What type is the most pedantic?

[Athenian200]

Well, the way I think of it. All republics are democracies (representative democracies, instead of a pure one, but still). All Constitutional Republics are republics, and therefore democracies. So the US is a democracy, specifically, a constitutional democracy.

Actually, a republic is a form of government in which people elect their representatives to rule for them, and a democracy is a form in which the people rule, directly or indirectly. Since congress is checked by an executive branch and an appointed judicial branch, and we have an electoral college to elect the president, we are much closer to a republic.

Also, a representative democracy might be accurate enough since it admits the representative part, but you would have to call it a constitutional representative democracy, when you could just call it a constitutional republic. The word republic expresses the idea more succinctly, and more accurately.

Lastly, the pledge of allegiance and the Constitution both refer to the nation as a republic.

I guess I'm the "worst" pedant on this message board.

 

[Totenkindly]

I guess I'm the "worst" pedant on this message board.

But that's why we love you, C3PO.

(You know, you need to pepper your posts more with phrases like, "Oh my!" and "Oh dear!" and "My gracious!" and "Well, what on earth would YOU know, you overturned rusty bucket-of-bolts? Stop beeping and whistling, the master needs us!")

 

[FemMecha]

INFJs.

Good heavens, no.

Spelling and grammar are never an end in themselves. Spelling is something of a challenge to me because the intent behind the message is always more important than the manner of delivery. It's not what I care about most. INFJs are considered the most poetic by some. Their use of language tends towards expression, not the letter of the law.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

ISTJ.

 

[Kiddo]

ISTJ.

I'd say more likely ISTPs. Every ISTJ I have ever met is too introverted to be very pedantic.

 

[Athenian200]

Good heavens, no.

Spelling and grammar are never an end in themselves. Spelling is something of a challenge to me because the intent behind the message is always more important than the manner of delivery. It's not what I care about most. INFJs are considered the most poetic by some. Their use of language tends towards expression, not the letter of the law.

So a poetic person cannot be pedantic? I don't think that. I guess I really only became the way I am about spelling and grammar after I tried to learn C and HTML. It makes you more aware of such things. Ultimately, I tend to notice what's expressed more than the spelling, but I still notice it.

 

[ygolo]

Actually, a republic is a form of government in which people elect their representatives to rule for them, and a democracy is a form in which the people rule, directly or indirectly. Since congress is checked by an executive branch and an appointed judicial branch, and we have an electoral college to elect the president, we are much closer to a republic.

So why is a republic not a democracy? It seems like a way for people to rule indirectly. I don't think these are mutually exclusive. In fact, I would say the set of all democracies include the set of all republics.

Also, a representative democracy might be accurate enough since it admits the representative part, but you would have to call it a constitutional representative democracy, when you could just call it a constitutional republic. The word republic expresses the idea more succinctly, and more accurately.

Lastly, the pledge of allegiance and the Constitution both refer to the nation as a republic.

To me, what you are saying sounds like, "A Green Delicious is not a fruit, it is an apple." All I'm pointing out is that it is both. One category is just more specific.

I guess I'm the "worst" pedant on this message board.

Perhaps the most pedantinc, but not the "worst". I can give a run-for-you-money on both

---------------------------------

I guess I really only became the way I am about spelling and grammar after I tried to learn C and HTML. It makes you more aware of such things.

Computer laguages use "context free" grammars (often LALR(1)) and are very systematic. Human languages have grammars based on tradition more than utility.

 

[ptgatsby]

So why is a republic not a democracy? It seems like a way for people to rule indirectly. I don't think these are mutually exclusive. In fact, I would say the set of all democracies include the set of all republics.

Heh heh... I always wondered why the US exported democracy and not republican...ism (?!). I guess it was a bit to close to exporting plutocracy. Wait a sec....

 

[FemMecha]

So a poetic person cannot be pedantic? I don't think that. I guess I really only became the way I am about spelling and grammar after I tried to learn C and HTML. It makes you more aware of such things. Ultimately, I tend to notice what's expressed more than the spelling, but I still notice it.

A deeply poetic person could be pedantic, but it would always be a means to an end, never the end within itself. The end would be the intangible expression and meaning in the poetry. Securing details would be a way to aid in communicating the intangible with the most force, if that is what was required. Does that make sense?

I'm guessing the most pedantic type would revel in the exacting of details for the love of those details.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm guessing the most pedantic type would revel in the exacting of details for the love of those details.

"ONE! ONE PEANUT-BUTTER-AND-BANANA SANDWICH! AH HA HA!

TWO! TWO PEANUT-BUTTER-AND-BANANA SANDWICHES! AH HA HA!

THREE! THREE PEANUT-BUTTER-AND-BANANA SANDWICHES! AH HA HA!"​

But I think he's more OCD, not pedantic.

 

[Metamorphosis]

Heh heh... I always wondered why the US exported democracy and not republican...ism (?!). I guess it was a bit to close to exporting plutocracy. Wait a sec....

It's easier to install leaders when you don't have to worry about elected officials.

 

[FemMecha]

But I think he's more OCD, not pedantic.

We should do a comparison/contrast of OCD and pedanticism. (Is that a word? )

I'm doubting that iNtuitive dominants would be the most pedantic. They view things from so many angles, focusing on the larger context. Details are often wearisome. Maybe Si dominants first and then Ti/Te dominants? What say ye?

Let's go to the lit...
I've placed quotes in a very approximate suggestion from most to least pedantic based on the info available in the text. The INTs maybe should be listed ahead of the ISJs. I am not sure about that.

