• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

INTPs - why do they love fancy-shmancy snooty debates?

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's because we are more interesed in the discussion itself rather than what is being discussed. HOW we discuss things -- framework and underlying foundation -- is more important than content [...]

I've always associated this with INTs - especially INTPs - and can't help to find it meaningless and boring, the very least. Nitpicking kills creativity and constructivity. Debating with the risk of a possible logical fallacy is more worth it than tearing every syllable apart until the goal is lost. Eventually, it all comes down to a handful of nerds mental-masturbating in which nobody's interested in.

You either get the "underlying foundation" or you don't get it. I honestly doubt that such mind games ever get you closer to what you're trying to find out. Well, not with an average mind - I'm not talking about your typical Ti-dom genius.
 

kendoiwan

I am Sofa King!!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,334
MBTI Type
IsTP
Appeal to ridicule, bare assertion, false dilemma.
 

InsatiableCuriosity

New member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
698
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
I've always associated this with INTs - especially INTPs - and can't help to find it meaningless and boring, the very least.

I don't understand the question??? Or many of the answers???? Why does it matter to anyone what INTPs do to get their rocks off?? No-one else has to like it!! If they are enjoying themselves - let them be. If you are not an INTP and are in a discussion where this happens and it annoys you, make a simple statement and choose not to respond or participate.

If I don't like something then I don't watch it, observe it, or participate in it, and if I don't think it worth my energy, or it doesn't matter to me I won't comment on it - end of story.
 

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If I don't think it worth my energy, or it doesn't matter to me I won't comment on it - end of story.

So why does it matter to you that it matters to me what the INTPs do? :popc1:

(seriously, I've expected something more than a fifth grade explanation of "don't like it, don't eat it!")
 

InsatiableCuriosity

New member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
698
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
So why does it matter to you that it matters to me what the INTPs do? :popc1:

(seriously, I've expected something more than a fifth grade explanation of "don't like it, don't eat it!")

A fifth grader in their simple observations can be a lot wiser than many beyond high school age :jew:

I am just curious as to why it worries you so much what others do when you don't have to participate??
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
So why does it matter to you that it matters to me what the INTPs do? :popc1:

(seriously, I've expected something more serious than a fifth grade explanation of "don't like it, don't eat it!")

The behaviour you identified is annoying, but most INTP's don't do that. In my experience anyway, it's more likely that someone identifying as INTJ will do that kind of thing rather than an INTP. I have experience of people ocming into threads to argue against me with that kind of approach, and more often than not they have listed as INTJ. Likewise, it's much more prominent behaviour on INTJForum than INTPCentral.

Of course you'll just say "those people aren't INTJ's". Maybe you're right, maybe not.

In any case though, I don't see any support for the claim that most INTP's behave that way. Those that do, I am equally as unimpressed as you by.
 

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I am just curious as to why it worries you so much what others do when you don't have to participate??

Why would it worry me? I sometimes find it hard to skip 20 pages of random people running after their tale, but its more annoying than worrisome.
A topic has been opened, an INTP added her own insights, I've noticed a pattern before, and now I've shared it with you. "End of story".

In any case though, I don't see any support for the claim that most INTP's behave that way.

Neither do I.
Though most of the times I've seen this trend, there was an INTP or an INTJ involved, with the former being more common ime.
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
A fifth grader in their simple observations can be a lot wiser than many beyond high school age :jew:

I am just curious as to why it worries you so much what others do when you don't have to participate??

The trouble for me is that such people usually jump into a thread with something along the lines of "OMG a logical fallacy, you appealed to majority sentiment/historical precedent/etc.! you must be an ESFJ not an NT!"

When a whole forum runs along those lines, it becomes a shame, because a promising concept (an INTP/INTJ forum) becomes overtaken by the most exaggerated and unhealthy elements of a type, dictating a form of perverse "pure logic" which runs in the face of any realistic or creative thinking. (one of the reasons I post on Typology Central instead).

So I think Litvyak has a point here actually.

Of course this is not to criticize people who are interested that a debate should be logical or who call logical fallacies now and again when it's necessarry to do so. Rather extreme cases who think that the abstract logic is superior to the real issues being discussed (or who repress their Fi/Fe to the extent that they lie to themselves that emotionally-driven opinions are purely logical and objective).
 

kendoiwan

I am Sofa King!!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,334
MBTI Type
IsTP
The trouble for me is that such people usually jump into a thread with something along the lines of "OMG a logical fallacy, you appealed to majority sentiment/historical precedent/etc.! you must be an ESFJ not an NT!"

When a whole forum runs along those lines, it becomes a shame, because a promising concept (an INTP/INTJ forum) becomes overtaken by the most exaggerated and unhealthy elements of a type, dictating a form of perverse "pure logic" which runs in the face of any realistic or creative thinking. (one of the reasons I post on Typology Central instead).

So I think Litvyak has a point here actually.

Of course this is not to criticize people who are interested that a debate should be logical or who call logical fallacies now and again when it's necessarry to do so. Rather extreme cases who think that the abstract logic is superior to the real issues being discussed (or who repress their Fi/Fe to the extent that they lie to themselves that emotionally-driven opinions are purely logical and objective).

