[NT] NT Objectivity Scale

[Maverick]

If we consider that in principle:

a) Dominant thinkers repress their feeling function stronger than dominant intuitives.

b) Extraverts are concerned with the outer (objective) world and introverts are concerned with the inner (subjective) world.

Theoretically, it would be the ENTJ that is the most objective, having as dominant function Extraverted Thinking.

However, in order to properly answer this question we should measure people's personality type along with their objectivity and determine if there is a relationship between the two.

 

[Jack Flak]

If we consider that:

a) Dominant thinkers repress their feeling function stronger than dominant intuitives.

b) Extraverts are concerned with the outer (objective) world and introverts are concerned with the inner (subjective) world.

I would say ENTJ.

You're the 2nd ENTJ in this thread to come up with a function theory as to why ENTJs are the most objective. In practice, it is obvious they are not very objective on average. This demonstrates the malleability and uselessness of function theory, and recursively the unobjectivity of ENTJs.

Would you feel better if I started a thread naming all the things ENTJs do better than INTPs? Because these things exist.

 

[Xander]

Don't agree. This only applies in personal matters - at which we tend to suck. If you are talking pure theoretical objective thought, we are unsurpassed.

Purely theoretical stuff IS what matters though. Just try to refute an INTPs thinking after they've carefully constructed it...

The best one is to ignore their thoughts and carry on anyway... this usually shows a little more emotion


Oh and as for ENTJs, if they aren't objective then neither are INTPs. The two are too close to be separated without extremely fine distinctions. Sure they act differently but the actual format of the thinking which takes place is frighteningly similar.

I would imagine that the most objective group would be a group of NTs but then you'd have to remove their humanity, which kinda removes the point.

I offer up INTPc itself as proof of the sheer lack of objectivity which can pervade a group of NTs.

Oh and wouldn't you say that there's a strong link between intelligence and capacity for objectivity? Can intelligence be linked to type? I doubt any strong correlation can be established.

As a parting thought, try talking to an ENFP as they go through a thought process objectively. They are quite capable, depending upon the individual, they just choose to ignore it at points and pay more attention to what they feel.

 

[ptgatsby]

It is true, on its own terms. Lack of concern for reality itself is a plus for objectivity.

I would seem like it would be counterproductive to... you know... fact based reasoning...

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

 

[Maverick]

You're the 2nd ENTJ in this thread to come up with a function theory as to why ENTJs are the most objective. In practice, it is obvious they are not very objective on average. This demonstrates the malleability and uselessness of function theory, and recursively the unobjectivity of ENTJs.

Would you feel better if I started a thread naming all the things ENTJs do better than INTPs? Because these things exist.

"In practice [...]" is not evidence for your statement.

Your last sentence is irrelevant to the content of my post and is of a subjective and relational nature.

You have shown twice in the same post that your thinking is subjective.

 

[Jack Flak]

Xander: Conviction can result from objectivity as easily as with subjectivity. It is the method for achieving such conviction which is a matter of discussion.

 

[Jack Flak]

"In practice [...]" is not evidence for your statement.

Your last sentence is irrelevant to the content of my post and is of a subjective and relational nature.

You have shown twice in the same post that your thinking is subjective.

I wasn't providing evidence, and I knew that. If you view the thread, you'll see I've made very little effort to provide evidence of any kind. I am sharing my observations, and you can take them or leave them.

My last sentence was an objective attempt to cater to your subjectivity.

 

[Xander]

Xander: Conviction can result from objectivity as easily as with subjectivity. It is the method for achieving such conviction which is a matter of discussion.

Semantics will now ensue

Conviction is emotional. Conclusion is objective.

If INTPs are the most objective of types then why can they not achieve the simplest of things without recourse to redundant thinking and posturing. It has been my experience that an INTP will try to reinvent the wheel before he or she will accept that it is a valid solution. Such is based in subjectivity as is the whole problem with authority. INTPs like to validate data for themselves but in doing so they are inferring themselves as an authority, which is entirely subjective.

