the time.

E: Ok, it's been said multiple times already.

 

[Venom]

What a donk play. You've just pointed out that type is not determined by preference, which falls exactly in line with my point that "type is determined by preference" and "we can prefer a process not associated with our type" cannot simultaneously be true.

Listen n00b, this is an obvious definitional problem. If you're going to define type as whatever the person's true ability is, you can't then turn around and also say that type is determined by preference. Duh.

If you don't agree with the idea that type = preference, then fine, but surely even you don't have such tunnel vision that you can't see the obvious conflict here.

You've insisted repeatedly that "TYPE IS A QUESTION OF PREFERENCE NOT ABILITY!!!" in any number of threads, and now here you are directly contradicting that.

I happen to agree that type is more dependent upon your strongest natural abilities than upon which abilities you prefer to use, but the quoted post obviously contradicted itself by simultaneously claiming that:

1) Type is determined by preference, and
2) One can prefer an off-type function.

Only one of these can be true--evidently you've chosen #2 (which I agree with), but you've also missed the point, which is simply that both cannot simultaneously be true.

I think they have this class called "Critical Thinking" for this kind of shit, buddy.

You're right, I don't understand nonsense.



Just because you see a contradiction, doesn't mean it exists.
#1 is true.
#2 is true.

Pop Quiz: How can a homosexual man prefer a heterosexual woman but still be homosexual?
I assure you, there is no contradiction there either.

What one prefers, is not necessarily who they ARE.
Preferences can easily be taught, if not downright pounded into people's head.

An intuitive can choose S as their preference.
A sensor can choose N as their preference.

They can "prefer" whatever they damn well please.
But it doesn't mean it's who they are.

This is why putting so much effort into typing other people is absurd.
I agree with Katsuni 100%.
Only the person can type themselves.

you guys fight about the dumbest shit.

Well I'm well aware that this can happen; it just contradicts her previous statement. This is a Ti thing; you prob wouldn't understand, but I guess I'll try out of sheer altruism.

She said that:

1) Type is a measure of preference/values, so someone who prefers Sensing skills would, by definition, be a Sensor.

But she also said that:

2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive.

Ya see the contradiction there?

Use some intuition and charity when reading. simply read #2 as implying "2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive (in their actions/shared opinion/shared thoughts/teachings/etc)." and suddenly everyone can get along and reframe from the Ti pissing contest. No body likes critical people. Just keep your "wrongly used Ti!" paranoia in check . If you had just shifted your perspective a bit, you could have avoided this whole mess!

 

[simulatedworld]

you guys fight about the dumbest shit.



Use some intuition and charity when reading. simply read #2 as implying "2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive (in their actions/shared opinion/shared thoughts/teachings/etc)." and suddenly everyone can get along and reframe from the Ti pissing contest. No body likes critical people. Just keep your "wrongly used Ti!" paranoia in check . If you had just shifted your perspective a bit, you could have avoided this whole mess!

But I'd much rather duke it out with Jaguar. What makes you think I want to avoid this whole mess in the first place?

 

[Katsuni]

Sorry, to clarify this odd situation...


Yeur type is not who yeu are. It's whot yeu value.

Yeu may be, by all rights, an ISTP or whotever. However, yeu may place far more value on the J values, due to yeur upbringing, and the current culture which emphasizes Jness, to the point that yeu do all yeu can to be ISTJ instead.

The MBTI 'typing' tests are ONLY capable of typing yeu as whot yeur preferences are. If yeu value ISTJ significantly more, yeu will show up as such, even if it's forced and yeu're actively "trying" to be that way.

Yeur innate default capacity may be ISTP but yeu won't type that way, nor will yeu try to adhere to the values of such.

There's, of course, even more fun stuff to play with... the I/E, S/N, T/F, P/J splits are black and white representations. Almost noone is totally 100% one or the other; N's generally still have some representation of sensory input into their decisions, and I's can be very extroverted in some situations.

Trying to type someone yeu don't know intimately, as in absolutely all facets of their life, including private, is absurd at best. We all put on our masks in public to hide who we are, for various reasons. Even being "polite around strangers" is a mask of sorts, as is "not cursing in front of children". If yeu'd do so otherwise when they're not around, yeu're pretending to be someone yeu're not.

As such, all yeu see of these "famous people" is whot they do in the public eye, which's, by default, going to be less than the 'real' them.

Yeu can't type someone based on how they act in the limelight, it's just a character for a play, the actor often is quite different than the character played. Trying to type an ENTP, for example, is especially difficult, due to massive flexibility and knowing that it's not a particularly 'popular' type generally tends to make us play the role of other types just to get by because we usually don't care for unnecessary conflict as it's inefficient. I may act totally SJ at times just so I don't have to deal with the headache of dealing with other people. Doesn't mean I am SJ by any means... wow if anyone thought I was I'd feel kinda scared XD

But the point is that yeu don't know who someone is at their core, and trying to type people who've been dead for thousands of years... is silly. Because yeu're typing only the outer mask they showed to other people, and even that's been exaggerated or twisted over the centuries. Chances are most of those tales are totally inaccurate.

