SolitaryWalker
Tenured roisterer
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 3,504
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 5w6
- Instinctual Variant
- so/sx
This needs further argument.The problem is that your premise is lacking in evidence and is a distortion of reality..
Who is to say whether there were or weren't just as many INTPs in early human ancestry
Study your history. Those men had a much higher propensity for action than contemplation, former came to them more naturally than the latter. Inner lives of INTPs would not manifest in this fashion as easily.
as there are now (proportionately of course), and over time the ESFJ becoming more advanced in their "passionate" function as the INTP becoming more advanced in their "intellectual" function, what I mean by this is that you could say that the ESFJ's emotionsc
Of course they are getting more advanced, as now instead of climbing trees they are working technology. Obviously were pressured to become more intellectual.
The current environment is not yet suited more for the intellectual than the passionate, but it is slowly getting there.The way you are coming off, atleast to me, is that humans are evolving out of the "passionate" into the "intellectual", that the current environment is more well suited for the "intellectual". And again you are assuming that being "Passionate"
or "Intellectual" has genetics behind it without ever proving it in your arguement.
Yeah thats right, you're made into an intellectual mostly, not born into one, but all in all, at birth, everyone has an equal chance of becoming a genius!
Pure anecdote.I have information contrary to your belief. I am INTP, my little brother is ESFJ, exact opposites. My parents are ESTJ. How did that happen?.
A recessive INTP gene in both of them? lol. Also you're missing the point that the "passionate" types do jobs that the "intellectuals" do not care for, and vice-versa. So we both depend on each other for society's survival.
I do not hold such an optimistic view of our progression. To predict humans remaining on Earth in 1,000 years is very "glass half-full". .
You're missing the point. In principle, if we had this much time, and we progressed in the same fashion this is about how much time it would take to make the world more favorable to the intellectual.
Your point about the machines doing the "passionate's" work holds some problems. It assumes that there will be no "passionates" in the far-future, which is undeterminable. And, if they are present in the future, what function would they perform in society if the robots were present? Also think over this: We HAVE the ability to replace people's jobs with robots, think of fast-food joints, etc, it just isn't a humane thing to do..
Relevance?
Thanks for the sarcastic insult to my vision at the end there but I'll get beyond that. Okay so basically I need to improve my reading skills? You say that I need to improve my Ne and Si, but I think they're doing just fine, that rant could have been easily shortened by telling me work on my reading skills...
You're making comments irrelevant to the text you're responding to. Shows your information isn't being collected properly. Mostly Ne and Si are responsible for this.
I, for one, am very young (16) and usually don't have much trouble writing down my abstract ideas, the way I know how is by using alot of Voice and trying to literally write down my thoughts which is often bad for the reader because of lack of transitions but I'll improve eventually. Contrary to your accusations, I know that I'm good at reading Abstract ideas when they are written down, I just interpret them more abstractly than presented which often confuses people. You can see by my writing style that I'm not a concrete writer, nor am I a concrete reader because I will go off on tangents on things that I interpret differently than others. Now, Why am I talking about myself? Well because that last chunk of yours was addressing my cognitive ability so I'm defending myself, just clearing that up for ya if I transitioned too fast (screw separating things into paragraphs). If this was too chaotic to comprehend then just remember this: Before posting a possibly controversial idea, second-guess your own argument for flaws (which yours have, part of being an INTP is being unsure of what you believe and checking your own logic), if you cannot find any on your own, write your argument in the way that you Intend for it to be interpreted, meaning that you should clear up any misunderstandings that could be made before the misunderstandings are actually made. And remember, even though us INTPs don't usually care if we hurt the feelings of others, there are lots of F's on this forum and think about the effect your thread may have in them viewing you in the future, you may be injuring your own reputation....
Ah okay!
The enthusiasm is appreciated but I'm always skeptical of it because enthusiasm from an INTP usually comes with the strong scent of sarcasm, which I've thoroughly detected. Trust me, I could have responded much more nastily to the connotation of your writing as you neared the end of the post, but I intend to gain your respect not your disrespect even though what you have written to me did not come off as respectful. Ad homineum and Appeal to Ridicule are often easy excuses to not refute what your opponent wrote, even if I misinterpreted what you tried to portray, what I wrote was still relevent.
Edit: Forgot to mention that your separation of humans into "intellectual" and "passionate" is a false dichotomy.
No dichotomy, only continuum with one end as passionate and other as intellectual.