Note I do not argue that under certain parameters which you have stated or inferred that INTPs are very objective. What I do question is the foundation for these parameters.

 

[Salomé]

If we consider that in principle:

b) Extraverts are concerned with the outer (objective) world and introverts are concerned with the inner (subjective) world.

You are doing this:

+1
Objectivity has a number of different meanings which are often confused.

In this context, it isn't about preoccupation with object vs subject, which are Extravert/Introvert libido issues. It is about impersonality.

Don't.

 

[Salomé]

If INTPs are the most objective of types then why can they not achieve the simplest of things without recourse to redundant thinking and posturing. It has been my experience that an INTP will try to reinvent the wheel before he or she will accept that it is a valid solution.

Thinking is NEVER redundant.
Posturing is optional.

I see this as an attempt to be truly objective - i.e. thinking your way all around an issue, coming at it from different sides (forgive the redundancy). The problem is that some problems can't be solved in this way, and that's when our noodles get caboodled.

 

[Jack Flak]

Semantics will now ensue

Conviction is emotional. Conclusion is objective.

If INTPs are the most objective of types then why can they not achieve the simplest of things without recourse to redundant thinking and posturing. It has been my experience that an INTP will try to reinvent the wheel before he or she will accept that it is a valid solution. Such is based in subjectivity as is the whole problem with authority. INTPs like to validate data for themselves but in doing so they are inferring themselves as an authority, which is entirely subjective.

Note I do not argue that under certain parameters which you have stated or inferred that INTPs are very objective. What I do question is the foundation for these parameters.

To say anyone is 100% objective is false. The question is degree, and the answer is in the OP.

While trimming my nails, I've come up with a tentative representation of the thought process behind my conclusion.

Type/Area of Most Experience On Average

INTP/Analysis
ENTP/Object Manipulation
INTJ/Self Advancement
ENTJ/Human Manipulation

 

[Salomé]

To say anyone is 100% objective is false. The question is degree, and the answer is in the OP.

While trimming my nails, I've come up with a tentative representation of the thought process behind my conclusion.

Type/Area of Most Experience On Average

INTP/Analysis
ENTP/Object Manipulation
INTJ/Self Advancement
ENTJ/Human Manipulation

Ooooh! Jack's losing his objectivity.

 

[Jack Flak]

Ooooh! Jack's losing his objectivity.

I never had any to begin with. I was merely discussing the archetypical members of type, which I am not one of...But wait, this makes me extremely objective...It's a logical nightmare.

 

[Jack Flak]

ENTJ: System Manipulation (Goals, Policies, Rules, Criteria, etc.)

I would agree to that except how would you then define the ENTP activity, because it could be called the same (System Manip.).

 

[Salomé]

...It's a logical nightmare.

welcome to my world

 

[INTJMom]

...
Type/Area of Most Experience On Average

INTJ/Self Advancement

Since I am an INTJ, I would like to understand what you mean by "Self Advancement".
Would you - or someone - please explain it to me?
I couldn't make out the meaning just from the context.
(The reason I ask is because it sounds like "self-promotion" which INTJs are stereotypically bad at.)

 

[Jack Flak]

It means such as choosing a career or area of interest and concerning oneself with excellence in it, and specifically being better than others.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is the perfect example. In the film Pumping Iron, in 1977, while he was generally considered the best bodybuilder of all time, he discussed possibly getting majorly into the movie business in Hollywood, then someday moving on to politics. He did exactly that.

 

[Lateralus]

It is about personality.

If it's all about personality, or lack thereof, then INTPs win going away.

 

[Salomé]

If it's all about personality, or lack thereof, then INTPs win going away.

Touche!

 

[INTJMom]

It means such as choosing a career or area of interest and concerning oneself with excellence in it, and specifically being better than others.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is the perfect example. In the film Pumping Iron, in 1977, while he was generally considered the best bodybuilder of all time, he discussed possibly getting majorly into the movie business in Hollywood, then someday moving on to politics. He did exactly that.

Ok. I guess I can agree with that since I am loath to do something if I'm going to be incompetent at it.