INTPs’ & ISTPs’ “One Thing”

[Miss spelt]

First off, methinks you are a feminist and this article of Drenth's was offensive to you somehow. I read the article again, and I fail to see how someone could get upset about sexism from reading that...unless you have feminist ideals. Nowhere does the author make any judgments whatsoever about the superiority/inferiority of having a mind that tends to be more inclined to "dominance" and to have "fewer but more focused interests." No one is saying (including the author) that there aren't plenty of women out there who would not fit that description.

If you want to get upset about that, go ahead, but you lost credibility the instant that you said that most of what CJ supporters believe is "BS." Also, methinks you never read Psychological Types, because he explores far more than just introversion/extraversion in that book. It's definitely not 90% attitude and 10% preferences, and it's not something you can quickly read and easily digest...there's a ton of nuance in there, and he makes a really compelling case.

As for the "debunking" of what the author talked about, you apparently fail to see the difference between intuition and thinking. The article was about Ti, not Ni or Ne. Ti, according to one study (which I can't remember where I saw it) is "found" to be most active in the left posterior hemisphere of the brain. I put that in quotes, because it's not actually a function of any kind, it's just an area of the brain that happens to be extremely well-developed in INTPs and ISTPs. Just because Nardi found a "Xmas tree brain" phenomenon for intuition does not automatically invalidate the idea that men have fewer connections between hemispheres than women. Show me scientific research that shows exactly what these connections are and what they do...Is it not possible that each sphere of the brain could act independently? Maybe what you see on the EEG with intuition has zero to do with the corpus callosum?

And anyway, I could care less if I do or don't have as many inter-sphere connections as women because as Architect says, the latest science and the Big Five are not predicative.

You're confused about a few things but I'll clear it up.

What I "debunked" was my own opinion that it was sexist as there clearly is (according to the cited research) sexual dimorphism in the corpus callosum, for you see... I let go of my bias when I realized I was wrong. I was personally referencing research that was from 1994 and ya things change. I did it on my own, by reading about the topic and coming to the realization that my gut reaction was incorrect. So, that's that. So I'm tired of hearing about it now because I feel I have corrected myself more than adequately. Ok? Good.

Next...

The author says that the phenomenon is MORE PREVALENT in INTP than ISTP. IN PLAIN FUCKING English. This is clearly in contrast to the EEG studies which purport that intuition is a whole brain function (I.e. Utilizes the corpus callousum), so IF it wasn't such INTP self-aggrandizing masturbation then the author would have left that bit out because this phenomenon here would clearly be MORE associated with the ISTP type which uses more of the single hemisphere stuff he talks about. So, fuck you twice.

Next.....

I am completely familiar with Types. Okay, and yes, the bulk of the text IS devoted to defining primarily introverted and extroverted attitudes. Chapter 10 goes into supreme detail about how these attitudes are manifest through the four psychological functions, but the association between chapter 10 and the MBTI is pure horseshit that Personality Junkie has latched on to.

Next.......you seem to think I'm trying to invalidate the idea of sexual dimorphism still which tells me you're a complete moron who hasn't really bothered to read anything I've had to say and is just protecting his buddies. That makes you a stupid twat. I looked into it, and I read the abstracts and I even quoted the Wikipedia article which proved me wrong and then I admitted it twice over so don't bring it up again.

Holy fuck man like you realize your whole post was basically psychotic? I didn't do ANY of the things you accused me of doing.

 

[Miss spelt]

One thing I overlooked was your suggestion that each hemisphere acts autonomously even when the CC is intact so that the whole brain theory of intuition doesn't imply the CC is being used, but if YOU read the same shit I read you'd see that the psychological function of intuition (yes the EXACT same that is involved in the MBTI) is associated with women BECAUSE of the enhanced communication between hemispheres.

 

[Architect]

@ Architect --- Finally, as I have referenced once already.- Nardi's EEG studies point to intuition as a whole brain function which directly contradicts the proposal made in the OP

Actually I think Dario is missing the boat on his research. He's just looking at the neocortex, and with a fairly gross technique. Obviously he had to do this on the cheap. Like I say a fMRI would be the right way to do it but it would cost a lot more. He just made do with an EEG and student volunteers.

It's a long conversation, but I believe he's looking at the neocortical 'reflection' of the type, which is why people of the same type have very different patterns (e.g. different learned behaviors to the same basic Type motivation).

