[NF] House, M.D.

[Sentura]

As an INTP, I know there are rarely black and white subjects, nearly everything is some shade of gray. Putting such gray subjects, lacking an exactitude or even "scientific merit", in such a state that every opinion is therefore valid, is an intellectually bankrupt method. If you truly believe that, there is no reason to write out an opinion, and we don't need to waste time reading it.

why are you still on this forum then? seriously.

 

[MacGuffin]

why are you still on this forum then? seriously.

Legit arguments.

 

[Sentura]

Legit arguments.

no argument is legit as long as it is associated with MBTI, because the MBTI is not legit.

if you really have a problem with people stating opinions as fact (although i don't believe i've done so), then i see no point in your participation in any trivial forum activity. hell, if you think so highly of your wasteless behavior, it would only make sense for me if you were attuned to exactly what you need in order to succeed in a noble goal, such as furthering the advancement of mankind. and if you were in such a position, then you wouldn't have time or need to be on this forum.

 

[MacGuffin]

no argument is legit as long as it is associated with MBTI, because the MBTI is not legit.

if you really have a problem with people stating opinions as fact (although i don't believe i've done so), then i see no point in your participation in any trivial forum activity. hell, if you think so highly of your wasteless behavior, it would only make sense for me if you were attuned to exactly what you need in order to succeed in a noble goal, such as furthering the advancement of mankind. and if you were in such a position, then you wouldn't have time or need to be on this forum.

Why are you here then?

 

[Sentura]

Why are you here then?

i don't mind wasting time.

(Sentura: 1, INTPs: 0)

 

[MacGuffin]

i don't mind wasting time.

So you are a troll?

Why should I just not ban you?

 

[Sentura]

So you are a troll?

Why should I just not ban you?

what exactly tells you i am a troll? what benefit would it be to be a troll on these forums? i see none.

i'm willing to bet you gain nothing from banning me either, but then again i am ignorant to whether admins have a hidden scoring system for people they've banned.

 

[BlackCat]

Lol I personally don't understand why people are on here if they don't think MBTI is legit. But whatever, free will.

 

[MacGuffin]

what exactly tells you i am a troll? what benefit would it be to be a troll on these forums? i see none.

i'm willing to bet you gain nothing from banning me either, but then again i am ignorant to whether admins have a hidden scoring system for people they've banned.

Do we? Maybe I should ask the other madmins...

Anyway, this is pretty trollish:

1) Offer an MBTI-based opinion
2) When called on it, promptly inform everyone MBTI is bullshit
3) ON AN MBTI FORUM

 

[Sentura]

Do we? Maybe I should ask the other madmins...

Anyway, this is pretty trollish:

1) Offer an MBTI-based opinion
2) When called on it, promptly inform everyone MBTI is bullshit
3) ON AN MBTI FORUM

last i checked this was typology central, not MBTI central?

i'm not saying MBTI is bullshit per se, but the amount of validity that it holds is limited because of the lack of verification. i don't consider it valid enough to make arguments about characters in TV drama or otherwise, because of said lack of validation. that doesn't automatically mean that i'm careless about the opinions others offer on any subject relating to MBTI. i just don't think everything here is a valid argument; and treating messages as opinions is much more manageable than otherwise. how is this not a valid opinion to have?

i consider this forum to be decent because it holds opinions of people who are obviously diverse points in life, country, culture and mentality. i don't consider it decent because it is based on whatever primary form of typology that may be used at a given time.

but then again who am i to say this? just a silly pleb trying to think outside the MBTI box?

 

[MacGuffin]

last i checked this was typology central, not MBTI central?

i'm not saying MBTI is bullshit per se, but the amount of validity that it holds is limited because of the lack of verification. i don't consider it valid enough to make arguments about characters in TV drama or otherwise, because of said lack of validation. that doesn't automatically mean that i'm careless about the opinions others offer on any subject relating to MBTI. i just don't everything here a valid argument. how is this not a valid opinion to have?

i consider this forum to be decent because it holds opinions of people who are obviously diverse points in life, country, culture and mentality. i don't consider it decent because it is based on whatever primary form of typology that may be used at a given time.

but then again who am i to say this? just a silly pleb trying to think outside the MBTI box?

Ergo, your opinion is worthless on this subject.

 

[Sentura]

Ergo, your opinion is worthless on this subject.

that is the individual's judgment to make.

 

[Orangey]

first off, MBTI does in no way hold scientific merit. any analysis on trying to type people is complete "bullshit", because it is based purely on subjective observance - an opinion. i don't need further claim than this, because that's how it is. you look through all these threads and you'll find people type other people (and themselves) differently.

i see no point in trying to make a standing argument in something as trivial as character analysis, both because there is no substantial proof and because i consider an argument to be something reserved for theories. you want to prove a certain character in a certain TV drama is of a certain MBTI type? prove the validity of the MBTI by finding a verifiable method of analysis, then. is this something you can understand?

