• 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.

[NT] NT Objectivity Scale

Night

Boring old fossil
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
4,755
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5/8
Yah, that's what I figured.

So, the real question is - who is the least floofy of all NTs.

And man, is that going to keep me up at night :eek:

;)

Does sound like a thread that might ruffle some feathers...
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Nah, it's obvious. Least floofy would be ENTJ. In fact, the scale in the OP in reverse.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
Maybe not. Everyone would have to hassle you on the definition of floofy first. :D

Oh, well... that's easy. Floofy = degree of N-ness.

The more N you are, the less objective you are, of course.

:D :D

:smile:
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Cool. I have always wanted to be floofy. Wait, what does floofy mean?

I'm not sure. I was guessing it using my intuition. Let's see if it turns out to have drawn a valid conclusion... :laugh:

Ah PT, you're a card. On a roll today, I see. *slap* :cheese:
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Sorry, I didn't quite catch that. The jarring, screeching noise of your N-grinding axe distracted me ;)

Tsk. Nothing worse than a convert, is there? :rolleyes:
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Oh, well... that's easy. Floofy = degree of N-ness.

The more N you are, the less objective you are, of course.

:D :D

:smile:
Actually, floofiness and objectivity aren't mutually exclusive. Objectivity is relatively irrelevant in isolating sensing and intuition. We see differently, but may handle what we see with equal deference.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Actually, floofiness and objectivity aren't mutually exclusive. Objectivity is relatively irrelevant in isolating sensing and intuition. We see differently, but may handle what we see with equal deference.

Ah. This is where it all started to go downhill in the other thread. Cos see, PT argues that the way N's see is inherently subjective; that Se 'seeing' is the only method of perception that's validly objective. And you can imagine how N's took to that.

*hides under table*
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Ah. This is where it all started to go downhill in the other thread. Cos see, PT argues that the way N's see is inherently subjective; that Se 'seeing' is the only method of perception that's validly objective. And you can imagine how N's took to that.

*hides under table*
Naturally. PT is simply incorrect.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
Ah. This is where it all started to go downhill in the other thread. Cos see, PT argues that the way N's see is inherently subjective; that Se 'seeing' is the only method of perception that's validly objective. And you can imagine how N's took to that.

*hides under table*

I was overstating the whole thing because of the attitude in the thread.

The reality is that "objective" fact based decision making is learnt. NTs will worship objectivity, yes, but that's entirely different than actually being objective.

No one is objective because of personality type. It's simply not a factor. Some correlation, perhaps, but weak - very weak - at best. One learns to be guided by certain principles, or not... learns to identify when concepts are thought first, then justified (INTPs are prone to using this as their "i'm objective" defense). Others learn to block out contrary data (TJs, I'm looking at you), or reframe it (NPs I'm looking at you.) Others will actively disregard new information (Ss, I'm looking at you) or close minds to alternative explanations (SJs, I'm looking at you).



Actually, floofiness and objectivity aren't mutually exclusive. Objectivity is relatively irrelevant in isolating sensing and intuition. We see differently, but may handle what we see with equal deference.

Naturally. PT is simply incorrect.

Well, I defined it that way, so meh to you. Floofy = N. And Floofy = not objective. Therefore, N = not objective.

Hah! (In all seriousness, I still haven't heard, from anyone, how to determine and test what makes one objective :D)

Sorry, I didn't quite catch that. The jarring, screeching noise of your N-grinding axe distracted me ;)

Tsk. Nothing worse than a convert, is there? :rolleyes:

Pshh, nothing to do with it. The axe is just for taking certain types down a notch.

A notch, a head, a foot. Whatever measurement is needed. :hug:
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Well, I defined it that way, so meh to you. Floofy = N. And Floofy = not objective. Therefore, N = not objective.

Hah! (In all seriousness, I still haven't heard, from anyone, how to determine and test what makes one objective :D)
Did you say test? No, that won't work. Part of the whole N thing, for me at least, is truly knowing something without being able to explain it. I know what objectivity is. If you don't, oh well, sorry, can't help you, kid! ;)
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Well, I've got a brand new bag, man. I'm no longer a worshipper in the cult of objectivity.

I've actually found that subjectivity is where it's at. No, don't come after me with anti-F pitchforks yet - let me explain!

See, if I can listen to and really understand someone else's subjective perceptions and opinions, then I'll have a more objective idea of who they are, what they're all about, and what their actions and words are aimed at achieving. This is a more accurate way of predicting behaviour than using my own objective observations of their behaviour and comparing them to what i consider 'facts'. If I can understand general trends of subjective workings in various strata of society, I can more accurately understand and predict how those things will interact with each other.

I can also control them more easily. As long as I'm aware of my own subjective workings, and not in denial of them; I can control those better too, that way.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Well, I've got a brand new bag, man. I'm no longer a worshipper in the cult of objectivity.

I've actually found that subjectivity is where it's at. No, don't come after me with anti-F pitchforks yet - let me explain!
Pff, typical ENTP bull. lol j/k.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,988
Definitions of objective used are:

-not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion

-expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

I'll summarize that definition as lack of bias.

What is the proposed measuring mechanism of bias?
  1. (Number of things said that are provably true)/(Number of things said)
  2. (Number of things believed that are provably true)/(Number of things belived)
  3. (Number of things entertained that are provably true)/(Number of things entertained)
  4. something else.

EDIT: I can be humorous, I swear.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
I'll summarize that definition as lack of bias.

What is the proposed measuring mechanism of bias?

[*](Number of things entertained that are provably true)/(Number of things entertained)

Oh Oh! Can we use this one? Please? :cheese:
 
Top