• 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.

Evolution of typology

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
The problem is that your premise is lacking in evidence and is a distortion of reality..
This needs further argument.

Who is to say whether there were or weren't just as many INTPs in early human ancestry

Study your history. Those men had a much higher propensity for action than contemplation, former came to them more naturally than the latter. Inner lives of INTPs would not manifest in this fashion as easily.

as there are now (proportionately of course), and over time the ESFJ becoming more advanced in their "passionate" function as the INTP becoming more advanced in their "intellectual" function, what I mean by this is that you could say that the ESFJ's emotionsc

Of course they are getting more advanced, as now instead of climbing trees they are working technology. Obviously were pressured to become more intellectual.

The way you are coming off, atleast to me, is that humans are evolving out of the "passionate" into the "intellectual", that the current environment is more well suited for the "intellectual". And again you are assuming that being "Passionate"
The current environment is not yet suited more for the intellectual than the passionate, but it is slowly getting there.

or "Intellectual" has genetics behind it without ever proving it in your arguement.

Yeah thats right, you're made into an intellectual mostly, not born into one, but all in all, at birth, everyone has an equal chance of becoming a genius!


I have information contrary to your belief. I am INTP, my little brother is ESFJ, exact opposites. My parents are ESTJ. How did that happen?.
Pure anecdote.

A recessive INTP gene in both of them? lol. Also you're missing the point that the "passionate" types do jobs that the "intellectuals" do not care for, and vice-versa. So we both depend on each other for society's survival.




I do not hold such an optimistic view of our progression. To predict humans remaining on Earth in 1,000 years is very "glass half-full". .

You're missing the point. In principle, if we had this much time, and we progressed in the same fashion this is about how much time it would take to make the world more favorable to the intellectual.


Your point about the machines doing the "passionate's" work holds some problems. It assumes that there will be no "passionates" in the far-future, which is undeterminable. And, if they are present in the future, what function would they perform in society if the robots were present? Also think over this: We HAVE the ability to replace people's jobs with robots, think of fast-food joints, etc, it just isn't a humane thing to do..

Relevance?







Thanks for the sarcastic insult to my vision at the end there but I'll get beyond that. Okay so basically I need to improve my reading skills? You say that I need to improve my Ne and Si, but I think they're doing just fine, that rant could have been easily shortened by telling me work on my reading skills...

You're making comments irrelevant to the text you're responding to. Shows your information isn't being collected properly. Mostly Ne and Si are responsible for this.



I, for one, am very young (16) and usually don't have much trouble writing down my abstract ideas, the way I know how is by using alot of Voice and trying to literally write down my thoughts which is often bad for the reader because of lack of transitions but I'll improve eventually. Contrary to your accusations, I know that I'm good at reading Abstract ideas when they are written down, I just interpret them more abstractly than presented which often confuses people. You can see by my writing style that I'm not a concrete writer, nor am I a concrete reader because I will go off on tangents on things that I interpret differently than others. Now, Why am I talking about myself? Well because that last chunk of yours was addressing my cognitive ability so I'm defending myself, just clearing that up for ya if I transitioned too fast (screw separating things into paragraphs). If this was too chaotic to comprehend then just remember this: Before posting a possibly controversial idea, second-guess your own argument for flaws (which yours have, part of being an INTP is being unsure of what you believe and checking your own logic), if you cannot find any on your own, write your argument in the way that you Intend for it to be interpreted, meaning that you should clear up any misunderstandings that could be made before the misunderstandings are actually made. And remember, even though us INTPs don't usually care if we hurt the feelings of others, there are lots of F's on this forum and think about the effect your thread may have in them viewing you in the future, you may be injuring your own reputation....

Ah okay!



The enthusiasm is appreciated but I'm always skeptical of it because enthusiasm from an INTP usually comes with the strong scent of sarcasm, which I've thoroughly detected. ;) Trust me, I could have responded much more nastily to the connotation of your writing as you neared the end of the post, but I intend to gain your respect not your disrespect even though what you have written to me did not come off as respectful. Ad homineum and Appeal to Ridicule are often easy excuses to not refute what your opponent wrote, even if I misinterpreted what you tried to portray, what I wrote was still relevent.

