[NT] Who are more "robotic": INTJs or INTPs?

[Nicodemus]

[MENTION=10757]Nicodemus[/MENTION]

Would you mind offering some insight on your vote?

I chose Marvin as my definition of the robotic.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Beep - I am a robot!

 

[Zarathustra]

I chose Marvin as my definition of the robotic.

Rather ironically, that was jockthemotie's old avatar...

 

[Nicodemus]

Jock is just a messy INTJ anyway.

 

[greenfairy]

You know that question you've been struggling with for so long?

You're an INTP.

LOLZ

I could not give a small-enough shit.

Excuse me for intruding on your private argument held on a public forum, which I began reading for amusement and ended in a slightly stressed out mood because of your negativity.

Not to split hairs, but my perspective is very clear, so, if anything, it would not be my lack of clarity, it would be the OP's lack of clarity.

Second, I never said it was the lack of clarity in the OP that implied a flaw in the reader's reasoning.

I said the reasoning in a particular responder's post was poor.



I have long been familiar with that profile.

It really doesn't apply here.

This is something altogether different.

I really have no difficulty expressing my opinions on this matter.

I left some openness to the thread intentionally and on purpose.

When something dumb was said, I called it out as such.

Then Riva felt the need to bust out his Fe rulebook.

He's tried this before, and, frankly, I don't care for it.



As am I.

Whatever you say.

I am discontinuing my involvement with this argument because this question is completely irrelevant to anything serious.

 

[Zarathustra]

Excuse me for intruding...

You're excused.

Anybody actually have any opinions about INTJs, INTPs, and roboticness?

 

[RaptorWizard]

I think black people are more robotic than mexicans.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Fluffywolf certainly seems to have gotten it.

And you said "pretty much this" to his response.

As such, I would say, certain people seem to have gotten it.

And, frankly, I'd expect any intelligent person with knowledge of typology to get it.

I do agree with [MENTION=6643]Fluffywolf[/MENTION]'s post ... but ...

Why ask the question then, if you "know" the answer, simply to see who gets the "right" answer?

Just curious what you're aiming for here in this thread.

And why did you change the OP?

 

[Zarathustra]

I do agree with [MENTION=6643]Fluffywolf[/MENTION]'s post ... but ...

Why ask the question then, if you "know" the answer, simply to see who gets the "right" answer?

That's not what I'm doing.

Just curious what you're aiming for here in this thread.

I address that thoroughly in post #54.

And why did you change the OP?

Well, as you know, I regularly edit my posts.

In fact, I'm not sure if I've ever started a thread where I didn't change the OP at some point.

All I added to it was "this is about essence, not appearace", because I was confused as to why Fluffy voted the way he did.

Honestly, though, PB, I'm not looking for another line of discussion about the morality of my calling a line of reasoning idiotic.

I'd much rather talk about the thread topic, so, if you have an inclination for the above, please don't go there.

 

[A window to the soul]

Anybody actually have any opinions about INTJs, INTPs, and roboticness?

No, but I have a question. What did the INTP robot say to the INTJ robot?

 

[Kaizer]

I'd look at INFJs and then decide which one of the two is more robotic

It looks more like Te would make for robots being manifested

Te to me is robotic, while Ti is more of a computer mainframe. Not sure I can explain the distinction very well.

saw this after i had framed the above.... looks like she gets it.. esp as an observer

[MENTION=2885]raindancing[/MENTION] might have some truly worthwhile input here

 

[greenfairy]

You're excused.

Anybody actually have any opinions about INTJs, INTPs, and roboticness?

I have another opinion. INTP's are like computers and INTJ's are like robots. Because robots are designed to perform actions efficiently and gather data, and computers are designed to think.

But they work SO WELL together! Right??

 

[Zarathustra]

I have another opinion. INTP's are like computers and INTJ's are like robots. Because robots are designed to perform actions efficiently and gather data, and computers are designed to think.

Yeah, I mean, this is where clarification does come into play, because the cut at which I was taking it was basically, "Whose mind functions more like a robot/computer?" (Which I essentially stated -- minus one or two words -- in post #12) Seeing as how robots have a computer mind, I don't think there really need be a distinction between the two, in this regard.

 

[Thalassa]

I don't know, INTJs appear more externally robotic, like stick-up-ass, but I think they have more feisty inside them as they get older, all that tertiary Fi and inferior Se ...while INTPs may appear softer or more easy going on the outside, there's something "drier" about them.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I have another opinion. INTP's are like computers and INTJ's are like robots. Because robots are designed to perform actions efficiently and gather data, and computers are designed to think.

Completely true, but that perspective is based on appearance, not cognative processes.

 

[cascadeco]

Completely true, but that perspective is based on appearance, not cognative processes.

