[NT] any nt's here NOT drawn to nf's for friendships and/or romance?

[periscopes]

I'm not, find they read into emotional subtext that isn't there for NTs which is highly irritating, nothing worse than someone assuming you were insinuating something then won't listen to any logic

That's not to say there aren't NFs I like, but they certainly aren't a preference

haha, guilty... :hi:

 

[Fecal McAngry]

Right, but why is focusing on how you get to the desired goal more a function of Si than of Te? That doesn't really jive with this book you sent me. Te is described as focusing intently on making sure things are done according to the society-wide standards that govern the way things are supposed to be done, measured and evaluated. Te needs to be able to depend on the fact that when you do x, it always results in y.

Society-wide? That has nada to do with Te, at least in this context. You, perhaps unintentionally, are equating Te usage with STJ behavior...When you want to differentiate a function--i.e. figure out what it is, in and of itself, it's fun to look at the commonalities/noncommonalities found in the disparate types who use a particular function. Extroverted Thinking is characterized, above all, by bottom line effectiveness in the real-world results. Te is about utility; predictable, efficient and desired results. Process is completely subservient to results. Process is useful only to the extent that it predictably achieves a desired end.

Here's LT: Extraverted Thinking

As one would expect, NTJs, particularly INTJs, are often very specific about the process they themselves use to accomplish something, and even dogmatic about the "best method," but in positions of leadership, they often could not care less how you complete task x, provided you do it well.


Here's David Mamet, whom I believe to be an NTJ, in an excellent results-and-only-results book on acting:

Amazon.com: True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor (9780679772644): David Mamet: Books

One of the most hilarious things Mamet says is that X, Y, and Z actors who came through X, Y and Z schools did not succeed because of their training, but either in spite of it, or because their training included something peripheral to the method taught in X, Y and Z schools--namely, getting up on stage and performing many times. In other words, in Mamet's view, the essential things are talent and practice, and nuances of acting "methods" are meaningless blather...

I'm reminded btw, of Roger Corman, an INTJ filmmaker who was so precise in his empirical orientation that he used to do things like only paint the side of a piece of furniture that would be seen on film...

 

[hermeticdancer]

I'm not, find they read into emotional subtext that isn't there for NTs which is highly irritating, nothing worse than someone assuming you were insinuating something then won't listen to any logic

That's not to say there aren't NFs I like, but they certainly aren't a preference

Yes but I would also build off what you said and argue that the NF
expects that the NT has more emotion then they actually do, they interpret the world through feelings, and may take things more personally, and express "assumptions" as a defense mechanism. In order to correct this the NF has to realize this about herself and the NT has to be more patient, and be willing to teach the NF logic, it can work if the NT, and NF are not too extreme, open, more willing to balance and help each other understand they mean when they speak.

The N provides the overlap, the intuitive or abstract idea oriented way of seeing the world, we can both relate to. Ask the person, let me see it your way... why do you think they way you do? Examine it and then you will be able to explain your own thinking process to someone else and they in turn will be able to better understand you. Most especially an NF. You would be surprised. We are life long students and love to learn new things from smart people. We may not become like you, but will love you for it.
And we can understand the way you think and translate our feelings and assumptions into cogent thoughts that make sense so we can better communicate with you and have more sensible and satisfying discussions.

The brain is plastic... remember. At least that's what I believe. Mine feels that way sometimes...

In essence have the patience to teach your way of logic to an emotional student, and also learn how the emotional brain works too.

 

[hermeticdancer]

I've dated one INFP, one ENFJ and a couple of ENFPs, but once I found an ENTP girl all of them paled in comparison.

So yeah, here's an NT who prefers other NTs for romance. (Just not ENTJs. Keep them the hell away.)

As for friendship, I have a number of NF friends. I think they're delightful for that, but romance (for me anyway) requires too much similarity in perspectives for the inevitable T vs. F clash to be manageable.

You could be right...

The T versus F clash is very powerful, I think it is good that you picked up on that and you know what you want. So, do you think you will only date NTs? or Just Ts? of any type? What if you found out you fell in love with a person and they were and F with a strong T? Are you open to it?

 

[hermeticdancer]

I find that I get along best with other TPs and and INTJs in terms of friendships/relationships/partnerships. I actually think NFPs are some of the hardest types for me to mesh with.

I don't know if I have met an ENTP in real life. Only online... I don't see what the big deal is. ENTP seems delightful, funny, insane... intelligent.

 

[Little Linguist]

Ack. The war has two theatres, does it?!

You know what they say about fighting a war with two fronts, right?


WE WIN!