 

[Miss spelt]

The neocortex is the only structure in the brain that doesn't exhibit near perfect bilateral symmetry and go ahead and see if I'm wrong about that

 

[StevenM]

What specifically does he get wrong? And what is debatable? Where is the bias? Explain...

Try subjective validation.

 

[Miss spelt]

If you want answers with the fMRI technique it's going to be the thalamus you're looking at most closely.

 

[Architect]

@Architect - no distinction is made between "neocortex" and "cortex" when looking at brain imaging techniques LOL omg. If you want to get technical there are less sophisticated cortical areas like the hippocampus which can still be assessed with an electroencephalograph however it's not like an fMRI is the key to unlocking typology in this way. You're likely referring to subcortical structures like various nuclei of the thalamus..... but you have no idea how ignorant that was haha it's okay

The neocortex is the only structure in the brain that doesn't exhibit near perfect bilateral symmetry and go ahead and see if I'm wrong about that

OK instead of being a jerk maybe you can educate us, as it seems you work in the field or have some expertise (please clarify).

From wikipedia

Disadvantages: Low spatial resolution on the scalp. fMRI, for example, can directly display areas of the brain that are active, while EEG requires intense interpretation just to hypothesize what areas are activated by a particular response.

Again this is a long conversation, it's late and you're not working too hard to have a decent conversation on it. Maybe I'll check in tomorrow.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

That's actually really dumb.

I'm with him. This is really stiupid and refers more to ITJ, they master things and think more narrow.

All great chess players are INTJ. Why? Ask yourself. INTP are good at doing many things and link them.

 

[Tannhauser]

All great chess players are INTJ. Why? Ask yourself. INTP are good at doing many things and link them.

So why are all great chess players INTJ? For example Kasparov doesn't strike me as anything near an INTJ.

 

[BatY]

maybe quicker make one of da emotional bias threads n make de bloke think his owhole ey- said someone 10238 years ago. no, your emotional oxholes sustain your lives that ou are unhappy with. i wish best of luck to naked woman tho, even tho i dont fink er ramblin is any mor dan 'arry potter on da mepfh. oh dis serios talk because we said what. wherer are da links m8. where are da links

u kno dis place is an hampshire dog to da scientifc cmunity roit?

Spoiler

http://www.enderwiggin.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/EGT-Robert.jpg

 

[TimeAsylums]

ITT: Shitshow

Oh, wait. It doesn't work like that here...

Meanwhile over on /r/entp

Anyone else feel like they can't concentrate on any one thing? - http://www.reddit.com/r/entp/comments/3jh94r/anyone_else_feel_like_they_cant_concentrate_on/

/lol

 

[Architect]

Well this thread turned into a gymkhana, thank you Red Shirt. Sixty posts in a few hours ...

Wrapping up the thread ...

Spoiler

So many cross ideas I can't make (or aren't interested to make) heads or tails of it. At any rate whether you like the particular article or not, Andrew makes a valid point in my opinion, which is that whether or not they can find the concentration to stick to one thing, I think it is true that INTP's at least wish to find their one thing.

Like him I've been obsessed with it since very young, and was a "serial careerist" as I kept trying to find something better. Outright I'd reject careers that I couldn't easily and actively engage in, like Architecture (you depend on big contracts to actually get a chance to design something). A cursory view of this board shows it to be a common topic, I just replied to a thread where a lawyer is thinking about going into programming.

One very interesting thing came out of this for me, which is the ISTP inclusion. Theoretically you'd expect this trait to be shared by the ITP's, but in my experience while ISTP's tend to stick to one thing (I've known many including my brother), they aren't as obsessed and angst ridden as we are about it. I would hesitate to have included them in the article.

What does it mean? This is the first time I've seen a theoretical MBTI prediction that didn't really jive with reality. More investigation needed.

On [MENTION]Miss spelt[/MENTION]Miss spelt, I notice she lists herself as an ENTP. Every actual ENTP I've known, they love to fuck with people. The one exception seems to be Adam Savage who I believe is an ENTP, and while I don't know him personally seems not to have this characteristic. But personalities will differ.

So while annoying and generally unproductive I think it doesn't hurt to have somebody around who kicks the ant nest a bit.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

So why are all great chess players INTJ? For example Kasparov doesn't strike me as anything near an INTJ.

he's ENTJ actually

 

[Miss spelt]

Annoying maybe but you still haven't recognized that it's dumb.

 

[Architect]

Annoying maybe but you still haven't recognized that it's dumb.

