[NT] Who are more "robotic": INTJs or INTPs?

[Riva]

but, if [MENTION=6164]Riva[/MENTION] didn't feel the need to go flashing his Fe rulebook all over the place

I wasn't shoving my rule book up your ass.

You called someone's opinion idiotic.

I pointed out that since you yourself made it an open ended OP (which you later changed) one had the right to come up with their own interpretation of what robotic meant.

And then Fluffy came and gave a good description of what robotic is.

Then you suddenly realized that your OP doesn't have to be open ended therefore changed the OP to fluffy's opinion of what robotic meant.

You didn't stop there. You continued to call people's opinions which didn't share Fluffy's point on view of what robotic was as idiotic. And by then you have claimed this to be your own point of view on what robotic was.

It's Ti not Fe.

Typical Zara.

 

[Fluffywolf]

To be fair though Riva, the fact you are still argueing, in spite of early agreement with the established definition of what robot-like means, is because of your Fe.

Whilest Zara is just being an INTJ responding to all posts in the thread he made to the best of his ability.

 

[Zarathustra]

Actually a spade is a collection of molecules (which are made up of atoms, which are made of electrons around a nucleus, which is essentially energy + space) which is arranged in a certain way and given a label by a being using language. In Spanish it's pala, and in Japanese it's スペード.

You know that question you've been struggling with for so long?

You're an INTP.

Zarathustra:
I have to agree with Riva...

I could not give a small-enough shit.

...your lack of clarity does not imply a flaw in the reader's reasoning.

Not to split hairs, but my perspective is very clear, so, if anything, it would not be my lack of clarity, it would be the OP's lack of clarity.

Second, I never said it was the lack of clarity in the OP that implied a flaw in the reader's reasoning.

I said the reasoning in a particular responder's post was poor.

Perhaps you should take the advice on this INTJ page into consideration:
http://www.personalitypage.com/INTJ.html
Particularly this:
"...It is not easy for the INTJ to express their internal images, insights, and abstractions. The internal form of the INTJ's thoughts and concepts is highly individualized, and is not readily translatable into a form that others will understand. However, the INTJ is driven to translate their ideas into a plan or system that is usually readily explainable, rather than to do a direct translation of their thoughts. They usually don't see the value of a direct transaction, and will also have difficulty expressing their ideas, which are non-linear. However, their extreme respect of knowledge and intelligence will motivate them to explain themselves to another person who they feel is deserving of the effort.

I have long been familiar with that profile.

It really doesn't apply here.

This is something altogether different.

I really have no difficulty expressing my opinions on this matter.

I left some openness to the thread intentionally and on purpose.

When something dumb was said, I called it out as such.

Then Riva felt the need to bust out his Fe rulebook.

He's tried this before, and, frankly, I don't care for it.

Just sayin.

As am I.

 

[Riva]

To be fair though Riva, the fact you are still argueing, in spite of early agreement with the established definition of what robot-like means, is because of your Fe.

I made my point. He continued to argue on it. I enjoying a good argument as always, carried on.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I made my point. He continued to argue on it. I enjoying a good argument as always, carried on.

Oh, I wasn't aware you thought of this as good discussion.

In that case carry on.

 

[Rasofy]

Pro Tip: ''Efficient'' and ''robotic'' are parameters that are not necessarily linked.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Pro Tip: ''Efficient'' and ''robotic'' are parameters that are not necessarily linked.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Riva]

Oh, I wasn't aware you thought of this as good discussion.

In that case carry on.

You wouldn't enjoy such a discussion especially which the conclusion is reached based on breaking things down to the core?????

You call yourself an INTP (or IXTP)? Shame on you!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[RaptorWizard]

I see perhaps I was wrong about ISTP being the most robotic type, because I am ISTP and this thread has me boiling in anger, and emotional reactions like that are for sentient creatures rather than robots.

 

[Zarathustra]

I wasn't shoving my rule book up your ass.

No, you were trying to.

I certainly won't be having that, though.

You called someone's opinion idiotic.

I pointed out that since you yourself made it an open ended OP (which you later changed) one had the right to come up with their own interpretation of what robotic meant.

And then Fluffy came and gave a good description of what robotic is.

Then you suddenly realized that your OP doesn't have to be open ended therefore changed the OP to fluffy's opinion of what robotic meant.