Then there's the matter that, even *IF* yeu knew who they were at their core... MBTI typing doesn't actually type who yeu are, just whot yeur preferances are, nothing more. So yeur "type" is completely different from whot yeur actual type really is.

So yes, as stated...




1) Type is a measure of preference/values, so someone who prefers Sensing skills would, by definition, be a Sensor.

But she also said that:

2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive.

Ya see the contradiction there?


Pretty much that right there. Yeu may "be" an iNtuitive at yeur core... but... yeu will always type as Sensor. So yeu actually have two different types of who yeu are, and only one of them actually counts. And the way it's set up, it's not the common sense one of "who yeu really are" but the one of "which yeu value more".

So yes, yeu can be, by definition, an S, but technically they're really an N.

I know, it really doesn't make sense... because the testing is flawed. MBTI is not an end all explanation of who yeu are, it really doesn't even show anything about who yeu are, just whot yeu prefer.

As such, we have the following:


A: yeu can't type someone else for them because it's their personal values that need to be tested, not who they are, that matters.

B: these values aren't capable of being known fully except by that one individual.

C: even *IF* yeu were trying to type someone else based on 'who they are', yeu are still only typing their outwards social mask.

D: once again, yeu can't type something which isn't known to yeu, even if yeu think it is.



Fact is, trying to type other people may give yeu some slight understanding into how they think, but it'll also tend to leave yeu with very, very dangerous assumptions of stereotypes, and yeu'll fail hardcore when they do something yeu didn't expect because yeu're still clinging to the stereotype.

It can be beneficial, but the moment yeu start thinking yeu can peg someone's type accurately, or that type has an absolute guaranteed rock solid foundation, then yeu have just failed soooooooo badly, and are now operating at a level that's even less safe than when yeu were working blind.

 

[Katsuni]

Your spelling is a distraction, but your content is accurate.
It's unfortunate it will fall upon mostly deaf ears.

Out of curiosity, what is with YEU, YEUR and WHOT?

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/bonfire/22553-parting-gift.html

Read up and have fun. I don't think it'll make yeu any less annoyed by such, but do realize there's actually reasoning going on behind it.

 

[Jaguar]

MBTI is based on what you prefer though isn't it? I think the distinction, is that you may prefer sensing at one point, but you only prefer it because of peer pressure... so really, you don't exactly prefer sensing, you've always naturally prefered intuition.

Initiating a thread about the influence of peer pressure on preference would be a good idea.
Food for thought.

What a donk play. You've just pointed out that type is not determined by preference

The first 4 words of your post tell me the rest is going to be shit.
It's going to be shit, since you fail to grasp what everyone else in this thread can, but you cannot.
So, the rest of your material will not be read by my eyes.

Adios, Mr. Morose.

you guys fight about the dumbest shit.

Lol, Babs. No kidding.

Use some intuition and charity when reading. simply read #2 as implying "2) Someone may prefer/value the abilities of Sensors but still be an iNtuitive (in their actions/shared opinion/shared thoughts/teachings/etc)." and suddenly everyone can get along and reframe from the Ti pissing contest. No body likes critical people. Just keep your "wrongly used Ti!" paranoia in check . If you had just shifted your perspective a bit, you could have avoided this whole mess!

Bingo.

But I'd much rather duke it out with Jaguar. What makes you think I want to avoid this whole mess in the first place?

Those words are nothing more than an attempt to save face.
It's absurd to go to the lengths you do, to avoid looking like an asshole.

Then there's the matter that, even *IF* yeu knew who they were at their core... MBTI typing doesn't actually type who yeu are, just whot yeur preferances are, nothing more. So yeur "type" is completely different from whot yeur actual type really is.

Agreed.

I know, it really doesn't make sense...

It makes perfect sense to me.

A: yeu can't type someone else for them because it's their personal values that need to be tested, not who they are, that matters.

B: these values aren't capable of being known fully except by that one individual.

C: even *IF* yeu were trying to type someone else based on 'who they are', yeu are still only typing their outwards social mask.

D: once again, yeu can't type something which isn't known to yeu, even if yeu think it is.

All of the above are true.
Let's see how many people realize it and change course in this forum.

 

[simulatedworld]

The first 4 words of your post tell me the rest is going to be shit.
It's going to be shit, since you fail to grasp what everyone else in this thread can, but you cannot.
So, the rest of your material will not be read by my eyes.