Your posts would be more effective if they contained some real content.

 

[Miss spelt]

Your posts would be more effective if they contained some real content.

Um did you read the op?

 

[Sinny91]

I read the OP piece with myself and a known ISTP in mind.
Some of it was very plausible.

 

[Inquisitor]

The author says that the phenomenon is MORE PREVALENT in INTP than ISTP. IN PLAIN FUCKING English. This is clearly in contrast to the EEG studies which purport that intuition is a whole brain function (I.e. Utilizes the corpus callousum), so IF it wasn't such INTP self-aggrandizing masturbation then the author would have left that bit out because this phenomenon here would clearly be MORE associated with the ISTP type which uses more of the single hemisphere stuff he talks about. So, fuck you twice.

Next.....

I am completely familiar with Types. Okay, and yes, the bulk of the text IS devoted to defining primarily introverted and extroverted attitudes. Chapter 10 goes into supreme detail about how these attitudes are manifest through the four psychological functions, but the association between chapter 10 and the MBTI is pure horseshit that Personality Junkie has latched on to.

Yeah...you're no expert on personality psychology. The Drenth article upset you. This led you to write a knee-jerk post. You regret it now. The cursing and name-calling are the nails in your coffin...no one is going to take you seriously with that kind of language.

Your logic has multiple errors.

1) You cannot assert w/o scientific evidence that just because you see the whole brain lighting up like a Xmas tree with intuition on an EEG that there is active communication between both hemispheres of the brain and that the corpus callosum is being extensively used. You just don't know. You could be right, or you could be wrong. I'm sure we'll have an answer sometime in the future when brain-scanning technology improves.

2) Again, the bulk of Psychological Types is not just about the attitudes. You have not read it in its entirety. As for the association between chapter 10 and the MBTI being "horseshit"...I don't even know what to say to this meaningless comment. It doesn't seem like you're thinking clearly and anger is choking you.

3) Now to the part about why INTPs may be more motivated to find a singular purpose compared with ISTPs. In her book Personality Type: An Owner’s Manual, Lenore Thomson draws a brain map that looks like this:

Front of Left Brain
Te
Fe

Si
Ni
Back of Left Brain

Front of Right Brain
Ne
Se

Fi
Ti
Back of Right Brain

Obviously, this map may be entirely unreliable, but...Drenth is likely familiar with this. As you can see, both Ne and Se are "located" in the same hemisphere as Ti. I believe that Jung made some comment that the inferior function is always located at a diagonal to the dominant. Don't quote me on that because I can't find the reference. Nevertheless, if this map is accurate, Drenth's hypothesis that men tend to have fewer inter-hemisphere connections than women would hold true, especially since thinking is more abundant in men than in women.

In the article Drenth never says that INTPs are more motivated to find a singular purpose than ISTPs. That said, and from my limited experience with ISTPs, I do agree with Architect that they seem to be less concerned with finding a singular purpose. This may be because Ne pushes INTPs to envision so many objective possibilities that Ti's mission becomes to narrow those down. I think everyone feels overwhelmed by career indecision at some point, but it must be extremely acute for INTPs, and probably also for ENTPs to some extent. I don't see how this is "self-aggrandizing masturbation."

If I had to venture a guess, I would say that Se is not concerned with generating a multitude of possibilities, and instead motivates ISTPs to experience objective sensations like sports as well as an interest in all things physical. In addition, it is my understanding that Se is the impetus for the development of an intelligence that quickly understands physical problems, like how to construct things with your hands, making them ideal engineers.

ENTPs are likely more comfortable with having a head filled with possibilities, since Ti is their aux. Also because the dominant is an extraverted attitude, the libido will be primarily directed outwards, making introspection less intensive.

Anyway...just my two cents.

 

[Miss spelt]

I'm not even reading that. Forget it dude,

 

[TheManBeyond]

3) Now to the part about why INTPs may be more motivated to find a singular purpose compared with ISTPs. In her book Personality Type: An Owner’s Manual, Lenore Thomson draws a brain map that looks like this:

Front of Left Brain
Te
Fe

Si
Ni
Back of Left Brain

Front of Right Brain
Ne
Se

Fi
Ti
Back of Right Brain

yo, i'm a total illiterate so excuse moi but does that mean if my head always hurts in the right side i'm then Ne or Se?

 

[Miss spelt]

If you actually read the theory as to why the reduced corpus callosum produces a more systemic mind you'lol discover the converse argument that a stronger CC produces an intuitive mind. I even quoted the Wikipedia abstract in this very thread. Have a look.

