Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[Amargith]

Not sure if "authetincity" is the right term, but there certainly is a sense of superiority, yes. Speaking strictly for myself I would say that I respect and sometimes even envy Te as an awesome superpower but at the same time consider it somehow "profane" and "less pure" than Ti in that Ti is in a way occupied with something higher, timeless and more abstract while Te is all about what is actually going on in the (profane) world out there. Reality, meh!

See, sub Te for Fe and Ti for Fi and you've got my thoughts exactly

I use the term 'authenticity' because that is how it is described in the profiles as well. It's a 'being true to yourself' focus. Nothing superior about it, it just has its perks and drawbacks like any other focus. Tbh, I have the same reaction you do to 'authenticity' to the 'objective truth' that Ti worships so, as imho, objective truth seizes to exist once it is interpreted by a human mind

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Not sure if "authetincity" is the right term, but there certainly is a sense of superiority, yes. Speaking strictly for myself I would say that I respect and sometimes even envy Te as an awesome superpower but at the same time consider it somehow "profane" and "less pure" than Ti in that Ti is in a way occupied with something higher, timeless and more abstract while Te is all about what is actually going on in the (profane) world out there. Reality, meh!

Interesting. I actually find Ti extremely intimidating due to its natural hierarchy over Te in the realm of logical deduction (juxtaposing the natural orientation of induction through Te). Every time I look at one of Raptorwizard's mountains of Ti logic, I can't help but feel dwarfed in comparison intellectually.

 

[Red Herring]

See, sub Te for Fe and Ti for Fi and you've got my thoughts exactly

I use the term 'authenticity' because that is how it is described in the profiles as well. It's a 'being true to yourself' focus. Nothing superior about it, it just has its perks and drawbacks like any other focus. Tbh, I have the same reaction you do to 'authenticity' to the 'objective truth' that Ti worships so, as imho, objective truth seizes to exist once it is interpreted by a human mind

That is an interesting point that merits a thread of its own as I don't want to derail too much. How about "objective truth and function preference"?

 

[Red Herring]

Interesting. I actually find Ti extremely intimidating due to its natural hierarchy over Te in the realm of logical deduction (juxtaposing the natural orientation of induction through Te). Every time I look at one of Raptorwizard's mountains of Ti logic, I can't help but feel dwarfed in comparison intellectually.

1. You guys win in the real world, at least leave us the comfort of being kings and queens in the realm of logic! And well-functioning Ni can also be intimidating.
2. Not sure if RW is representative as he's a special case.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

1. You guys win in the real world, at least leave us the comfort of being kings and queens in the realm of logic! And well-functioning Ni can also be intimidating.
2. Not sure if RW is representative as he's a special case.

I had an ISTP friend earlier in life, and I was always so confused as to how he was able to understand the mechanisms of everything down to a T, and it drove me insane due to the fact that we argued constantly. Thinking doms like the INTP can easily slaughter us poor Intuitive doms when it comes to breaking things down and refining them or even logical constructs. (As I've grown older, I've seen myself starting to become more like him, probably through the development of Te)

You have a point with number 2, though I'm mostly sure he is the paragon of the INTP with some common eccentricities associated with INTx. It seems like he was touched by the irrational mysticism of Ni at one point.

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

You have been using Fi as the critical parent lately, used in a sort of witch-huntish way. You are attempting to utilize the Fi process of undermining external masks but you are doing so in a negative light and in an Ni sort of way. I would say that you would be like an INTJ in this sense, but we (INTJs) see Fi as a bit of a child's folly due to our use of it as personal relief and not as a serious decision making function. Furthermore, you are utilizing Fe in this thread right now since you are attempting to debunk what you perceive to be Amar's false facade, which would be indicative of Fi if Fi wasn't a very phlegmatic function that could care less about what happens to that facade, Fe on the other hand would attempt to eradicate any potential sense of disturbance to the environment, such as a potentially unsettling guise worn by someone.

Common example: INFJ Witch Hunt threads. Rife with Critical Parent Fi.

What do you mean I have been using Fi "lately"? I have not been acting different in any way.

And I disagree with you regarding the so called "false" façade, but I will no longer devote my energy to it.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

What do you mean I have been using Fi "lately"? I have not been acting different in any way.

And I disagree with you regarding the so called "false" façade, but I'm no longer going devote energy to it.

You've seemed more militant and mobilized recently, to me, at least.

Fi critical parent shines through in this statement particularly, you are attempting to compensate in the field of Fi by stating that you are in control of who you are at this very moment and are confident in the way you have perceived you have been acting, thus using it as a sharp weapon that conceals your deficiency in the area of personalized emotional understanding.

•I'M the authority on ethics! Your behavior shows a lack of personal integrity. [I feel I'm not living up to the personal (internal) side of ethics with my external focus, and I project it onto you].

This quote is from the archetypal standpoint of Critical Parent Fi, but you are utilizing it through its second method, which is defending your own persona and individualism, which is partly correct but at the same time refutable. "I'm the authority on how I've been acting!" (When really, you are most likely unsure and ambivalent)

Realize that I am not attempting to undermine you, I am attempting to elucidate the facts through which I believe possess objective accuracy.

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

You've seemed more militant and mobilized recently, to me, at least.

Fi critical parent shines through in this statement particularly, you are attempting to compensate in the field of Fi by stating that you are in control of who you are at this very moment and are confident in the way you have perceived you have been acting, thus using it as a sharp weapon that conceals your deficiency in the area of personalized emotional understanding.