Irrelevant. I couldn't care less about what types you have assigned to the House characters...we're arguing about a very specific claim that you made regarding type theory (which I've quoted and rephrased several times). Don't obfuscate the argument.

secondly, don't be idiots. nothing is idiotic, because the term "idiotic" is subjective too. you claim that my opinion is idiotic? how exactly is that of relevance to me? how does it further the discussion?

Blah blah...subjective...blah blah.

Edit: Okay I'll take the bait anyway. I've stated over and over again why I said that your opinion was idiotic. BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT SUBSTANTIATED YOUR CLAIM!!! How else can I get this through to you? Why do you think that NFs are more capable of empathy than SFs? Personal experience? Your feelings? Did you read it in an MBTI book or article? As you've aptly pointed out, it certainly isn't because it's scientific fact. What is it then?

i'm tired of seeing INXPs just spouting random judgments because something doesn't fit their absolute logic. is it really so hard to instead put out a counter opinion that could sway the other part? are you too lazy? is it too hard to find the words? why is this such a problem for people of these two types only?

Here, let me simplify the discussion for you:

You: NFs are more empathetic than SFs. (claim)
Me: No they're not. (counter-claim)
cont., Me: You have no evidence. (grounds for counter-claim)
You (now): Wah! Why don't you have a counter opinion? Wah! You called me an idiot!

Do you notice the dearth of grounds for your own claim? You have done nothing but assert an opinion and then whine when people challenge you to defend your position.

about the sensor "discrimination":

is it discriminating if one thinks that certain people are better at certain tasks? you seem to think there is some sort of absolute spectrum where people rank in. i don't believe there is a spectrum. people regardless of types still have areas of expertise, and i would be willing to bet that everyone in the entire world has at least 1 area of expertise. if i was an INXP, i would use the term "foolish" here to think that every person in the entire world acts the same, has equal knowledge of everything and has the willingness to pull things through. everyone is different, but just because they're different doesn't mean they're worse off.

Stating that SFs are categorically less capable of empathy than NFs when it isn't true promotes prejudice against sensors. It's like saying that women are less capable of intelligent thought than men. The prejudicial aspect of such statements comes from the fact that they are NOT TRUE. It is not discrimination to say that one group of people with X traits is naturally better at task R than another group of people lacking X traits IF IT IS TRUE. But the fact that such claims usually turn out to be false sends red-flags up every time I see statements of that form.

i'm not saying MBTI is bullshit per se, but the amount of validity that it holds is limited because of the lack of verification. i don't consider it valid enough to make arguments about characters in TV drama or otherwise, because of said lack of validation. that doesn't automatically mean that i'm careless about the opinions others offer on any subject relating to MBTI. i just don't think everything here is a valid argument; and treating messages as opinions is much more manageable than otherwise. how is this not a valid opinion to have?

i consider this forum to be decent because it holds opinions of people who are obviously diverse points in life, country, culture and mentality. i don't consider it decent because it is based on whatever primary form of typology that may be used at a given time.

Disregarding for the moment your flaccid (not to mention irrelevant) attempt to rhetorically position yourself as the subversive visionary amidst a mob of zealous MBTI disciples, I would like to inform you of something that every student learns in argument 101. It is as follows: having an opinion does not make one an idiot unless he/she has no good reasons to have said opinion. If you have nothing to defend your opinion, then you shouldn't have that opinion, much less throw it around on an anonymous internet forum.

 

[Sentura]

Irrelevant. I couldn't care less about what types you have assigned to the House characters...we're arguing about a very specific claim that you made regarding type theory (which I've quoted and rephrased several times). Don't obfuscate the argument.

i already stated that i don't consider my "argument" any more valid than an opinion. logically, i can't obfuscate anything that isn't there.

Edit: Okay I'll take the bait anyway. I've stated over and over again why I said that your opinion was idiotic. BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT SUBSTANTIATED YOUR CLAIM!!! How else can I get this through to you? Why do you think that NFs are more capable of empathy than SFs? Personal experience? Your feelings? Did you read it in an MBTI book or article? As you've aptly pointed out, it certainly isn't because it's scientific fact. What is it then?

are you kidding me? an opinion, unlike an argument, is not tied to reason.

