Intelligent, stupid, lazy, active

[Jesin]

Another link from HN. I wonder how, if at all, this correlates with the MBTI types.
http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=232401

 

[Vrecknidj]

I rather enjoy the classifications. I would gather that there are some overlaps with MBTI, but that they're not clean connections.

For example, many J types would consider many P types to be lazy, but, of course, many SPs are quite active.

I do think that INTPs will tend toward the Smart Lazy type, but I'm sure there are plenty of non-INTPs who are also of the Smart Lazy type.

Dave

 

[murkrow]

Actually I think J types would consider Ps to be quite active because you guys tend to skimp on planning.

While you're generally inactive you do get your bursts of energy and motivation on a topic, often without having considered the matter in enough depth.

I think that you could plot the types (or an average representative of each type) on a T graph for this.

INTJs are the ultimate smart lazy type from what I can see, maybe ISTJs too (I don't know much about them). I think that having an E or a P tends to move you closer to the active side of the graph, while an F might move you towards stupid.

as far as S/N goes my gut (hehe) tells me that they're pretty balanced, but N probably leans towards active and S towards stupid.

So here's how I see it:

I: lazy
E: active/stupid
N: active
S: stupid
T: smart/lazy
F: stupid
J: lazy
P: active

obviously that's not entirely accurate.

 

[Kuu]

Amusing, but way too simplistic to be of use. That's why I like the MBTI...

 

[murkrow]

This is obviously a J built system (like most I suppose) because it really doesn't benefit anyone in a self discovery way, it's all about how to categorize and use people.

 

[Perseus]

Hello,

Check out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_von_Hammerstein-Equord

who said:

I divide my officers into four classes; the clever, the lazy, the industrious, and the stupid. Each officer possesses at least two of these qualities. Those who are clever and industrious are fitted for the highest staff appointments. Use can be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man who is clever and lazy however is for the very highest command; he has the temperament and nerves to deal with all situations. But whoever is stupid and industrious is a menace and must be removed immediately

DO YOU MAKE THE CONNECTION?
​

Andy


Lazy Toad

 

[lemonsunite]

in terms of friends, hanging out with only your 'type' gets territorial pretty fast. I guess people need a balance of each other, which lead to an overlap. but no other group can fit INTP exactly, beacuse you either are one or you belong to another group


hmm. INTPs use wikipedia a lot...

 

[Wisp]

Correction: Everybody uses wikipedia a lot.

 

[lemonsunite]

eh?

not true...when i moved half the people at my new school didn't know what wikipedia was...
those who did never used it as a 'source'

unlike me, who uses wikipedia for everything

 

[Kuu]

And you moved where? Under a rock? To the 80s?

There is no perfect source. Anyone who takes any single source as authentic, is an idiot, no matter what the source is...

But wikipedia is great. Jumping around ideas. The kind of knowledge base that the visionaries of the internet thought when they invented hypertext...

Anyway....... thread-jacking mode OFF

 

[rocky00753]

Intelligent Lazy - that would pretty well sum me up.

 

[ChaosTheory]

Intelligent Lazy - that would pretty well sum me up.

Same here.

And I love wikipedia. While some people put false information on there, it's usually looked up and made correct pretty soon and I think it's a great source of an immense amount of information.

 

[Waterstiller]

I have reservations about any information I gain from Wikipedia. I tend to use it to help solve problems or figure out paths towards what I want to learn, rather than actually using it tp educate myself. And I just veer away from it when it comes to anything in regards to historical facts.

I don't use it as a source. It's more like a mostly-trustworthy guide.

 

[Gorgrim]

Indeed. Wiki helps me get in the right path of things.

In a way, basing your knowledge of wikipedia without further research gives you little credibility. But whenever you want to research, Wikipedia is mostly a good place to begin.


I find that I will try find many other sources, because reading it different places helps you take in information and make's it truer.


I lean towards a quite intelligent, rather lazy student to most teachers. Another girl in my class loves to say her opinion which would appear to be intelligent, sort of opposite of lazy. based on that, i wonder... perhaps she's INTJ.

 

[lemonsunite]

And you moved where? Under a rock? To the 80s?

sorry no rock

just because you use wikipedia, you can't expect everyone else to know about it

its not even that popular.

 

[Agent Intellect]

wikipedia is usually in one of the top 3 spots on any google or yahoo search (can't speak on other search engines, those are the only 2 i ever use).

as far as wikipedia, i find that it often has good source links. that, and reading through it gives you a good idea of other topics related to the one you've looked for.

 

[Jordan~]

http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?cc=US&ts_mode=country&lang=none

Wikipedia's the number 8 most popular website in the US, according to this.