This quote is from the archetypal standpoint of Critical Parent Fi, but you are utilizing it through its second method, which is defending your own persona and individualism, which is partly correct but at the same time refutable. "I'm the authority on how I've been acting!" (When really, you are most likely unsure and ambivalent)

Realize that I am not attempting to undermine you, I am attempting to elucidate the facts through which I believe possess objective accuracy.

I haven't been acting out of character recently.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I haven't been acting out of character recently.

Suit yourself, I will retract my claim then. Though I will still ponder the situation in the back of my mind for the next few hours probably to see if there is anything I'm missing, for I sincerely believe you to be an INFJ, but at the same time, I realize that I am not the authority of your own personality.

 

[chubber]

Suit yourself, I will retract my claim then. Though I will still ponder the situation in the back of my mind for the next few hours probably to see if there is anything I'm missing, for I sincerely believe you to be an INFJ, but at the same time, I realize that I am not the authority of your own personality.

In my books, he is ENTP.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

In my books, he is ENTP.

Who, me?

 

[chubber]

Who, me?

[MENTION=15318]Nights and Days[/MENTION]

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

In my books, he is ENTP.

Yes, because I'm clearly an Ne dom.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Yes, because I'm clearly an Ne dom.

I think you'd make a splendid ENTP. XD

 

[HongDou]

Yes, because I'm clearly an Ne dom.

You thought you were ENFP at some point bub, do your dirty laundry.

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

I think you'd make a splendid ENTP. XD

Yeah, probably. It would take too much energy though.

You thought you were ENFP at some point bub, do your dirty laundry.

Haha.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Yeah, probably. It would take too much energy though.

That's the spirit!

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

1. You guys win in the real world, at least leave us the comfort of being kings and queens in the realm of logic! And well-functioning Ni can also be intimidating.
2. Not sure if RW is representative as he's a special case.

I agree. I am far more intimidated by INTJs than by INTPs. I rather enjoy debating INTPs and to some extent ENTPs because their style of debate tends to be very polite and conversational. I'm not saying INTJs are mean or less cordial or that NTPs can't be brutal, but INTJs tend not to waste time or words with too many platitudes; they also don't seem to second guess themselves...if they know they are right (or at least they think they know they are right) they go in for the kill, whereas an INTP will step back and consider their opponent's point of view and second guess himself/herself. I think such second guessing gives the (false) impression that the INTP is perhaps unsure of himself/herself or not wholly convinced of their own argument's validity, thus blood is in the water, which the opponent smells.

I might add that INFJs can also be intimidating, although perhaps for different reasons I don't want to get into at the moment.


That's not to say INTPs can't be excellent debaters.

I found this video linked at Celebtypes and it's amusing to watch the way two INTPs (yes, I agree with their assessment of Ben Stein as an INTP) debate one another. Each of them basically tries to trip the other one up by asking what might be considered "gotcha" questions to show fallacies in their opponent's logic. That style of repeatedly questioning one's opponent can be highly effective. I wouldn't dare put myself on the same level as Stein or Dawkins, but I've noticed that this is something I tend to quite often and naturally in "real world" situations, something I did long before I typed INTP, and it can be quite frustrating to other people. It's a surefire way to make my father red in the face. I don't usually do this with that goal in mind, so when people react with anger or frustration, it always confounds me. It was largely because of this that I was the bane of many teachers' existence throughout my years in school.

Anyway, sorry if I went too off topic with this post.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

In my books, he is ENTP.

No. I don't see it, at all. Please elaborate why and/or how you see Nights being a Ne dom..

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I agree. I am far more intimidated by INTJs than by INTPs. I rather enjoy debating INTPs and to some extent ENTPs because their style of debate tends to be very polite and conversational. I'm not saying INTJs are mean or less cordial or that NTPs can't be brutal, but INTJs tend not to waste time or words with too many platitudes; they also don't seem to second guess themselves...if they know they are right (or at least they think they know they are right) they go in for the kill, whereas an INTP will step back and consider their opponent's point of view and second guess himself/herself. I think such second guessing gives the (false) impression that the INTP is perhaps unsure of himself/herself or not wholly convinced of their own argument's validity, thus blood is in the water, which the opponent smells.

I might add that INFJs can also be intimidating, although perhaps for different reasons I don't want to get into at the moment.


That's not to say INTPs can't be excellent debaters.

I found this video linked at Celebtypes and it's amusing to watch the way two INTPs (yes, I agree with their assessment of Ben Stein as an INTP) debate one another. Each of them basically tries to trip the other one up by asking what could almost be considered "gotcha" questions to show fallacies in their opponent's logic. That style of repeatedly questioning one's opponent can be highly effective. I wouldn't dare put myself on the same level as Stein or Dawkins, but I've noticed that this is something I tend to quite often and naturally in "real world" situations, something I did long before I typed INTP, and it can be quite frustrating to other people. It's a surefire way to make my father red in the face. I don't usually do this with that goal in mind, so when people react with anger or frustration, it always confounds me. It was largely because of this that I was the bane of many teachers' existence during my early years.

Anyway, sorry if I went too off topic with this post.

Enjoyed the video, and I concur with your analysis of the INTP and INTJ styles.

Had I been Dawkins in the video, I would have probably taken a much more aggressive stance and hammer in some ideologies being perfected now that suggest a cyclical universe over one that has a beginning, thus eradicating the whole concept of the beginning in the first place. Specifically, I would have honed in on Ben Stein's quote of "8 billion people" and put that in relation to his own question requiring specificity from Dawkins in the percentages and shown that Ben Stein's figure was, in fact, wrong, as well, just as a sort of treatise (Te attack, requiring objective statistical data?) to deflate the aggressive posture presented by Stein. The INTP method seems to be a bit more laid-back and a tad more open minded.