so entp are not creative because they're only more creative than average instead of inventing every single concept they come up with.
If humans did that, it wouldn't have taken thousands of years to build a half descent civilization.
*tips hat to my wise friend*
That's the thing, if you would create invention statistics of what is a real invention and what not, there wont be much. Especially in engineering you can see that some things labeled as innovations are things invented far back in time and which come up again as being intresting later on. Regarding engineering its nearly always the demands that justify the needs, so there's a huge bunch of innovations just ending in the paper bin, cause you cant earn quickly money with it.
Regarding the construction of things, the rule of thumb is: 20% are new constructions, 20 % are an alternative construction of an existing one and 60 % are modifications to an existing construction.
To really invent something new that would be the holy grail to me personally and its definitly a thing I thrive for. But it's like hitting the lotteries jackpot and one shouldnt think of that as being ones main goal or you can end up dissapointed.
What's another intresting thing is metaphysics. I thinkj what I mean is metaphysics, I am not so good at that. But there you have the deduction and induction principle and while deduction from latin deducere meaning deduce is according to some theories the thing a person does in 100% of the cases, inducere or induce would mean that they just came up with the idea.
If you take that thought and expand it on all human evolution on this planet, what really is there of what you can say that must be a thing gained by induction. if you think for example about the combustion engine, you may say thats so way off, that had to be induced. But if you consider the steam engine aswell and how it came to the steam engine, you'll see its a process that started with very small parts, which in the end evolved to the whole.
Same is it in physics, basically they stumble across a phenomena, which they didnt invent, but just noticed and now can use controlled and then they for example build an electronic component from it. The real thing then is to combine all this phanomena and create a huge weave on interconnected phanomena to realize some sort of function with. But is that again a real invention ? I dont think so.
On thing that could be really close to induction is Einstein's relativity principle. That#s really so far off, it's hard to say that's deduced somehow. But again you cant take a look into Einstein's mind and clearly say what things he had learned in life that may in combination have led him to come up with his theory. One has to fairly say that the way he came up with his theory was bullshit. Later on after relativity on his way to find the all-explaining formula he came up with a wrong theory, this has a special name but I dont remember it. So at this point you see, this guy was doing a lot of good research in his life, but he wasnt like totally outstanding and extraordinary different from other scientists aswell. He just had a good idea and many things speak for an induced idea. I am so sure, if you'ld now his whole story a 100%, you'ld see how it was clearly deduced again.
In regards to entp being copycats, I have to say yes. When I was new at my job I copied a lot of the behaviour of older colleges to get along better. This a thing I am not always fine with, it's the easy way to cope with things, but it changes your personality too and not always for the better. It's a thing I've to work on for myself in my life and watch that I dont get dragged into it too often.
I think a strong thick-headed IJ has more chances to develop an outstanding personality in that regards.