[NT] Stupid NTs

[Jaguar]

Want to use that BLAZIN FAST Te and give us a list of reasons?

Okay now we know your Ni is dead. Get a new battery.

 

[Hendo Barbarosa]

Wow man, such a hateful backlash I should probably ask, do people not want me to come back to these boards?

I'm still the most unique person in this thread so far, even more so than Kalach, so I don't have any qualms. Plus I seem to be the only one flowing with the title.

Ah well...not everyone can dig.

EDIT: Also, I don't edit my posts.

 

[Jaguar]

I just wanted to quote this so that you couldn't edit it later.


Carry on.

God damn, it's so nice to see a man who "gets it."

 

[Salt n' pepper]

God damn, it's so nice to see a man who "gets it."

Why don't you marry him?

 

[Jaguar]

^ Wrong plumbing sweetheart.

 

[Kalach]

Kay. The bits of the thread not being followed up:

What is function order? Why is it so?
When MBTI stops being deep enough, what goes deeper?
Where does preference come from?
Or Mix n Match functions--you be the judge?
And, your Snowflake identity.



Stupid NTs.

 

[Jaguar]

What is function order? Why is it so?

Stupid NTs.

Any NT who hasn't bothered to notice how many people in this forum do not have the function order claimed by MBTI, needs to have an eye exam.

There are studies that have been conducted years ago by Jungian analysts,
which clearly showed the function orders claimed by MBTI are not accurate.


Wake up Rip Van Winkle.

 

[Kalach]

Wuzzat u say? Studies?

You mean, studies? There were studies? With studying?

It was studied?


Stuuuudeeeee.

 

[Jaguar]

^ I figured you'd answer like that.
I rest my case.

 

[Grungemouse]

Has there been a gas leak in the INTJ dormitories?

 

[Jaguar]

It looks that way.

 

[Kalach]

Oh, I dunno. If people on here claiming a function order is enough to make that function order true, and studies back it up, who's to argue?

These Jungians, the ones who studied, what did they find? I'm all agog. And hoping they didn't find that function preference is essentially random. I'm hoping order didn't change too much over time. I'm hoping there is something other than whim behind it all.

All secret-holders are invited to deign to inform.

 

[Athenian200]

I think the MBTI types aren't meant to represent actual development, but rather someone's sense of what are "ideal" development patterns.

For instance, my function order is something like Ni > Ti > Fe > Ne=Si > Te=Se > Fi.

Now, I don't fit any of the types perfectly, of course, but which one of the "ideal" function orders am I closest to? The INFJ one, obviously, though it's somewhat off. It's just that that's a better match than any of the others, though all of them are wrong for my order if looked at specifically. So the advice an average MBTI practitioner would give me, is to develop Fe further and strive to balance my Introversion/Extraversion. But who knows whether that's really desirable or not?

I guess it's kind of like in Geometry, there are "ideal" shapes. Most shapes aren't in their ideal form, but we tend to look at them relative to the most similar ideal shape in order to make it easier to work with. I figured this was sort of like that.

 

[Jaguar]

If people on here claiming a function order is enough to make that function order true, and studies back it up, who's to argue?

I don't see anyone claiming that nonsense.
I sure didn't.

The studies I referred to refute what MBTI claims is true.
They do not support it.

But you know damn well that's what my prior post meant.
Now you're just dragging red herrings all over the place.
Either that or you wish to resemble a drunk making comments like this:

"Wuzzat u say? Studies?
Stuuuudeeeee."

I agree with Athenian that the proposed function orders could be used as an ideal.
But in practice, the function orders do not hold up.
This is not some "secret."

 

[Kalach]

What's the difference between function order, function usage, subjective importance of the function to the user, function reportage by the user, and general self-perception?

It seems to me there's a gap to be bridged: what happens vs what users think happens. Which is to say, wonky function orders would be more easily believeable if they could be nameable under some new yet coherent theory. The gap would have been bridged.

But if I'm going to fall back on anything, it'll be the simpleminded Jungian axioms, e and i alternate to provide balance, function order refers to relative conscious control, and there's 16 types.

So... got any other axioms, anyone?



Oh wait, the point was ideal vs real.... hm, good point Athenian.

Seems to come back to needing, or at least me wanting, a theory on the origin of preference.

 

[FlamingMask]

Define stupid.

Functional perspective:

Te: not having a clear line of thought
Ti: not being accurate
Fe: not considering the group
Fi: not knowing what really matters
Ne: not seeing the forest
Se: not seeing the trees
Ni: not considering implications
Si: not considering what is already known

This is excellent.

We should all realize that there are different types of intelligence, and as someone pointed out, the average person is not an MBTI archetype. And even if they were, they would probably be missing many of the different types of intelligences that exist.

 

[Unique]

Threads like this make me wonder if people understand the term "PERSONALITY types" at all

Intelligence is not determined by which personality you have

I know loads of the most stupid NTs you will ever see

 

[entropie]

Threads like this make me wonder if people understand the term "PERSONALITY types" at all

Intelligence is not determined by which personality you have

I know loads of the most stupid NTs you will ever see

Stupid NTs dont exist, they are all right, in their own ways

 

[Jaguar]

Threads like this make me wonder if people understand the term "PERSONALITY types" at all

Intelligence is not determined by which personality you have

I know loads of the most stupid NTs you will ever see

MBTI is an indicator of preferences.
It is not an indicator of ability, or skill.

If you wish to see stupidity, one only needs to read the original post in this thread.

 

[ThatGirl]

MBTI is an indicator of preferences.
It is not an indicator of ability, or skill.

If you wish to see stupidity, one only needs to read the original post in this thread.

Actually that is not true. This proves exactly my point. That people are so afraid to recognize intelligence, specially in NT types, that they will go out of their way to say it is either even or to a greater extent, stupid.

I was analyzing political correctness amongst MBTI. Thanks for not taking it personally.

No one gets pissed off when people say SJs are helpful, SPs are spontaneous, or NF are dreamers. But say NTs are intelligent, and you're in a world of trouble. Fact of the matter is each of these is a description of the type. These are Types not constants. There will always be variation, but there is a pattern within the type that was apparent enough to be put into the general description.

Read the stupid OP again. This time without bias.