 

[hermeticdancer]

Correction: NT's are sarcastic as hell whereas NF's think they are but come off as annoying and immature. They also tend to get upset over an NT's blatant sarcasm because they percieve non-existant cristism/insults

"NF's come off as annoying and immature"

"they perceive non-existent criticism/insults"

I get what you are trying to say. You are saying NF's are too sensitive, aren't good at sarcasm, and take your bluntness as a personal insult when that is not how it is intended to be.

However you did contradict yourself.

And what kind of positive person would say that? ("NF's come off as annoying and immature")

Your comment sounds more like a sweeping generalization, then a sarcastic remark.

 

[Little Linguist]

NTs are still awesome even if you haven't come to terms that we're awesome yet.

 

[simulatedworld]

Society-wide? That has nada to do with Te, at least in this context. You, perhaps unintentionally, are equating Te usage with STJ behavior...When you want to differentiate a function--i.e. figure out what it is, in and of itself, it's fun to look at the commonalities/noncommonalities found in the disparate types who use a particular function. Extroverted Thinking is characterized, above all, by bottom line effectiveness in the real-world results. Te is about utility; predictable, efficient and desired results. Process is completely subservient to results. Process is useful only to the extent that it predictably achieves a desired end.

No, Lenore actually does relate Te to societal standards because Te-ers view society as a working unit that can't function the way it's supposed to without rules and regulations governing the way its pieces interact with each other. I was surprised to read this too because I thought that sounded more like Fe, but there you go. I don't have the book with me at the moment, but I'll provide quotes later if you want.

Here's LT: Extraverted Thinking

As one would expect, NTJs, particularly INTJs, are often very specific about the process they themselves use to accomplish something, and even dogmatic about the "best method," but in positions of leadership, they often could not care less how you complete task x, provided you do it well.

Yeah I've already read everything on that site, but it doesn't cover a lot of the key portions of the Te chapter in the actual book.

What you say may be true, but the problem is that Te doms so frequently worry about the competence of their team members, sometimes justifiably and sometimes not. If they've decided you don't know what you're doing, you can expect constant backseat driving until they're sure you're not going to fuck it up again.

Sure, they'll leave you alone if you're doing a good job already because then it doesn't matter how you got it done, but it's when they don't like your performance that shit really hits the fan. The Te dom believes he's the only one who knows the proper way of doing anything and that it's up to him to save the day.

Here's David Mamet, whom I believe to be an NTJ, in an excellent results-and-only-results book on acting:

Amazon.com: True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor (9780679772644): David Mamet: Books

One of the most hilarious things Mamet says is that X, Y, and Z actors who came through X, Y and Z schools did not succeed because of their training, but either in spite of it, or because their training included something peripheral to the method taught in X, Y and Z schools--namely, getting up on stage and performing many times. In other words, in Mamet's view, the essential things are talent and practice, and nuances of acting "methods" are meaningless blather...

I'm reminded btw, of Roger Corman, an INTJ filmmaker who was so precise in his empirical orientation that he used to do things like only paint the side of a piece of furniture that would be seen on film...

Right, good examples. But have you ever worked with an ENTJ who thinks you're totally incompetent (even if you're not)? This is what I'm talking about.

 

[Jaguar]

No, Lenore actually does relate Te to societal standards because Te-ers view society as a working unit that can't function the way it's supposed to without rules and regulations governing the way its pieces interact with each other. I was surprised to read this too because I thought that sounded more like Fe, but there you go.

Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.

Are you incapable of making a post without parroting Lenore Thomson?

 

[teslashock]

Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.
Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says. Lenore says.

Are you incapable of making a post without parroting Lenore Thomson?

Substance via inspiration from Lenore is better than no substance at all. Just something for you to keep in mind, my little kitty friend.

 

[MacGuffin]

NFs R gross.

 

[Jaguar]

NFs R gross.

Your porn star picture was gross.

 

[MacGuffin]

Your porn star picture was gross.

Your existence is grotesque.

 

[disregard]

(besides solitarywalker)

Oh, there was a time when they could do no wrong in his eyes.

 

[Salomé]

I just can't imagine an NT romance. It seems like an oxymoron.

Since I want to understand emotion and have a more interesting dynamic, I'd much rather have an NF than an NT. I can understand NT too well for it to work out. (Sorry, I think I'd get bored.)

+1
NTs are better friends, NFs are better lovers.

 

[Jaguar]

Your existence is grotesque.

Your existence is fraudulent.

 

[MacGuffin]

Your existence is fraudulent.

My existence is verifiable.

 

[Jaguar]

Not according to the obituaries.

 

[MacGuffin]

Not according to the obituaries.

Obituaries are untrustworthy.