You can't have it one way and not the other. That's the theory. Either you accept it because there is science or you don't. Nardi's EEG merely augments it.

 

[Inquisitor]

yo, i'm a total illiterate so excuse moi but does that mean if my head always hurts in the right side i'm then Ne or Se?

If your dom is Se/Ne then actually the part of your head that is likely to "hurt" is the back of your left brain because it's the most undeveloped/inefficient part, and therefore requires more blood. The dom is up to 100X more efficient than the inf, which means it requires very little blood to process information. This is why Ne doms can spend the whole day exploring a whole bunch of possibilities in their heads and not get tired of it. It's also the reason why Ti doms can spend the whole day problem-solving by themselves and never feel stressed out. But put them in a position where they have to extravert their emotions frequently, like being a mascot at Disneyland and talking to little kids all day, and they will burn out.

 

[Inquisitor]

If you actually read the theory as to why the reduced corpus callosum produces a more systemic mind you'lol discover the converse argument that a stronger CC produces an intuitive mind. I even quoted the Wikipedia abstract in this very thread. Have a look.

You can't have it one way and not the other. That's the theory. Either you accept it because there is science or you don't. Nardi's EEG merely augments it.

You're making a leap from "empathy" to "intuition." Read the wikipedia abstract carefully. Greater interconnectivity between hemispheres may be associated with greater empathy...intuition is an entirely different phenomenon.

 

[Miss spelt]

You're making a leap from "empathy" to "intuition." Read the wikipedia abstract carefully. Greater interconnectivity between hemispheres may be associated with greater empathy...intuition is an entirely different phenomenon.

Read it carefully,

It talks about intuition.

This is congruent with the findings that intuition according to Nardi is a whole brain function.

Your suggestion that the CC is not being used in a neurotypical brain and each hemisphere is acting autonomously is plain ignorance.

 

[Inquisitor]

Read it carefully,

It talks about intuition.

This is congruent with the findings that intuition according to Nardi is a whole brain function.

Your suggestion that the CC is not being used in a neurotypical brain and each hemisphere is acting autonomously is plain ignorance.

Spoiler

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The extreme male brain theory (EMB), put forward by Baron-Cohen suggests that autistic brains show an exaggeration of the features associated with male brains. These are mainly size and connectivity with males generally having a larger brain with more white matter, leading to increased connectivity in each hemisphere. This is seen in an exaggerated form in the brains of those with ASD. Another feature of male brains is having a smaller corpus callosum in at least some regions leading to decreased inter-hemispheric connectivity. This is also seen in those with ASD. Individuals with ASD were found to have widesperead interconnectivity abnormalities in specific brain regions. This could explain the different results on empathy tests between men and women as well as the deficiencies in empathy seen in ASD as empathy requires several brain regions to be activated which need information from many different areas of the brain. A further example of how brain structure can influence ASD is looking at cases where the corpus callosum does not fully develop (agenesis of corpus callosum). It was found that autism is commonly diagnosed in children where the corpus callosum does not fully develop (45% of children with agenesis of the corpus callosum). A further example of brain structures relating to ASD is that children with ASD tend to have a larger amygdala, this is another example of being an extreme version of the male brain which generally has a larger amygdala. These brain differences have all been shown to have an influence on social cognition and communication.

Nowhere do I see "intuition" in any of this...Clarify yourself.

It is possible that each hemisphere can act independently of the other, if this were not so, then people who had one hemisphere removed would not be able to re-train their brains.

Baron-Cohen and associates say that similar sex differences on average have been found using performance tests of empathy such as facial emotion recognition tasks[12] and on performance tests of systemizing such as measures of mechanical reasoning or 'intuitive physics'.

Intuition would seem to be a systemizing function which would mean it does not involve inter-hemispheric connectivity to any great extent. The whole wikipedia article makes zero mention of intuition except what I referenced above. It does discuss emotional and cognitive empathy, so Drenth's take on the science would appear to be accurate. The EEG studies likely point to something else happening. What I don't know...I'm not a neuroscientist.

 

[Miss spelt]

Intuition is a synthesizing function not a systemizing function.

The article is called extreme male brain theory, read it yourself.

Yes people with a bisected corpus callosum can function almost normally however this does not indicate that neurotypicals don't use it. That's a huge leap on your part, you need to let that go. It's ignorant.