Really? What about the boatloads of money you've made in Vegas playing poker? Surely some time along your illustrious career you've heard this terminology before!

Those words are nothing more than an attempt to save face.
It's absurd to go to the lengths you do, to avoid looking like an asshole

I wonder why you think I'd spend so much time arguing on forums if I didn't enjoy arguing on forums. I imagine you also enjoy it, or you wouldn't do it either. As I said, I'm one of the few people willing to admit to enjoying arguing. It's a competition and that's fun.

And uh, if there's one thing I really don't bother doing here it's try to avoid looking like an asshole. If my goal were to look like a nice guy, I'd be going about it in the worst way imaginable. You really need to calibrate that Ni camera lens.

 

[Jaguar]

wonder why you think I'd spend so much time arguing on forums if I didn't enjoy arguing on forums. I imagine you also enjoy it, or you wouldn't do it either. As I said, I'm one of the few people willing to admit to enjoying arguing.

You are here to troll and argue. That's it.
It's clear you have no interest in acquiring knowledge.

You really need to calibrate that Ni camera lens.

I don't need to calibrate anything. I can see through your antics, just fine.
Take notice of who you replied to: Me.

Why aren't you responding to Katsuni's great post?
Could it be she knows her shit and you don't?

Yep!

 

[simulatedworld]

You are here to troll and argue. That's it.
It's clear you have no interest in acquiring knowledge.

Really? So twenty minutes ago your super Ni read was that I'll go to great lengths to avoid looking like an asshole, but now I'm only here to troll and argue? For an ENTJ you sure change your mind a lot.

I don't need to calibrate anything. I can see through your antics, just fine.
Take notice of who you replied to: Me.

Why aren't you responding to Katsuni's great post?
Could it be she knows her shit and you don't?

Yep!

Because there wasn't anything in it I significantly disagreed with. I don't find it necessary to defend my competence on this subject compared to you, though.

 

[Jaguar]

So twenty minutes ago your super Ni read was that I'll go to great lengths to avoid looking like an asshole, but now I'm only here to troll and argue? For an ENTJ you sure change your mind a lot.

Once again you imagine contradictions, when in reality there are none.
That's a bad habit you have. Work on it.

I don't find it necessary to defend my competence

That's because the competence doesn't exist.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Socionics says that Putin also is ENTp, however you can't really convert socionics type into MBTI. Probably he is, why not? He has some really ENTPish hobbies like horse riding and painting. And judo made him disciplined, once he even admitted that without judo he may have ended up living in streets.
What about Steve Jobbs? He's definitely ENTx, but after watching his speech in Stanford he really seemed ENTP to me, because of Ne+Ti.
Some people type Obama as ENTP, I'm not sure though. It's hard to find typical ENTP politicians, because developed ENTP persons that I know, are good at changing their public style and role as the situation and/or occupation requests (maybe a little Machiavellian?).
And that Borat-guy is also definitely ENTP!

Putin is most definitely INTJ.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Julius Caesar: The mother of all ENTJs.
Can't get much more Te than that.

ESTP

 

[sgtmac_46]

Dude, I really don't feel like repeating what I say, but I am going to do it at least for this time:

Caesar was known for his extreme risking and pushing things to the limit, even if it means destroying himself. There are many examples that his career would be in ruin, but luck saved him everytime.

(1) He pissed off Sulla when he was a child for disobeying the dictator's orders to marry his daughter, and he almost got killed for it. He was saved by the intervention of his relatives.

(2)He accumulated massive amount of debt to buy popularity and political office. Even so, he continue to borrow money and lavishly spend them on public games to win people's favor. At one point, his debtors threaten to kill him and went to house at night, and he had to flee for his life.

(3) he bet everything on his campaign in Gaul. It was as massive gamble and the only hope of paying the massive debt he accumulated. If the campaign in Gaul turn out to be a disaster, his career would be in utter ruin and he would sink even deeper into debt.

(4)He decided to cross the rubicon. it was a all or nothing move. If he loses to Pompey he would be killed and everything he has fought and gain for in his life would amount to nothing. It is like investing 100% of your money into a stock that you are not certain will rise or plummet to the ground. It was like risking everything in one bet.

(5)He always spared his defeated enemies rather than killed them.If it was Te, he would have executed all his enemies and strike fear into anyone who pissed him off like Sulla. But instead he choose to be generous and turn enemies into allies. This is an example of Fe.

TJs are known to make every decision within a calculated framework or a plan, not take all or nothing risks that could ruin everything. And they have contingency plans for everything. caesar was a huge risktaker. His life is about all about throwing dices and maximizing his chance of winning, as he said in the quote "the die is cast". he counted on luck and randomness to win as much as planning and strategic thinking.

Yes, ESTP