User Tag List

View Poll Results: Who is more "robotic": INTJs or INTPs?

Voters
109. You may not vote on this poll
  • INTPs

    42 38.53%
  • INTJs

    67 61.47%
First 172526272829 Last

Results 261 to 270 of 355

  1. #261
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    The machines of the present are IST, but the machines of the future will be INT. Artificial intelligence could, perhaps even one day be transerred into the human body, making our intelligence programmable.

  2. #262
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    I vote INTP due to the functions. The first cognitive function that comes to mind when I think robot is Ti, which is INTPs dominant. How do you make a robot with Ni? Maybe one day we will but I don't we're quite there yet technologically.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  3. #263
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Caesar View Post
    I have never met a robotic INTJ, but I have met INTPs who seem a hundred times more robotic if you don't know them (needless to say I do, and I know first hand they're not robotic, but their emotions are carefully buried, like a mine). INTJs I've known always have intense, fiery emotions boiling just beneath the surface. Immature INTJs who want to appear robotic often deny their emotions so vehemently you can only smile knowingly and pat their fluffy little heads.
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by 111 View Post
    Poor INTJs talk like robots, act like robots, treat you like robots, care about you as much as robots do, and just like robots, lack the humour detector and auto-irony module, yet, suprisingly, no one seems to express the will to fathom their rich inner emotional realms, those which exist only in reference to their own well being.

    Yes, Zarathustra, I completely agree with you. INTPs are more rational, more self-critical, they more easily detach themselves from the constraints of their feelings when assessing a problem and are thus more objective when critical thinking is concerned, hence, "more robotic on the inside."

    Unlike INTJs, who, in addition, don't poses their innate aversion towards overreaching conclusions, mysticism and similar regressive inhibitions, INTPs are lucky they don't have to cross that egoistic emotional barrier in their goal of distilling knowledge into truth.

    Excluding the objective rationality of the INTPs, INTJs are the robots in all other aspects - they are the cold, selfish machines efficiently executing complex tasks with their auto-destruct sequences overriden.
    ^ This is mostly a bunch of nonsense.

    Quote Originally Posted by 111 View Post
    ^ Hehe, but this was actually pretty good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    We are not defining the term, because to define it would be to answer the question and end the thread. It is only because the term is understood subjectively by those who answer that the question can even muster the appearance of being meaningful. As you can see in post #12, Zarathustra is somewhat aware of it, too.
    Somewhat?

    If I were at a green level of consciousness, I would agree that it's all just subjective yada yada yada...

    But, being at the yellow/turquoise level, I'm willing to say that some definitions are better than others, so it's not completely subjective.

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    Assuming all come to the same conclusion based on the same initial parameters, which I still bet ends much like this thread without an objective definition.
    The point was never to come to an objective definition of what it means to be robotic.

    It was to come to a better understanding of INTJs and INTPs (among a number of other things).

    Whether or not someone does is not the thread's fault; the arguments I wanted have been fleshed out in the thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robopop View Post
    Thus the covert war of Ti vs Ni continues................................
    *chortles*

  4. #264
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _Poki_ View Post
    Are we referring to analytic as robotic? I see a robot as something that is programmed to do certain things...definately not a P trait. I would say its more a J trait because they are more stuck on what they believe and what they believe is how they are programmed. Its like everything get analysed through there vision(be it Si or Ni) and a conclusion is made...that conclusion is global, not personal opinion.
    INTJs look more robotic just because of that walk and how they look at you and stuff like that. INTPs think more like robots though

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  5. #265
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Somewhat?

    If I were at a green level of consciousness, I would agree that it's all just subjective yada yada yada...

    But, being at the yellow/turquoise level, I'm willing to say that some definitions are better than others, so it's not completely subjective.
    You seem to be only somewhat aware of the fact that your thread hinges on the definition of 'robotic' remaining 'open-ended'; for if it were clear that you mean 'often thinking in logical patterns, aiming for consistency, bla', most people would jump to Ti as a match and your thread became a matter of simple concept allocation. By the way, many, many threads on this forum suffer - or, rather, benefit - from the same problem. Remember the Best King thread?