 

[Miss spelt]

Oh actually you're right that the wiki article doesn't mention intuition, that was my mistake. That is the link supplied by the op that does that.

 

[Inquisitor]

Intuition is a synthesizing function not a systemizing function.

The article is called extreme male brain theory, read it yourself.

Yes people with a bisected corpus callosum can function almost normally however this does not indicate that neurotypicals don't use it. That's a huge leap on your part, you need to let that go. It's ignorant.

No intuition is not a "synthesizing function." You're pulling that right out of...nowhere. Ne motivates people to think diffusively, not synthetically. Ni on the other hand, does tend towards convergence. The attitude makes a big difference for each of the preferences, and this is why there are 8 of them and not 4. The addition of the aux, while less conscious than the dom, leads to substantial enough differences between people with identical doms that the number of total types becomes 16.

I never said that neurotypicals don't use the CC, merely that it's a stretch for you to assert that just because Nardi's EEG readings indicated the whole brain was activated that this automatically implied that the Jungian function of intuition was making use of the CC extensively. I stated that it's impossible to know for sure if/how much intuition and CC are related. I stand by what I said. Likely it is used to a degree, but the map I posted earlier clearly indicates Ne is isolated to the front right side of the brain.

Oh actually you're right that the wiki article doesn't mention intuition, that was my mistake. That is the link supplied by the op that does that.

Nope. The OP's linked article does not mention intuition either. Get your facts straight.

On a different topic...

Interestingly, savant syndrome can apparently be replicated by transcranial magnetic stimulation...

Spoiler

Savant skills are usually found in one or more of five major areas: art, musical abilities, calendar calculation, mathematics, and spatial skills. The most common kind of autistic savants are calendrical savants, "human calendars" who can calculate the day of the week for any given date with speed and accuracy. Memory feats are the second most common savant skill in a survey.

Approximately half of savants are autistic; the other half often have some form of central nervous system injury or disease.[1] Among those with autism, it is estimated that 10% have some form of savant abilities.
Mechanism
Psychological
No widely accepted cognitive theory explains savants' combination of talent and deficit. It has been suggested that individuals with autism are biased towards detail-focused processing and that this cognitive style predisposes individuals either with or without autism to savant talents. Another hypothesis is that savants hyper-systemize, thereby giving an impression of talent. Hyper-systemizing is an extreme state in the empathizing–systemizing theory that classifies people based on their skills in empathizing with others versus systemizing facts about the external world. Also, the attention to detail of savants is a consequence of enhanced perception or sensory hypersensitivity in these unique individuals. It has also been confirmed that some savants operate by directly accessing low-level, less-processed information that exists in all human brains that is not normally available to conscious awareness.

Neurological
Savant syndrome results from damage to the left anterior temporal lobe, an area of the brain key in processing sensory input, recognizing objects and forming visual memories. (possible Se?) Savant syndrome has been artificially replicated using transcranial magnetic stimulation to temporarily disable this area of the brain.

I would be interested to know how savant syndrome relates to psychological types.

Savant Syndrome

 

[Miss spelt]

Nope. The OP's linked article does not mention intuition either. Get your facts straight.

The article linked by the op's article does in fact. The link titled "recent research".

It also comments that it's a right-brain function as does the Wikipedia article on intuition. Nevertheless,

The article referenced by Drenth as his research does make this connection though.

 

[Inquisitor]

The article linked by the op's article does in fact. The link titled "recent research".

It also comments that it's a right-brain function as does the Wikipedia article on intuition. Nevertheless,

The article referenced by Drenth as his research does make this connection though.

I'm no neuroscientist, but after reading that Scientific American article, I come away thinking that while the research findings were interesting, the speculations were bogus. I'm inclined to dismiss them entirely. In any case, I think your criticisms of his article are unwarranted.

As for right brain/left brain, I found this very interesting npr article:

