to address both INTPs:
first off, MBTI does in no way hold scientific merit. any analysis on trying to type people is complete "bullshit", because it is based purely on subjective observance - an opinion. i don't need further claim than this, because that's how it is. you look through all these threads and you'll find people type other people (and themselves) differently.
i see no point in trying to make a standing argument in something as trivial as character analysis, both because there is no substantial proof and because i consider an argument to be something reserved for theories. you want to prove a certain character in a certain TV drama is of a certain MBTI type? prove the validity of the MBTI by finding a verifiable method of analysis, then. is this something you can understand?
secondly, don't be idiots. nothing is idiotic, because the term "idiotic" is subjective too. you claim that my opinion is idiotic? how exactly is that of relevance to me? how does it further the discussion?
i'm tired of seeing INXPs just spouting random judgments because something doesn't fit their absolute logic. is it really so hard to instead put out a counter opinion that could sway the other part? are you too lazy? is it too hard to find the words? why is this such a problem for people of these two types only?
about the sensor "discrimination":
is it discriminating if one thinks that certain people are better at certain tasks? you seem to think there is some sort of absolute spectrum where people rank in. i don't believe there is a spectrum. people regardless of types still have areas of expertise, and i would be willing to bet that everyone in the entire world has at least 1 area of expertise. if i was an INXP, i would use the term "foolish" here to think that every person in the entire world acts the same, has equal knowledge of everything and has the willingness to pull things through. everyone is different, but just because they're different doesn't mean they're worse off.