  6. #266
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    You seem to be only somewhat aware of the fact that your thread hinges on the definition of 'robotic' remaining 'open-ended'; for if it were clear that you mean 'often thinking in logical patterns, aiming for consistency, bla', most people would jump to Ti as a match and your thread became a matter of simple concept allocation. By the way, many, many threads on this forum suffer - or, rather, benefit - from the same problem. Remember the Best King thread?
    Yes, I know, I'm just wondering why it is that "somewhat" comes into play.

    I'd say I'm more than well aware of it.

    I just don't choose to stop there.

  7. #267
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yes, I know, I'm just wondering why it is that "somewhat" comes into play.

    I'd say I'm more than well aware of it.

    I just don't choose to stop there.
    Because a) your post (#12) only somewhat shows it, and b) there would have been better ways to achieve whatever you are trying to achieve here with a thread less circular.

  8. #268
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    ^ This is mostly a bunch of nonsense.
    What is it? The things that reek of truth are to much for you? You need something irrational, like the illusion that your egocentric INTJ emotionality is a virtue towards which we should strive, to grasp onto? Your unwarranted, idiotic arrogance that you have been flashing from the very start is nonsensical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    And we have the right answer.
    Don't ever say I hate INTPs, in general, people.
    Is this a poll or an exam? Are you expecting opinions or waiting for the right answer? How is this supposed to convince anyone that your intentions are benevolent, that you are not using robotic in a deprecating manner and that you're not here to gloat at someones supposed ignorance?

    INTJs care too much about themselves to be considered as objective as INTPs are. Ni-Fi is prohibiting you from being truly rational, truly logical, truly robotic... It's obvious that this inversion is not the thing you had in mind when starting this thread, but the truth is as cold, as unpleasant, and as beautiful as usual.

  9. #269
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Hmm, how does this description of INTP Si strike you?
    INTP Si = I'm objective and logical, therefore I am open-minded. If someone disagrees with me, that doesn't only mean that they're wrong, but they're close-minded for not agreeing with me.
    I think that applies to some INTPs, the thing with tert Si is to realize the subjectivity of it or it will distort your thinking like your example shows. No one is objective and Si meaning that your sense perceptions go through abstractive filter that makes it highly subuective. But since people have hard time seeing that tert is mainly playing tricks on us, feeling like we handle it and control it consciously, but in reality its more often controlled by shadow and its contents are mixed with complexes and other functions, we often arent able to see tert properly.

    Why?
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #270
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    I think that applies to some INTPs, the thing with tert Si is to realize the subjectivity of it or it will distort your thinking like your example shows. No one is objective and Si meaning that your sense perceptions go through abstractive filter that makes it highly subuective. But since people have hard time seeing that tert is mainly playing tricks on us, feeling like we handle it and control it consciously, but in reality its more often controlled by shadow and its contents are mixed with complexes and other functions, we often arent able to see tert properly.

    Why?
    Just pointing out the symmetric observation. Neither argument is particularly compelling, except insofar as tert (and inf) are somewhat useful for pointing out blind spots, but the relationship to "open-mindedness" per se is a bit of a stretch. The tert doesn't make one feel or think that one is open-minded or that it is good to be so, but rather points out those areas where, no matter how open minded one really is, one doesn't see the blind spots. Other people upon encountering those blind spots might make an observation of close-mindedness or stubbornness.

    W/r to "open mindedness" in general, I have found that regardless of type, those who believe that they themselves are open-minded and chide others for being close-minded tend to bring up the topic on precisely those matters about which they themselves are quite stubbornly resistant to changing their own opinions, and are quite unaware of the unintended irony of their assertions. It's definitely a human foible, kind of like the Dunning-Kruger effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect), where those who are competent tend to underestimate their competence, while those who are incompetent tend to overestimate their competence. Similarly, those who are close-minded tend to overestimate their open-mindedness, while those who are truly open-minded tend to worry whether they're being open-minded enough.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

Similar Threads

  1. [E6] Who is more skeptical of people? 6 or 8?
    By NK258 in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-23-2015, 02:36 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Any other NTs here who are more into NFs than NTs?
    By gandalf in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 08:26 AM
  3. [NT] BEST Critic: INTJ or INTP?
    By Afkan in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 06-29-2009, 01:16 AM
  4. [NT] INTJ or INTP: Who is more misanthropic?
    By ajblaise in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-27-2009, 08:10 AM
  5. is this INTJ or INTP?
    By 527468 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-11-2009, 08:00 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