The Truth About The Left Brain / Right Brain Relationship

Spoiler

When the hemispheres are connected, don't they just share all the information and operate in a unified fashion?
The answer is, no, they don't.
They don't, in part, because they can't. Processing within each hemisphere relies on a rich, dense network of connections. The corpus callosum that connects the hemispheres is big for a fiber tract, but it is tiny compared to the network of connections within each hemisphere. Physically, then, it doesn't seem feasible for the hemispheres to fully share information or to operate in a fully unified fashion. Moreover, in a lot of cases, keeping things separate is (literally!) the smarter way for the hemispheres to function. Dividing up tasks and allowing the hemispheres to work semi-independently and take different approaches to the same problem seems to be a good strategy for the brain ... just as it often is in a partnerships between people.
...
the field has also uncovered a lot of hemispheric asymmetries – cases in which, for example, a left hemisphere brain area becomes active and its right hemisphere homologue (with the SAME basic inputs, outputs, etc.) is much less active (or vice versa). This should really surprise us: here are two brain areas that are essentially the same on all the dimensions the field is used to thinking about, yet they behave strikingly differently. There must be physical differences between them, of course – but then, this means that those "subtle" differences are much more critical for function than the field has appreciated.
...
I believe that cognitive functions arise from dynamically configured neural networks. On this view, the role played by any given brain area is different depending on the state of the network of which it is currently a part, and how activity unfolds over time often matters more than where it is in the brain.
...
For language comprehension in particular, my work has shown that left hemisphere processing is more influenced by what are sometimes called "top-down" connections, which means that the left hemisphere is more likely to predict what word might be coming up next and to have its processing affected by that prediction. (Sounds like Ne) The right hemisphere, instead, shows more "feedforward" processing: it is less influenced by predictions (which can make its processing less efficient) but then more able to later remember details about the words it encountered. (Sounds like Si) Because of what is likely a difference (possibly small) in the efficacy of particular connections within each hemisphere, the same brain areas in the two interact differently, and this leads to measurable and important asymmetries in how words are perceived, linked to meaning, remembered, and responded to.

The CC is very small and cannot handle what must be very large amounts of information passing within a single hemisphere. It's just not a good strategy as she said for the brain to operate as a unified whole. Specialized neural networks do their thing and are either highly efficient or not. This then lends more support for the map of the brain that I posted earlier. Intuition in the Jungian sense is most likely not a "whole brain" phenomenon.

 

[manishboy]

I'm late to the party but wanted to address the inciting post about the "one thing." I definitely recognize the need for maximal convergence of economic, social, political, vocational, pedestrian, elemental, and spiritual aspects of my life into a single coherent framework. On the other hand, I have a tendency to divergence, seeking maximal inclusion in that framework. It's my Big Painful TOE.

This tendency finds expression in my interest in abstract subjects--why study economics or material science when you can grok networks and be done with it. Then, when your wife wants to talk about family issues, you can confidently explain the implications of social topologies and run away before your bubble is burst by the pin of non-conforming details. Even within an interest, I seek the mini-max optimum--the minimal input which yields maximal output. For example, I've long trained in martial arts and have steadily whittle away training protocols and technical know-how until my practice sessions look like I'm just a water aerobics dropout doing minute hip and shoulder circles on land.

 

[WALKYRIA]

"Find what you love and let it kill you.” – Charles Bukowski (allegedly an ISFP)

Never knew this quote was that specific to ITPs.


Lol, I love how u guys lose yourselves and get crazy about meaningless detailed discussions...

Personnaly, I can relate to what AJD is talking about... I love many things but ultimately I "want" to be worldwide expert in one particular thing if not two or three. We realize very young that the world is harsch and that social darwinism is happening(especially in the more competitive fields), so we become territorial.

Of course, not sure about the ITP specifity of the phenomenon; and not sure about the scientific explanation given by AJD, but who cares, seriously.

 

[Architect]

No worries, Miss Spelt did a dive bomb into the forum with big booted feet. Good thoughts otherwise Walkyria, thanks for the quote.

 

[Esurient Fere]

Well. My first thought is underdeveloped people don't have the skills to present their ideas appropriately. I appreciate being challenged in my ideas. I don't appreciate being mistreated. And according to my MBTI (INTP) I'm the least likely to have my feelings hurt. I can still differentiate hostility and disagreement.
I do think the article is taking a general human experience and limiting it to one group. Apply his ideas to yourself and measure it against others that you know. Then take into consideration the lengthy and rich store of human experience and knowledge we have in art, religion, and social/political organizations. Everyone is looking for purpose and there are merely different manifestations of the search and nature of purpose.
There may be a relationship for what type of person has a more visible purpose. I don't know.

Personally I've spent a lot of time looking for purpose, I believe I know what it is. Yet I'm holding off from diving into it because I know it will be all consuming and I need to prepare. The interesting bit is my particular purpose needs a wide array of supporting interests. My very singular purpose requires me to be versatile and experienced in a wide array of concepts. Anything can become a contribution to it. This has led many people with an outside perspective into falsely asserting that I'm purposeless.