ISTJs are often called inspectors. They have a keen sense of right and wrong, especially in their area of interest and/or responsibility. They are noted for devotion to duty. Punctuality is a watchword of the ISTJ. The secretary, clerk, or business(wo)man by whom others set their clocks is likely to be an ISTJ...

ISTJs are easily frustrated by the inconsistencies of others, especially when the second parties don't keep their commitments...The grim determination of the ISTJ vindicates itself in officiation of sports events, judiciary functions, or an other situation which requires making tough calls and sticking to them.

In the workplace, ISFJs are methodical and accurate workers, often with very good memories and unexpected analytic abilities;

Precise about their descriptions, INTPs will often correct others (or be sorely tempted to) if the shade of meaning is a bit off. While annoying to the less concise, this fine discrimination ability gives INTPs so inclined a natural advantage as, for example, grammarians and linguists.

INTJs are perfectionists, with a seemingly endless capacity for improving upon anything that takes their interest. What prevents them from becoming chronically bogged down in this pursuit of perfection is the pragmatism so characteristic of the type: INTJs apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from their own research efforts to the prevailing social norms.

INFJs have a knack for fluency in language and facility in communication. In addition, nonverbal sensitivity enables the INFJ to know and be known by others intimately.

Because ISTPs need such a lot of flexibility to be as spontaneous as they feel they must be, they tend to become as inflexible as the most rigid J when someone seems to be threatening their lifestyle

Some INFPs have a gift for taking technical information and putting it into layman's terms.

 

[Totenkindly]

We should do a comparison/contrast of OCD and pedanticism. (Is that a word? )

I hope not. It sounds like something someone should go to jail for.

I'm doubting that iNtuitive dominants would be the most pedantic. They view things from so many angles, focusing on the larger context. Details are often wearisome. Maybe Si dominants first and then Ti/Te dominants? What say ye?

What about Eco? She's pretty... detail-oriented.

 

[FemMecha]

What about Eco? She's pretty... detail-oriented.

It's better to refer to the literature over anecdotal info, because people can easily be borderline types, atypical representations of type, or simply mistyped. In reading through the descriptions again, it isn't clear whether INTs or ISJs tend more towards pedanticism. It maybe depends on how it is being defined.

As far as my snippet quotes are concerned, people should really link over to TypeLogic Home Page to read through the entire profiles. Those segments i chose attempted to select the most pedantically relevant information from each profile.

 

[Totenkindly]

...In reading through the descriptions again, it isn't clear whether INTs or ISJs tend more towards pedanticism. It maybe depends on how it is being defined.

Probably.

If you want something "according to spec," the ISTJ is about as solid as it goes, as well as ISFJs who are organizing/calculating things.

But INTPs, as you note, make good linguists because of their obsession with nuance and context (which are more abstracted than the sort of material the ISTJ is scanning for flaws).

INFPs tend to be more precise about feeling states, but in terms of technical information will "gloss over nuances" if it is inappropriate to communicating a point to their students. (This can make INTPs cringe.)

 

[Athenian200]

But INTPs, as you note, make good linguists because of their obsession with nuance and context (which are more abstracted than the sort of material the ISTJ is scanning for flaws).

I really don't think so. They're too vague and generalized in their thinking to be good linguists. Ne is too random/chaotic to be used effectively for that purpose.

INFPs tend to be more precise about feeling states, but in terms of technical information will "gloss over nuances" if it is inappropriate to communicating a point to their students.

So do INTP's.

 

[Tayshaun]

There are Si, Se, Ni, Fe, Te and Ti ways of being pedantic.

This leaves out ISFPs, INFPs, ENFPs and ENTPs.
The answer is among the rest.

 

[wildcat]

Who's what is what?

Had to point out that one.

I'm a pedant but not with such formalities as is mentioned here. Pedantry I'd think could be part of any profile. Surely the personality type merely defines some of what style the pedantry is in?

Semantics is order.
Order is by nature definition.
Rule is not order. Rule is abour power.

The rule of hairsplitting is the rule of the academia. The rule of status.

Hairsplitting is the antithesis of semantics.
Semantics is about what is.
Hairsplitting is about what is not.

Order is the mirror of the cause (effect) and the mirror of the effect (cause).

Hairsplitting takes time. Order is instantaneous.

 

[Xander]

Semantics is order.
Order is by nature definition.
Rule is not order. Rule is abour power.

Without rules/ guidelines (whatever you want to call them), there is no order.

Being left alone to do what you like is not order it is anarchy. It's just anarchy that has less chance of affecting others.

The rule of hairsplitting is the rule of the academia. The rule of status.

Hairsplitting is when you try and be overly precise and pedantic. It is academic but there again what technical discussion is not?

Hairsplitting is the antithesis of semantics.
Semantics is about what is.
Hairsplitting is about what is not.

Once you have eliminated all other possibilities then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the answer.
I see no reason to split the techniques. It's only a matter of preference, context and expediency.

Order is the mirror of the cause (effect) and the mirror of the effect (cause).

So there is no order, no line to follow? If one is the mirror of the other then both appear simultaneously.

Order is the effect. It's cause depends upon what is being brought to order and what is ordering it. Mirrors are reaction only, no organisation.

Hairsplitting takes time. Order is instantaneous.

If order is instantaneous then what is chaos? Besides to find the order sometimes you have to split hairs.

 

[Tigerlily]

I'm going to go with "whatever type I am," since I just corrected pedantricin your thread title and OP.

Ha! I thought it said pediatric and I was going to answer an SF type. Thanks for clearing that up!