[NT] NT Objectivity Scale

[INTJMom]

You INTPs are deceived.

 

[Xander]

You INTPs are deceived.

Debased akshually. I looked it up.

 

[Xander]

Minus a demerit? That's a plus right? Woot! 10 points for me.

Still locked in that "plus is positive" illusion eh?

 

[Salomé]

Well I'm glad we got that one sorted out, without resorting to stereotyping, name-calling, logical fallacies, hair-splitting, personal invective and the rest.

I can say with true objectivity - it's great to be an INTP

 

[Xander]

Well I'm glad we got that one sorted out, without resorting to stereotyping, name-calling, logical fallacies, hair-splitting, personal invective and the rest.

I can say with true objectivity - it's great to be an INTP

Err... juss one more thing ma'am...


how would you know?

 

[Salomé]

Err... juss one more thing ma'am...
how would you know?

say it ain't so.

 

[Jack Flak]

So, Xander, you would tell me that the average INTJ is less concerned with bettering his status in the world than detached analysis, and vice versa for the INTP?

Add: These objectives (lol) compete, as should be obvious, and the former wins out much more in the mind of the INTJ than the INTP, in my observations.

 

[Xander]

So, Xander, you would tell me that the average INTJ is less concerned with bettering his status in the world than detached analysis, and vice versa for the INTP?

Add: These objectives (lol) compete, as should be obvious, and the former wins out much more in the mind of the INTJ than the INTP, in my observations.

It has been my experience that an INTJ will be fully aware of what SHOULD be but also acutely aware of what IS. They do think about the former but they act upon the latter. To do otherwise would be impractical and ... well P ish.

Anyhow INTPs seem locked in their own struggle to be "right" most of the time and hence are about as lacking for a motivation behind their "objectivity" as an ENFP male teen volunteering to judge a lapdancing contest!!

It is, as with most things, a question more of perspective and subjective definitions than truth.

 

[Xander]

To my mind this is the best definition of objective I've seen yet
"objective truths are those which are discovered rather than created."

Based upon that alone I'd guess that those more externally focused would be more objective than those internally focused.

Also there is the question of which is better, is it better to wrap yourself in your own mind picking up subjectivity in definitions and other idiosyncrasies or is it better to wade into the full gamut of what other's think about it and hope to come out the other end with a balanced view of things?

 

[Salomé]

To my mind this is the best definition of objective I've seen yet
"objective truths are those which are discovered rather than created."

Based upon that alone I'd guess that those more externally focused would be more objective than those internally focused.

Also there is the question of which is better, is it better to wrap yourself in your own mind picking up subjectivity in definitions and other idiosyncrasies or is it better to wade into the full gamut of what other's think about it and hope to come out the other end with a balanced view of things?

That quote is meaningless.
One can't create objective truth, one can only discover it.
But one doesn't discover it by wading into the fray, one discovers it by calm, disinterested, usually solitary, reflection. If you examine the lives of most of the great discoverers of truth, you will find that they didn't go in much for wading.

 

[Xander]

That quote is meaningless.
One can't create objective truth, one can only discover it.

That's what it says!!

But one doesn't discover it by wading into the fray, one discovers it by calm, disinterested, usually solitary, reflection. If you examine the lives of most of the great discoverers of truth, you will find that they didn't go in much for wading.

Exactly why you err. All you discover is the reflection of that truth as locked within your mind. Without probing it's connections and seeing how far it's ripples travel you fail to see the wider picture and hence only end up with the dictionary definitions which without the thesaurus oft leave a person for want of a word.

 

[Salomé]

That's what it says!!

Exactly why you err. All you discover is the reflection of that truth as locked within your mind. Without probing it's connections and seeing how far it's ripples travel you fail to see the wider picture and hence only end up with the dictionary definitions which without the thesaurus oft leave a person for want of a word.

TBF, you could read it either way.

Why I err? Why I er.....I'm no Einstein (in case you hadn't noticed).
I'm not saying it stays locked in the mind, unexplored, unchallenged, unverified. I'm just saying it's born there (or first revealed there), not in the fray.

 

[booyalab]

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

Most Objective: INTP...ENTP...INTJ...ENTJ: Least Objective

I'm confident in this assertion as it pertains to "the typical bearer of type," though I'm sure someone disagrees. As to its importance...Advantage could be gained in dealing with people of these types by way of adjusting initial trust. One who isn't as concerned with self-advancement or control as one is with remaining objective is less likely to deceive.

I haven't known the typical INTP to ever deal with facts without interpreting them subjectively. The interpretation may not have anything to do with emotions, but that doesn't make it objective by default. INTPs are much less likely than, say, ENTJs to change their preconceived view if the facts contradict it. They're only objective if they haven't made up their mind yet.

 

[Salomé]

I haven't known the typical INTP to ever deal with facts without interpreting them subjectively. The interpretation may not have anything to do with emotions, but that doesn't make it objective by default.

All interpretation is subjective.

 

[booyalab]

All interpretation is subjective.

Agree to disagree. :rolli:

 

[booyalab]

Anyway, the simplistic way I'd define objectivity is through a balance of logical and factual. INTPs may be the most logical, but they're not the most factual.

 

[INTJMom]

Anyway, the simplistic way I'd define objectivity is through a balance of logical and factual. INTPs may be the most logical, but they're not the most factual.

So, to answer the OP, in which order would you rank NT objectivity?

 

[Jack Flak]

The argument has degenerated into disagreements over the timeline of decision making instead of the mindset notion I advanced some time ago. Do what you will, but you're hardly arguing against my position anymore.

From me, in the first stage of the debate:

See OP for the definitions. In my words, however: Being objective is making analyses, decisions, speaking and taking action with a big picture view in mind, as opposed to large concern for self interest.

 

[Salomé]

Anyway, the simplistic way I'd define objectivity is through a balance of logical and factual. INTPs may be the most logical, but they're not the most factual.

That's not a definition I recognise. If we can't even agree on what we are disagreeing about, what hope is there? We have to stick with a common definition, namely, that in the OP. That defines the scope of this discussion.

 

[booyalab]

So, to answer the OP, in which order would you rank NT objectivity?

Most Objective: booyalab...INTJMom...CaptainChick...Jack Flack: Least Objective