I've spent/spend so much time on IC that I can spot a fallacy from a mile away. Which I must grudgingly admit, I'm pretty grateful for. Also, I can spot when it's being done in good faith, and when someone is trying to pull a fast one. Which dictates how I respond to it. If someone is making an honest mistake then I will take the time to engage them, but if someone is simply "trying to be right by whatever means" I don't see the point in that dialog. Calling bullshit by listing the fallacy/fallacies in question is good enough for me.
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
I've spent/spend so much time on IC that I can spot a fallacy from a mile away. Which I must grudgingly admit, I'm pretty grateful for. Also, I can spot when it's being done in good faith, and when someone is trying to pull a fast one. Which dictates how I respond to it. If someone is making an honest mistake then I will take the time to engage them, but if someone is simply "trying to be right by whatever means" I don't see the point in that dialog. Calling bullshit by listing the fallacy/fallacies in question is good enough for me.

I don't mind it if it's correctly applied. There are times when it's correct to call a fallacy, but on some levels of reasoning "formal logic" simply falls down. For example in mathematics we can prove that at some times a = -a. That flies in the face of formal logic. Or we can show that a "vacuum" is not empty, but a process by which particles and anti-particles negate each other. Or that the angles of a triangle don't necessarilly add up to 180 degress on a large enough scale.

So in some cases these things have their place, but a genuine historical/poltiical discussion can't be policed take place entirely within the bounds of "formal logic". At least in my opinion.
 

kendoiwan

I am Sofa King!!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,334
MBTI Type
IsTP
I don't mind it if it's correctly applied. There are times when it's correct to call a fallacy, but on some levels of reasoning "formal logic" simply falls down. For example in mathematics we can prove that at some times a = -a. That flies in the face of formal logic. Or we can show that a "vacuum" is not empty, but a process by which particles and anti-particles negate each other. Or that the angles of a triangle don't necessarily add up to 180 degress on a large enough scale.

So in some cases these things have their place, but a genuine historical/political discussion can't be policed take place entirely within the bounds of "formal logic". At least in my opinion.

See I could go into great detail about why that's not true or I can just say that's a propositional fallacy.

While in this particular case I don't believe you are trying to pull a fast one, it's just simpler to say that's a propositional fallacy than going into the "that's not true because..."
 

mrcockburn

Aquaria
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
1,896
MBTI Type
¥¤
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Judging by this site, there are 42 fallacies.

Fallacies

I guess it's not as vast or complicated as I thought. I assumed you guys were all philosophy PHDs or law students. :D

You just don't learn this stuff in Accounting. But even so, I still stand by my observation that INTPs seem to favor the logic of their opponent's reasoning instead of the general idea at hand.
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
See I could go into great detail about why that's not true or I can just say that's a propositional fallacy.

While in this particular case I don't believe you are trying to pull a fast one, it's just simpler to say that's a propositional fallacy than going into the "that's not true because..."

I don't see why it's a propositional fallacy (I just looked the term up). I didn't say formal logic is never true, I said it's sometimes untrue, i.e. it can't encompass all of reality, so you can't have an effective debate about "reality" (which is what politics and history discussions should seek to get to the heart of) purely on those grounds.
 

kendoiwan

I am Sofa King!!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,334
MBTI Type
IsTP
I don't see why it's a propositional fallacy (I just looked the term up). I didn't say formal logic is never true, I said it's sometimes untrue, i.e. it can't encompass all of reality, so you can't have an effective debate about "reality" (which is what politics and history discussions should seek to get to the heart of) on those grounds.

It's arguably untrue under a very exact circumstance (Math) that doesn't include in the circumstance you named (History and Politics). Also I'm pretty sure that someone better versed in formal logic than I can explain how those exceptions you named aren't really exceptions.
 

tcda

psicobolche
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,292
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5
It's arguably untrue under a very exact circumstance (Math) that doesn't include in the circumstance you named (History and Politics). Also I'm pretty sure that someone better versed in formal logic than I can explain how those exceptions you named aren't really exceptions.

If it's untrue in Maths its untrue in advanced physics. Advanced physics states the laws that govern the universe. If the activity of the matter of the unvierse contradicts formal logic, that doesn't speak well of the ability of formal logic to explain social processes.

The reason I used mathematical and physical examples is because they are less likely to be questioned than historical/poltiical discussions.

In any case I should state an interest: I believe in dialectical materialism, that it is an advance on formal logic, and that it has been backed up by advances in physics and maths.

I recommend the book "the dialectical biologist" by Richard Levins and Richard Lewontin, if you are interested in these things. :)
 

kendoiwan

I am Sofa King!!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,334
MBTI Type
IsTP
Yes. I'm a marxist.

Well your Marxism aside, it has just been explained to me, as I suspected exactly why your examples don't hold up

When this is used as a counter-example against formal logic you can just stop reading for he has clearly no understanding of formal logic. The group Z_2 of elements {0,1} and operation * where a*b = a+b mod 2, is a system which is logically consistent and this guy is :censored:
 
Top