INTP Critique

[Zionoxis]

As many of us know, a very special skill of an INTP is to tear apart argument by pointing out just about every hole they can find (and they are equally as skilled at finding them). Recently, I keep getting lectured by whom I believe an INFP believing that my sole purpose for debunking statements is, 'to be right'. My goal is not to be 'right', but to save time, effort, and money by pointing out why said idea would not work. Somehow, this INFP can not understand this concept. She also seems to be the only one that actually cares about this tendency of mine.

Is this a recurring theme to any of you? Does it affect others, or can I store this nag away in my vault of various other critiques from others to be ignored for the rest of eternity? What kind of validity does it carry? Should I just agree and shake my head inside when she realizes she was wrong after all? I personally find that option to be morally wrong, but I am just throwing the option out there.

 

[GYX_Kid]

I dunno. If their faults are getting in the way of something that has to involve me, then I might analyze the person and make a compelling argument catering to their personality to the best of my ability.

If it didn't have to concern me I probably wouldn't give a shit.
I don't believe much in true objective truth, anyway

(Constructive criticism can get annoying if you do it so much that it seems almost pointless, or just for the hell of it. Think of a micromanaging ESTJ, for example)
Not that this NF is "right", but I could see where she could be coming from

 

[crippli]

Tell her she is applying an ad hominem fallacy, and it is not an intellectual method of addressing an argument.

 

[Zionoxis]

Tell her she is applying an ad hominem fallacy, and it is not an intellectual method of addressing an argument.

That would just be rebutted with yet another "you are trying to be right again". As for the given situation, it does affect me, and it would waste this specific person's time and money if they were wrong. I even voiced my explanation that the point was to find a working method, not for her to storm of accusing me of always trying to be 'right'. I am trying to help her.

 

[GYX_Kid]

"ad hominem fallacy" and "intellectual method dfkjhdfg" aren't NF-language enough

 

[SpaceYeti]

When she corrects someone, is it because she's trying to prove she's right? Ask her. She doesn't care about problems with plans or efficiency, she just has an inferiority complex?

 

[Dapper Dan]

Does this happen around other people? If so, you may be able to call her out on the ad hominem fallacy and get some support from them.

If not, counter with "Why would I want to be wrong?" and walk out like a boss.

 

[Minuend]

As an Ne dominant I get bored with details and prefer the other person understanding what I'm saying intuitively. Explaining myself gets so tedious. Often I don't even finish my sentences. So yeah, being constantly corrected is a pain in the ass. Are you even trying to understand what she's saying, or are you just browsing on the surface of nitpick?

My goal is not to be 'right', but to save time, effort, and money by pointing out why said idea would not work.

Is it?

 

[Zionoxis]

As an Ne dominant I get bored with details and prefer the other person understanding what I'm saying intuitively. Explaining myself gets so tedious. Often I don't even finish my sentences. So yeah, being constantly corrected is a pain in the ass. Are you even trying to understand what she's saying, or are you just browsing on the surface of nitpick?



Is it?

It is not that, but for example, let's say this person wants to spend $500 to do x, which will supposedly, solve y. I read on multiple articles that doing x will not fix y. Am I wrong for pointing out this fact?

 

[Minuend]

That's too little information.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Well, the way you explain it, you're right. However, I doubt one paragraph accurately sums up the entire situation.

 

[Cognisant]

Trying to explain a "big picture" idea and having someone interrupt with apparent flaws in the details before I'm finished explaining is really irritating, because I already know "A" is not going to work unless "B", "C" and "D" are changed, that's why I much prefer text to any other kind of communication, I can dump loads of information on someone and anticipate their arguments before they ever get a chance to reply.

So yeah, always check if they're finished before offering critique.

Then ask them if they want critique before giving it, you'll find that once someone asks for your opinion they're much more receptive to it; good constructive discussion is like a dance, you gotta know the steps.

Finally offer something positive, you've got to balance out the critique with support because if all they're hearing from you is negative they're going to lose motivation and start avoiding you before you force them to give up.
I know you know your support is implicit but c'mon mate it takes two to tango.

I like that metaphor

 

[Dimensional Transition]

As an Ne dominant I get bored with details and prefer the other person understanding what I'm saying intuitively. Explaining myself gets so tedious. Often I don't even finish my sentences. So yeah, being constantly corrected is a pain in the ass. Are you even trying to understand what she's saying, or are you just browsing on the surface of nitpick?



Is it?

YES IT IS.

You have no idea how fucking annoying it is that many people never believe INTPs honestly just want to get to the truth in the most economic way possible. We have to find out all possible flaws in ideas, to make sure nothing gets fucked up later on, in the future. We check our own ideas, and ideas of others constantly.

It IS annoying though when people keep correcting you with shit that you're just intuitively saying. I hate it when people keep interrupting me with corrections that I already know of. I usually just talked too fast and made a little mistake, which is fine. Everybody does that.

I'm mostly just nit-picky when it comes to important discussions, and more often in text.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I can see that it might be, but he may also be not listening to everything she's saying.

 

[EditorOne]

OK, this may be harder to do than just being quiet:

Sometimes you can get people to find the flaws in a plan or project themselves just by acting stupid and asking questions. Spending $500 to get Result A? "Wait, I don't get it. How does this work?" "Oh, people will do that?" "Wait, really, help me here, explain how this works. Hasn't there been something written about it not working? I can't quite remember."

Etc.

Then they get to feel good about straightening you out, you dummy, and in the process, if you were clever, they realize the idea won't work.

If it's really about making the project work and not about always being right, then make the project work and look like you're wrong.

Personally, unless it's something that affects somebody I care about, I just stfu and let people plunge ahead, and stand by with duck tape to patch it up when it collapses from its own stupidity.

 

[VroumVroum]

As Intp, we won’t be satisfied by the right answer. We need the right explanation too. We don’t want to be right. We want others not to be illogical.

You give me the feeling that you base your text on the fact that you know better than her.
However, other types have their way too.
Furthermore, we have flaws (feelings, details, speed,…).
Finally we are not unbiased. Don’t be like , I know you’ve all found pseudo-logical argument not to do what you don’t want to do.

Still, we tend to state our conclusion has if it is pure objective truth. Then we tactlessly reject everything not stated with flawless logic. (Well, at least I may have done it ).
This seems as if we want to be right.

Anyway, of course the infp is wrong and the intp is right.