[NT] NT Objectivity Scale

[ptgatsby]

My subjectivity is like a tiny, tiny mouse, and my objectivity the tiger who hungers for it, though it would make an unworthy meal.

I kind of see it more like the mouse and the elephant.

Except of course, I know that analogies introduce subjectivity into my thinking, and would never use an analogy like that, even to make a point.

 

[Jack Flak]

I kind of see it more like the mouse and the elephant.

Except of course, I know that analogies introduce subjectivity into my thinking, and would never use an analogy like that, even to make a point.

Note to self: ISTPs are Sensors. Interesting...

 

[Valiant]

*Jedi mind trick* This is not the Jack you are angry with.

 

[substitute]

LMAO we've already been here... there was a thread very similar a while ago - remember it PT?? I think it started off as something like 'war of objectivity' pitting ENTP's and INTP's against each other, but ended up encompassing all types and getting pretty heated.

I actually think ISTP's are the most objective, IME. Dunno how it works, but they always seem the least likely to get het up or personally involved, they're nearly always pretty even handed if arbitrating. ISTP's FTW.

 

[ptgatsby]

LMAO we've already been here... there was a thread very similar a while ago - remember it PT?? I think it started off as something like 'war of objectivity' pitting ENTP's and INTP's against each other, but ended up encompassing all types and getting pretty heated.

Oh yah, I remember. I was even going to link it.

Then I remember what happened last time To be fair, Jack did offer definitions this time

 

[nonsequitur]

Thank God INTJs don't care if they're "objective" or not, only if the situation works to our advantage.

 

[Jack Flak]

I saw the other thread, but this one includes all rationals and is brimming with truth.

nonsequitur: Yes, of course. This is why INTJs are less objective.

I didn't say, or mean to say, it was a scale of quality, only objectivity.

 

[substitute]

nonsequitur, I was thinking something similar, except that I thought "I don't care that much if it's objective, more about whether it's valid."

Cos like, if one ENTJ makes a subjective observation that he expects INTP's to be lazy, it's easy for the INTP to shrug it off on the basis of its subjectivity; it doesn't however mean it's not valid. If 100 people independently draw the same subjective conclusion, then that conclusion's validity is mounting towards the undeniable. Yet the INTP will still shrug it off because it's subjective.

I think ENTP is more concerned with getting at the truth, whatever it is and however you get at it; it's knowable on sight quite often, whether that be subjective or not. INTP is just obsessed with objectivity and the irony is, it can't really hear much truth past the noise of all the bees in its bonnet.

 

[Jack Flak]

I think ENTP is more concerned with getting at the truth, whatever it is and however you get at it; it's knowable on sight quite often, whether that be subjective or not. INTP is just obsessed with objectivity and the irony is, it can't really hear much truth past the noise of all the bees in its bonnet.

I appreciate this, because it demonstrates INTP>ENTP with regard to objectivity. If, of course, you are ENTP, which you are.

ENTPs are too concerned with action and world modification to have the objectivity of the INTP.

 

[digesthisickness]

good god, people. just let him have it.

 

[Jack Flak]

good god, people. just let him have it.

I already have it, being that I'm incredibly objective, and it doesn't affect my logical process whatsoever if someone agrees or disagrees with it.

By the way, I have been completely forthright in all of the above aside from not mentioning my constant LOL.

 

[substitute]

it was taken as read Jack, as was mine, considering that the whole time you're just an ENTP in denial yourself

Oh, and INTP's conviction that objectivity = validity is what makes INTP < ISTP in the objectivity scale

 

[Jack Flak]

it was taken as read Jack, as was mine, considering that the whole time you're just an ENTP in denial yourself

*marks down "substitute" on teh s-list*

Objectivity=Validity? Who said that? Not me.

 

[substitute]

*speaks to poking stick: haha, well done, my friend*

Nice edit. But of course you didn't say that. You're not an INTP

 

[ptgatsby]

*speaks to poking stick: haha, well done, my friend*

Bah, my preference is not meant for your poking pleasure. (But, please, if you are going to do it, keep doing it to Jack )


Really, I'm still stuck on how creative/imaginative/abstract Ns are (just ask them ) combines with "most objective", even logically. It seems to follow that if you want fact based, unbiased conclusions... you don't go to the poofy thinkers

(All due respect to you poofy thinkers, of course.)

 

[Metamorphosis]

Definitions of objective used are:

-not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion

-expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

By this...I would probably say that I'm never objective. To be honest, I find it hard to believe that anyone is even capable of being objective.

When we say that we use logic what we really mean is this:
Step 1: create conclusion based on mystical abstract thinking that we don't understand
Step 2: find logic to support it
Step 3: if unable to find logic return to step 1

 

[substitute]

Well, quite, PT. You go to the Dickensian Gradgrinds

 

[Jack Flak]

Really, I'm still stuck on how creative/imaginative/abstract Ns are (just ask them ) combines with "most objective", even logically. It seems to follow that if you want fact based, unbiased conclusions... you don't go to the poofy thinkers

True. Don't come to me for primarily fact based conclusions. I draw my data from the Ether and pound it in to shape with the mighty sledgehammer of Thinking.

 

[ptgatsby]

True. Don't come to me for primarily fact based conclusions. I draw my data from the Ether and pound it in to shape with the mighty sledgehammer of Thinking.

Yah, that's what I figured.

So, the real question is - who is the least floofy of all NTs.

And man, is that going to keep me up at night

 

[Jack Flak]

So, the real question is - who is the least floofy of all NTs.

That could be a fun thread on its own accord, couldn't it. I recommend starting it.