O
Oberon
Guest
I'm disappointed with my fellow ENTPs for not behaving true to type.
Who wants a beer?
Who wants a beer?
Oh jesus...What have you done to refute that?
How does commonality make it any stronger or better? If an ENTP breaks something down into the simplest parts and forms them into a logical framework, the INTP can do no better.
There IS such a thing as objective truth - a point at which no more information can be gathered, or deduced into a smaller system. I don't see how having a stronger preference for thinking makes the INTP any more capable of it. He might get there first, but that's equally as unlikely because the ENTP seeks information at a higher rate.
Objectivity is, in all fairness, the culmination of perception and logic.
Thank you. Good to see that someone else sees that taking in information doesn't taint objectivity and somehow make it personal. I don't think that makes us more objective necessarily. The fact that we take in more information only matters as long as we use our Ti to break it down and systemize it.
Disagree. Making inferences doesn't by any means count as a point towards bias. It only serves to give an idea as to what should be searched for. It helps for future perceiving.
Oh jesus...
For starters,
Check the rest of my post history in the thread.
You still dont understand. If I asked you what your intuitions are like, you'd have no way of knowing. Whatever you'd pass off as your answer would be the product of your Ti.
Yes I would.You still dont understand. If I asked you what your intuitions are like, you'd have no way of knowing.
Fair enough, but that still doesn't make the intuition any less objective.Whatever you'd pass off as your answer would be the product of your Ti.
Yes I would.
Fair enough, but that still doesn't make the intuition any less objective.
Back to square one. What do you understand for objectivity to be. We cant get anywhere until we settle this point.
I can describe my intuitions, and my Thinking isn't likely to be strong enough to impact my description, so what you're reading is from my Ni function. If Fe were part of it, it would likely be more focused on the underlying emotion.
I begin by interpreting symbols as ideas/concepts, and then looking at what the interrelationships of the ideas to other ideas are. I then select the one that it seems to have the "strongest" connection to, and look where it leads. If I want to be more certain, I carefully examine the interrelationships for "flaws" that could sever them, and then after I've severed the ones with flaws, I follow the strongest one that remains.
You may well need to use Ti to become conscious of your perceptions, but I believe a dominant Percieiving type such as an ENTP wouldn't necessarily, because their minds are structured differently.
Intuition is basically a non-substance. Converted into substance after conscious analysis. However objective you'd be will depend on how well you use your Ti. Since INTPs use Ti better, they'd edge ahead.
I understand objectivity to be what it is: Not holding personal opinion; being bound to the factual evidence, and gathering as much of it as is necessary to come to an argument which explains, logically why things are the way they are.
I could elaborate further, but I think if you've got any perceptive ability at all, you'll get it.
That's ridiculous. The Ti doesn't do anything without perception. If you Ti something to death, but have bad information, or not enough of it, you're not objective.
Still not clear enough. We cant depend on Intuition to establish our terms because they will be too ambiguous. And again, we will be using the same words to depict different, if not incompatible ideas.
Still not clear enough. We cant depend on Intuition to establish our terms because they will be too ambiguous. And again, we will be using the same words to depict different, if not incompatible ideas.
Ne is a perception. Unconscious by definition. That was my thesis. It goes all the way back to Jung, who acquired the notion from Schopenhauer. Who argued that the most congenial state of mind is that of unconscious perception without judgment.
Are you listening at all? Unconscious or not, it's part of the process wherein objectivity is 'acquired'
I did not say it was not part of the process.
As I see it, the ENTP is more actively searching for the truth in the name of objectivity where the INTP is more inclined for deciphering what little chunks of information that intuition brings in the name of objective reality.
The ENTP is by no means by definition less likely to be working its way towards logical discovery of truth, which is after all, the hallmark of being objective, is it not?
Is that a jest or a jab? Somehow I can't tell...
1. Define objective.
2. Agree on an acceptable test of objectivity.
3. Apply the test to several members of each type in question and compare results.
Also, don't forget that ISTP, just like INTP, has inferior Fe, which could compromise their objectivity as was mentioned earlier in the thread, thereby off-setting any 'advantage' that might be gained by Se, assuming there even is one. Not saying that Fe cannot be objective (I actually argued the opposite earlier), but that inferior versions of any function can and frequently do..
I've already pretty much decided that, if anything, and only going by the above criteria, ExTJ with balanced perceiving functions would be the 'most objective'.