Here, let me simplify the discussion for you:

You: NFs are more empathetic than SFs. (claim)
Me: No they're not. (counter-claim)
cont., Me: You have no evidence. (grounds for counter-claim)
You (now): Wah! Why don't you have a counter opinion? Wah! You called me an idiot!

thanks for being condescending, it generally helps your position in a discussion :rolli:. let me clarify what i meant, since you obviously misinterpreted it (i would expect no less from an INTP):

me: claim in an opinion.
you: proof please. oh wait you don't have any.
me: it's an opinion, it's a point of view, not an argument.
you: OMG GIVE ME PROOF YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ARGUMENT YADDA YADDA YADDA [discussion truncated]

the point is, it's just what i think. it's not an argument, i'm not trying to pull a theory out of my ass or anything of the like. it's my personal point of view, and you can take that or you can leave it. if you consider that idiotic, then i consider you an idiot for thinking exactly that. see what i mean?

Stating that SFs are categorically less capable of empathy than NFs when it isn't true promotes prejudice against sensors. It's like saying that women are less capable of intelligent thought than men. The prejudicial aspect of such statements comes from the fact that they are NOT TRUE. It is not discrimination to say that one group of people with X traits is naturally better at task R than another group of people lacking X traits IF IT IS TRUE. But the fact that such claims usually turn out to be false sends red-flags up every time I see statements of that form.

so what, you're going to prove to me that it is true that sensors are just as empathic as intuits? if i'm not mistaken, this is a claim in an argument. or if it isn't, it's an opinion and i'm not obligated to care about it.

Disregarding for the moment your flaccid (not to mention irrelevant) attempt to rhetorically position yourself as the subversive visionary amidst a mob of zealous MBTI disciples, I would like to inform you of something that every student learns in argument 101. It is as follows: having an opinion does not make one an idiot unless he/she has no good reasons to have said opinion. If you have nothing to defend your opinion, then you shouldn't have that opinion, much less throw it around on an anonymous internet forum.

heeeeeeeeeeeeere's logic. in no rulebook is it stated that you opinion has to be valid in any logic way in order for you to have it. i.e., there does not necessarily have to be a reason to have an opinion. this is the difference between an argument and an opinion; there is no validation required. whether you consider that opinion idiotic is irrelevant since it's completely subjective.

the reason i asked macguiffen in the first place about his presence in all of this was exactly because it didn't make sense for him to look for arguments in a thread about opinions. i could ask you the same thing.

now, are we done here?

 

[BlackCat]

now, are we done here?

Nah, this will go on forever then go to the graveyard. NTP arguments are hilarious to watch, since one person will skew the other's argument into something else, or find some hole in it the other didn't realize and then blow it up out of proportion. This will happen back and fourth over and over until one of them gets bored with it.

Neither of you are correct, since this is based entirely off of opinion. Whether one person's opinion makes more sense than the other is irrelevant, because nothing is going to change here. Even if someone's opinion isn't inaccurate... well... you're not gonna change it. Especially not an NTPs' opinion, since to them their logic is absolute until otherwise proven, and here we have a case of two people's logic being absolute to them and then arguing about it. Quite hilarious and entertaining.

It's also entertaining to watch people argue about the subject of arguing itself, and also arguing about how someone can hold an opinion. Sure I also believe that opinions need to be backed, but Sentura obviously doesn't, so it's futile to try to turn him. He may play the "faking it" card here and make you think you've won, or the other may, but in the end nothing will ever happen. lol

I mean really, no one is gonna change an ENTP's opinion... ever. There's no point in trying even if you're right.

But carry on.

 

[Sentura]

i just said that this entire thing was based on opinion and therefore useless to argue within.

 

[Phantonym]

And nobody cares about House and Wilson anymore. Real people are much more interesting than fictional characters on TV.

 

[BlackCat]

i just said that this entire thing was based on opinion and therefore useless to argue within.

Oh yes, I wasn't adding to that at all. Just making a detached observation.

 

[MacGuffin]

i just said that this entire thing was based on opinion and therefore useless to argue within.

I know! Your opinion was shit and we are all dumber for having read it. Why do you continue to draw attention to this?

 

[pippi]

an opinion, unlike an argument, is not tied to reason.

That is one of the funniest thing I've read in a while. Some guy confused time and gravity the other day when spouting off about quantum physics which was a hoot, but this is a close second. Entitled to my opinion fallacy.

me: claim in an opinion.
you: proof please. oh wait you don't have any.
me: it's an opinion, it's a point of view, not an argument.
you: OMG GIVE ME PROOF YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ARGUMENT YADDA YADDA YADDA [discussion truncated]

Burden of proof fallacy.


Both those sites I just linked have great examples of logical fallacies, I would recommend that you read them, although you don't seem to be lacking for examples of any of them.

Thanks for the laughs.