Well, isn't that exactly what he did, trying to change the world into a better place? He championed his ideals quite brashly, and not "hesitantly". He even saw himself more as a preacher than a comedian. And I don't know about just ENTP's wanting to open up to the unknown, care to elaborate?
yes my arguments come out kind of muddled. what i alluded to wasn't his delivery which is brash enough for two. but rather, what does he promise us if we do his thing? can you set a finger on it? its all very vague to me
ill try to explain
nader (if we can belive him to be an enfp): what does nader want? he wants to ban the corvair
what will happen if we ban the corvair? well all be safer, the automobile industry will have to make better cars for us, the world will be a better place
its tangliable and concrete
socrates (if we can belive him to be an entp): what does socrates want?
he wants us to examine our arguments dialectically and remain intellectually honest while doing so
what does he promise us? well, uh, nothing really. he just has this idea that everything will be better if we use the dialectical method. we wants to open up the way we debate to allow for something greater what it is, he cant really say
machiavelli (if we can accept him as ENTP): what does he want?
he wants us to accept a form of goverment where factions are constantly vying for power against each other. not so controversial now, but try going back to the renaissance. everyone else wanted a strong monarch.
what does machiavelli promise us if we do what he says? well, uh, something vague about always being better and more flexible in a conflict.
again, im pretty scatter brained here. what i am getting at, is that the ENTPs are sort of an abstract designer. they're not champions like ENFPs.
lets say we have the classic political conflict of the orders: people / aristocracy / monarch - ENFPs would typically champion one of those. thus we have a concrete tangliable goal and a concrete tangliable outcome.
on the other hand, analytical ENTPs would typically look for a way for design "the rules of the game" so that each order contributes the most to the whole and dis-contributes the least. socrates dialectic is also just rules for having a conversation
i once wrote somewhere:
Fe is World-then-ego
Fi is Ego-then-world
what does hicks promise us if we something manage to connect with our inner cosmic light and love all people? again, something pretty vague.
an analytic ENTP sort of designs how to make the game fair
a champion ENFP just wants his side to win
IMHO
By the way is it your site?
yes