Edit: Forgot to mention that your separation of humans into "intellectual" and "passionate" is a false dichotomy.

No dichotomy, only continuum with one end as passionate and other as intellectual.
 

Wolf

only bites when provoked
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,127
MBTI Type
INTJ
We're overpopulated by about 6.6 billion people. Breeders are a severe problem at this point.
 

Didums

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
680
I'll respond once you're done editing that post BW, its a little sloppy :) (you're missing quote wraps and responses to the quotes that weren't wrapped.)
 

sassafrassquatch

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
961
Where did I say evolution was going somewhere? Fish in a cave without light will likely be blinded because they need no sight. Monkeys in an environment where climbing trees is no longer rewarded will likely loose the ability in time, and if swimming is rewarded instead, will gain that ability. And so on.

So if intelligence(abstract thought) will be rewarded, and survival will be contingent upon that factor, ESs will turn into INs. Where did I insinuate a pre-planned purpose?

I may have misunderstood you. Are you saying a) Individuals who are ES will turn into INs, b) People are born with their type and that due to the menial "brawn jobs" being handed over to robots births of ESs will drop and births of INs, who are better suited to "brain jobs" will increase? c) Having lost their jobs ESs die out leaving the earth to the INs?
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
I may have misunderstood you. Are you saying a) Individuals who are ES will turn into INs, b) People are born with their type and that due to the menial "brawn jobs" being handed over to robots births of ESs will drop and births of INs, who are better suited to "brain jobs" will increase? c) Having lost their jobs ESs die out leaving the earth to the INs?

Well, I guess if we take that type (or at least some parts of it) is not inherent, the environment could become more conductive to creating IN types -- and thus, there would be more of them. Not so much evolution of people but rather people adjusting to their environment.

For example... if we take that only the dominant function is inherent to individuals, and the environment was most conductive to 'IN' individuals, we'd end up with a lot more INPs as compared to ISPs, and ENJs as compared to ESJs, but the numbers of ISJs, INJs, ESPs, and ENPs would remain the same, because the dominant function would not be able to be changed (because it wouldn't affect the dominant perceiving individuals), and introversion versus extroversion would also be inherent. So, I guess there would be a shift towards IN types, but it would mostly come at the expense of ISP types, but otherwise, I guess there wouldn't be too many IN types as compared to the rest.
 

Didums

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
680
Not so much evolution of people but rather people adjusting to their environment.

It doesn't exactly work like that atleast in my view. Nature vs. Nurture, both have a hold over the other. Some people are born with the brain chemicals to be "intellectuals", some are born with the brain chemicals to be "passionates", most people lean either way and may turn or change into one or the other. I don't hold the idea that people are going to change into NTs because their environment makes them, our brains are very stubborn once fully developed.

From personal experience I think that what 'type' we become is very random, possibly determined by early childhood experience that is for the most part out of our control. I'm still trying to coax up an explanation for why my little brother and I are exact opposite types, were we raised differently? That doesn't make much sense because we have the same parents and parents are likely to bring up their children the same way.
 

Didums

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
680
For Bluewing's arguement to have merit it must be proven with empirical evidence that there is a link between cognitive processes (the whole "passionate" vs. "intellectual" thing in Bluewing's OP) with either genetics or the environment.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
It doesn't exactly work like that atleast in my view. Nature vs. Nurture, both have a hold over the other. Some people are born with the brain chemicals to be "intellectuals", some are born with the brain chemicals to be "passionates", most people lean either way and may turn or change into one or the other. I don't hold the idea that people are going to change into NTs because their environment makes them, our brains are very stubborn once fully developed.

I meant it more being a change over a long period of time -- say five hundred years, with technological advancements. There would still be plenty of "passionates" but it could be that offspring, because of the environment, become nerdier and nerdier (IN) with each following generation.