You didn't stop there. You continued to call people's opinions which didn't share Fluffy's point on view of what robotic was as idiotic. And by then you have claimed this to be your own point of view on what robotic was.

I'm not even gunna deal with the blatant misreadings evidenced in this post, as all you've done here is hamper potentially worthwhile discussion.

I left it open-ended intentionally, to spur discussion on what it means to be robotic. I know you have difficulty keeping up with some of the most obvious information on this forum, so I suppose I should not be surprised that you would not know that this is something I often do in threads I start. That I merely start a thread in a relatively open-ended manner does not require me to accept any and all definitions that are offered. If a definition is idiotic, then I can call it so. If a definition is brilliant and gets right to the core of an issue, I can say as much. These are the rules I play by. And your belief that I must accept all definitions proposed is your Fe rulebook. As you should realize by now, I don't care for it.

It's Ti not Fe.

Typical Zara.

No, it's subconscious Fe, and you just don't realize it.

Typical Riva.

 

[Fluffywolf]

You wouldn't enjoy such a discussion especially which the conclusion is reached based on breaking things down to the core?????

You call yourself an INTP (or IXTP)? Shame on you!!!!!!!!!!!

I wouldn't entertain a discussion based on some kind of mutual spite going on between two people, Which doesn't add to the actual thread subject at hand and as an indirect result causes other people to refrain from sharing their opinions out of fear being dragged in in whatever drama is going on between you and Zara. Opinions I would hear much rather than the ramblings between you and Zara over menial ethics.

 

[Riva]

If a definition is brilliant and gets right to the core of an issue, I can say as much.

And then you make this your idea and call every other idea than is not remotely connected to this idiotic?

I fail to see the logic behind it.

If a definition is idiotic, then I can call it so.

Like the KingKong of rationality.

No, it's subconscious Fe, and you just don't realize it.

It was probably my Fe that desired to continue the discussion. So I guess it is Fe.

I wouldn't entertain a discussion based on some kind of mutual spite going on between two people, Which doesn't add to the actual thread subject at hand and as an indirect result other people are refraining from sharing their opinion out of fear being dragged in in whatever drama is going on between you and Zara. Opinions I would hear much rather than the ramblings between you and Zara over menial ethics.

I wasn't expecting you to get what I was getting at. I was only taking my chance to say -

You call yourself an INTP!

when I replied to you.

---

Anyway you are indeed correct. We are not adding to the thread. I shall leave .

 

[Zarathustra]

I made my point. He continued to argue on it. I enjoying a good argument as always, carried on.

Oh, I wasn't aware you thought of this as good discussion.

He seems to have difficulty distinguishing his trolling from a good discussion.

In that case carry on.

No, please, do not encourage him.

I would much rather he stop.

Pro Tip: ''Efficient'' and ''robotic'' are parameters that are not necessarily linked.

Quoted for truth.

Hey, look, some people who get it.

I'm just gunna further emphasize here that this is why I said gmanyo's post was based on worthless and idiotic reasoning.

 

[Zarathustra]

And then you make this your idea and call every other idea than is not remotely connected to this idiotic?

I fail to see the logic behind it.

That you fail to see it, once again, is not my problem, it is yours.

Go back and read the thread, the claim in your first sentence is so inaccurate it's fucking absurd.

Plenty of people have had different positions than my own, and I have not come anywhere close to calling their positions idiotic.

And your repeated insinuation that I somehow "stole" fluffywolf's position is not only idiotic, but really quite weird.

Guess what, Riva: just because I didn't explicitly state my position in the OP doesn't mean I didn't have one.

 

[Zarathustra]

Now how about you get out of here [MENTION=6164]Riva[/MENTION], so a worthwhile discussion could actually occur.

 

[chickpea]

who would want an inefficient, slacker robot?

 

[RaptorWizard]

Listen to the ultimate robots of the cosmic future of the destiny of mankind, Darth Vader and C3PO rap! They are both ISTJ, so I now say ISTJ is the most robotic type!

 

[Riva]

Now how about you get out of here [MENTION=6164]Riva[/MENTION], so a worthwhile discussion could actually occur.

OkiDoki

 

[Zarathustra]

[MENTION=10757]Nicodemus[/MENTION]

Would you mind offering some insight on your vote?

 

[SoraMayhem]

Te to me is robotic, while Ti is more of a computer mainframe. Not sure I can explain the distinction very well.