*does a double-check on your type*
Ti dom, yep.
Color me shocked! An INTP disregarding data? Never!
Shouldn't it tickle your brain to dig deeper?
If that's your assessment of my critique, maybe
you need to dig deeper. The study is piss-poor and the presentation is full of errors. It's sloppy and unscientific, yet masquerades as serious research. I'm actually very disappointed that more effort didn't go into study design, the collection of meaningful volumes of data, and the publication of a peer-reviewed paper. Nardi himself confesses to his failings in this regard. Of course, it should surprise no one that MBTI doesn't attract serious research.
INTP expressed similar reservations. Given your lame, invalid assessment of our type's short-comings, it's ironic that we are the people paying proper attention to data quality.
But then, it's not like an INFP to allow facts to get in the way of personal prejudice.
When people are sloppy, it kind of sets me off because it is obvious they have invested little in the quality of what they are producing. In those cases, I have a tendency to rip what they wrote to shreds.
Well, I guess we have something in common.
Your calling it a "category error" is the exact type of definitional conflict between INTJs and INTPs that I raised earlier.
Duh.
You made a judgment of another person based on your subjective personal views.
Everyone does this. All the time. Every day. Usually based on less than the information I have available. Welcome to humanity.
How do you think you make your judgments about people....me, for example?
/rhetorical
In any event, I am using my judgment to evaluate "Nardi the self-professed expert", not Nardi, the man. I didn't NOT read the presentations or NOT watch the video because Nardi has thus far failed to impress. But when I have to decide where to invest my finite resources, um...yes, I'd suggest it's entirely logical and sensible to form an impression as to whether someone is credible and worth investing in, or not. It's called being discriminating. And it's a hallmark of critical thinking.
You've agreed with much of what I've said, so you do exactly the same thing, you just don't express your opinions in the same way.
In any event, your knuckle-rapping is fucking tiresome. Cut it out. I can form judgments in any way I see fit and it's none of your business. Your popping into threads to pass judgment on me (for passing judgment) is odious, patronising, hypocritical and utterly uneccessary. This is what makes you guys such a PITA. It derails the thread, lowers the tone, and affects the participation of others who might actually have something on-topic / worthwhile to say. It's also an abuse of your position as a mod. (If you don't understand why, I'd be happy to explain it to you, in private.) I don't know if you even get how inflammatory it is. In your case, I doubt it.
In Nardi's defence, I was genuinely surprised to learn he self-typed as INTJ, because he's really very personable and modest.
The "category error", was calling my critique an "argument". It wasn't an argument.
My "observation" related to INTJs, (and was consistent with research findings) which is what I assumed you were reacting to (if you weren't, you shouldn't have included it in your quote.) Truth be told, that's what got under both your's and umlau's skin. And you've both demonstrated the truth of that observation, yet again.
God. Arguing with INTJs is unutterably dull. I wish you guys would leave me the fuck alone.
I’m having difficulty understanding how you reach what appear to be such black and white conclusions.
Consider that it's none of your business how I decide who is worth my time and who isn't? I told you already: I'm not trying to persuade anyone. If you feel like joining Nardi's fanclub, knock yourself out.
I'm sorry to put it so bluntly but trust me when I say that your arrogance and patronising attempts to "correct" my thinking are AT LEAST as irritating to me as I am to you.