Then again, with each generation, what is desirable changes. It may not be that there would more IN types but rather that more people would be trying to fake it.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
However, the idea that ESs would be less suited to a technologically-driven world may be entirely bunk. I know some ESs who are more computer-savvy than I am -- it's just that most of their savviness has to do with communications and games rather than programming or whatever.
 

Didums

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
680
However, the idea that ESs would be less suited to a technologically-driven world may be entirely bunk. I know some ESs who are more computer-savvy than I am -- it's just that most of their savviness has to do with communications and games rather than programming or whatever.

Yeap, I think the whole thing comes down to the statement I made above ^^^.
 

sassafrassquatch

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
961
It's classifying ESTJs, ESFJs, ESTPs and ESFPs as the Gammas and Deltas and INTPS as the Alphas in his brave new world that reeks of intellectualized bigotry. BlueWing sounds like those old racists going on about "the Negro", how they're inferior and unfit for all sorts of things. It's all a bunch of self serving bullshit designed to inflate his flaccid little ego.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Anyone who believes that ES types aren't able to grasp all the new technology very well has never been to a middle class American school.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
X_o

Can we please keep evolution in the scientific/actual/Darwinian sense out of this thread please.

It is hurting my Bio-logical eyes, mind and heart!!!

K

Thnx

-CC
 

Didums

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
680
X_o

Can we please keep evolution in the scientific/actual/Darwinian sense out of this thread please.

It is hurting my Bio-logical eyes, mind and heart!!!

K

Thnx

-CC


Sorry but it is necessary for this reason:

For Bluewing's arguement to have merit it must be proven with empirical evidence that there is a link between cognitive processes (the whole "passionate" vs. "intellectual" thing in Bluewing's OP) with either genetics or the environment.

That is my final stance on this until BW fixes his last post to me so that I can actually respond to it.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
X_o

Can we please keep evolution in the scientific/actual/Darwinian sense out of this thread please.

It is hurting my Bio-logical eyes, mind and heart!!!

K

Thnx

-CC

Not only is it in the first post, but it's in the title of the thread. Heh, that's why this whole thread is rediculous.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I may have misunderstood you. Are you saying a) Individuals who are ES will turn into INs, b) People are born with their type and that due to the menial "brawn jobs" being handed over to robots births of ESs will drop and births of INs, who are better suited to "brain jobs" will increase? c) Having lost their jobs ESs die out leaving the earth to the INs?

If for any reason ESs cannot cut it in this world anymore as ESs, they will either evolve into species that could cut it, or die out. So, if you cant cut it without being able to do a brain job, than you will either die out or become fit for such a job.

Just like if monkeys were forced to live in the swamp, they'd either learn to swim better or die out.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
It's classifying ESTJs, ESFJs, ESTPs and ESFPs as the Gammas and Deltas and INTPS as the Alphas in his brave new world that reeks of intellectualized bigotry. BlueWing sounds like those old racists going on about "the Negro", how they're inferior and unfit for all sorts of things. It's all a bunch of self serving bullshit designed to inflate his flaccid little ego.

Could be some good intellectual work ESs could do. But if for whatever reason they'd be forced to do theoretical physics (or anything of the like, perhaps theoretical work involving technology around that level), they'd have to change in order to become more naturally talented at such endeavors. If their survival was truly contingent upon this.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
For Bluewing's arguement to have merit it must be proven with empirical evidence that there is a link between cognitive processes (the whole "passionate" vs. "intellectual" thing in Bluewing's OP) with either genetics or the environment.

Likely further research in neuroscience shall confirm this. Though much could be said about the brain activity when we are in a passionate state (for instance, brain state after a very exciting event, or a deeply saddening), whereas we would not be able to think straight. This is a case where we are overwhelmed by emotions to an extreme degree. If there is a heavy load of emotions present in our psyche (need not even be this heavy), it'd be a hindrance to thinking clearly. This, has more than likely been proven, and even if it hasnt been, its as close to a truism as it gets. Don't believe me, try solving astrophysics problems right after being shot, or sky diving. And so on.
 
Top