So, we're all supposed to agree that it's the dominant internal cog. process that defines 'robotic'? And that's why INTP IS more 'robotic' than INTJ?

External cog functions are also cognition, but we're supposed to agree that we're not supposed to be looking at the external to determine robotic-ness? Why?

But then there's a lack of consistency, because I don't think it's the dom-Si that makes the ISTJ robotic - in reality I think it's more the Te that defines the robotic-ness (ISFJ wouldn't be viewed as robotic). And incidentally, I'd put ISTJ as more 'robotic' before ISTP. So I do look to the external cog functions more than internal when assessing robotic-ness, and I did look through the whole thread.

Or is it instead the tertiary Si of INTP that makes them more robotic than INTJ's, and that way we can tie off the fact that both INTP's and ISTJ's are robotic? Still wouldn't solve for ISFJ's NOT being robotic, though....

 

[PeaceBaby]

That's not what I'm doing.

So you're simply saying that Fluffy was going the direction you were hoping the discussion would go?

I address that thoroughly in post #54.

kk

*reads post 54*

...another area to explore/define.

kk

Well, as you know, I regularly edit my posts.

Don't I know it dear Z!

Honestly, though, PB, I'm not looking for another line of discussion about the morality of my calling a line of reasoning idiotic.

That's not where I was or am going. I need to remember that when I ask you pointed questions without preamble, you tend to assign me motives that I don't have.

I'd much rather talk about the thread topic, so, if you have an inclination for the above, please don't go there.

I did, having read the OP a couple of hours ago, but coming back to the thread, I need to think on it more because the water seems muddier now.

Although I will say I do think INTJ's are more procedural .... step a then step b then step c .... esp for topics they are well-versed in. And they can seem to play to that default of what "works" and is known, esp when it comes to people-stuff.

I'll think some more on it and be back.

 

[Fluffywolf]

So, we're all supposed to agree that it's the dominant internal cog. process that defines 'robotic'? And that's why INTP IS more 'robotic' than INTJ?

External cog functions are also cognition, but we're supposed to agree that we're not supposed to be looking at the external to determine robotic-ness? Why?

But then there's a lack of consistency, because I don't think it's the dom-Si that makes the ISTJ robotic - in reality I think it's more the Te that defines the robotic-ness (ISFJ wouldn't be viewed as robotic).

Or is it instead the tertiary Si of INTP that makes them more robotic than INTJ's?

The breaking mechanism that makes INTJ's less robotic in particular is their Ni, that defies any law a computer or robot would function by. And as the dominate function of a type does not conform to robot-like or computer-like standards, it stands to reason that a type with a dominate function that does in essence work like the rules a computer could function on is therefor more robotic.

Never did I talk in absolutes however, and have before mentioned to not take the simile too literal but approach it from a general perspective, and even mentioned there could obviously be exceptions, as well as Zarathustra said that enneagram could also be a major factor. But since Zarathustra came with the comparison of INTP's and INTJ's specifically, it stands to reason he means the MBTI differences between those two types on a general level, making it obvious that in this case this thread in particular points to the cognative process differences between those two types. Based on that, INTP's are the more robotic ones.

As for ISTP's and ISTJ's, I just made the remark that Si is not like Ni in that regard, and then the combination of Si+Te would quite possibly be generally speaking more robotic than Ti+Se. Also, I just mentioned ISTP's and ISTJ's because Riva asked if I thought what I said about INTP's and INTJ's would also hold true for ISTP's and ISTJ's, and I just made the point that I think it does not.

edit: The bolded part would also answer the first bit of [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION]'s post above, I believe. xP

 

[greenfairy]

Completely true, but that perspective is based on appearance, not cognative processes.

Yes. But the cognitive processes produce the appearance imo. I think this has already been explained a bit, but I wanted to refine the concept.

Both robots and computers would operate on Ti it's true. Te gathers data and responds to the physical world, like a robot. Te organizes the environment and decides which actions are more logical and efficient.

Ne gathers data like all the internet users giving information to a computer, and a computer just stays in one place and thinks (Ti). Also a computer responds to people (Fe), while a robot is less interactive.

In general, of course. INTX's would be like a computer-robot hybrid, and atypical INTP's and INTJ's would be their own unique thing.

 

[Thalassa]

[MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION]

I think this is a good point. I do not think Si is responsible for being "robotic"...I think T functions are. Si is actually a very personal function, and sometimes people mix it up with Fi because it's so subjective, and associates memories with feelings, etc.

I think that's what INTJs LOOK more robotic on the surface (you're seeing their T function in the aux position focused externally, and we tend to see extroverted functions more, even in introverts...which is why you also get that surface impression with ISTJs, possibly) ...but if you get to know the INTP, you get more and more into that Ti, which to me as an Fi type, seems very "dry."