The elusive ENTJ.

[Auburn]

Nagging is a behavior; as such it is not specific to any psychic process. IxxJs may have no functions common with each other. You are looking at this in terms of the four letter code - which is a false perspective.

Richard Dawkins has excessive conviction; he has a lot of "Judgment" (not "J-ness" but use of the T/F functions). "IxxJs" are auxiliary-Judgment users (P-leads) so they're wrongly called "J-types". Their primary nature is not one of defending a conviction or position -- but instead perpetuating a perspective and expanding it.

Dawkins does that too (aux-Pi) but his motus operandi is principle-based, logical & ethical correctness. And the way he debates this with others is by responding with calculation to specific objections. This is a behavior, but as far as behaviors go it belongs to Je-leads.

 

[Ink]

I'm still not convinced Dawkins isn't an INTP. Perhaps make a separate thread about it?

 

[Jennywocky]

As much as I hate to agree with Scorpion (ha ha, what's the world coming to? ), I don't think Hathaway and Silverman are the same type either -- Silverman is TP, Hathaway is some type of F and often ends up portraying FJ characters on screen. You see a definite difference between TP sensibilities vs Fe.

I always thought Kathy Griffin was a good example of an ETP woman.

 

[Ink]

As much as I hate to agree with Scorpion (ha ha, what's the world coming to? ), I don't think Hathaway and Silverman are the same type either -- Silverman is TP, Hathaway is some type of F and often ends up portraying FJ characters on screen. You see a definite difference between TP sensibilities vs Fe.

I always thought Kathy Griffin was a good example of an ETP woman.

I don't know much about Sarah Silverman but I remember I was convinced she was ISFJ the first time I saw her and the more I saw the more the impression cemented in... Got a clip or something we could analyze togethere?

 

[scorpiomover]

Nagging is a behavior; as such it is not specific to any psychic process. IxxJs may have no functions common with each other. You are looking at this in terms of the four letter code - which is a false perspective.

In the UK, nagging is the #1, or at the least, in the top 3, of the things British men HATE about women. If you come here, and you hear a British man speaking about a friend of his that nags, he'll say something like "He nags and nags! He's like a woman!" So, at least in the UK, it's more than a behaviour. To cross that boundary, you have be that kind of intense perceiving-dominant, who is so obsessed with their own ideas, that you'll happily do whatever it takes to make your inner vision happen, no matter what.

In female IxxxJs, you also see the nagging, and in other females. But in females P, it's usually a single nag, and a few nags later on, and then they give up, and find something else to nag about. Female Ni-doms can be pretty much relentless on a topic.

Richard Dawkins has excessive conviction; he has a lot of "Judgment" (not "J-ness" but use of the T/F functions). "IxxJs" are auxiliary-Judgment users (P-leads) so they're wrongly called "J-types". Their primary nature is not one of defending a conviction or position -- but instead perpetuating a perspective and expanding it.

I've watched him in interviews. He admits that he's not nearly so committed to his judgements as he seems at first glance. That's typical behaviour of Ni-doms, who admit that inside they are often doubting their ideas, even though when they speak, they seem adamant that no other view can be held.

Dawkins does that too (aux-Pi) but his motus operandi is principle-based, logical & ethical correctness.

Except that for the level of logic normally found in the UK, he's pretty poor at it, and he's also extremely over Fe for a British person. We're far more likely to care about our pets, than people. He also has an excessive worry about how religion is hurting OTHER people. He uses logic, but poorly, like a tertiary Ti, and he's heavy on ethics when it comes to worrying about others, like an Fe-aux, but without the typical demand that he is treated nicely that Fe-doms have.

And the way he debates this with others is by responding with calculation to specific objections. This is a behavior, but as far as behaviors go it belongs to Je-leads.

Actually, Je-aux also do that. If you look at INTJf, INTJs do it all the time.

 

[scorpiomover]

I don't know much about Sarah Silverman but I remember I was convinced she was ISFJ the first time I saw her and the more I saw the more the impression cemented in... Got a clip or something we could analyze togethere?

Sarah Silverman On Voter ID Laws

Watch the clip and the analysis.

Then take a look at the MBTI Comic on the INTP dinosaur. She has the same clever insights into the details, that comes from Ti. She has the same behaviours to criticise the flaws in our society.

F*@#ing Matt Damon

Self-deprecation of self. Total admittance of confusion. Goes to the wild, crazy idea, that shocks everyone mentally. Makes complete fun of society for its irrational attitudes.

Sarah Silverman: A new perspective on the number 3000

I suspect that she is either INTP or ISTP. But she's so abstract thinking, that I think, INTP. Note also her self-deprecation: "This can't be right."

 

[Ink]

Sarah Silverman On Voter ID Laws

Watch the clip and the analysis.

Then take a look at the MBTI Comic on the INTP dinosaur. She has the same clever insights into the details, that comes from Ti. She has the same behaviours to criticise the flaws in our society.

F*@#ing Matt Damon

Self-deprecation of self. Total admittance of confusion. Goes to the wild, crazy idea, that shocks everyone mentally. Makes complete fun of society for its irrational attitudes.

Sarah Silverman: A new perspective on the number 3000

I suspect that she is either INTP or ISTP. But she's so abstract thinking, that I think, INTP. Note also her self-deprecation: "This can't be right."

Matt Damon is ISTP and Kimmel ESTP for contrast, that high pitch voice you hear is definitely Fe. NOT inferior. She is very inwardly focused, indicative of Pi, ISFJ fits best by far. Great Si memory recall.

 

[Auburn]

@scorpiomover ..

In the UK, nagging is the #1, or at the least, in the top 3, of the things British men HATE about women. If you come here, and you hear a British man speaking about a friend of his that nags, he'll say something like "He nags and nags! He's like a woman!" So, at least in the UK, it's more than a behaviour.

...there is so much fallacy. lol.

Firstly, the fact (supposing it is indeed a fact, I don't know) that British women nag more than women of other country, is still a behavior. In fact, it confirms that nagging is behavioral and subject to different contexts such as cultures -- rather than intrinsic psychic processes. You kinda proved my point.

Secondly, it's folly to characterize that way about all the people within a country. Simply being born in one part of the world rather than another has nothing to do with.. well, any of this. There isn't more logic in Britain than anywhere else, nor are British people innately more logical --- nor are ethics irrational, for that matter.

To cross that boundary, you have be that kind of intense perceiving-dominant, who is so obsessed with their own ideas, that you'll happily do whatever it takes to make your inner vision happen, no matter what.

Or.. you could just be a Je-lead, who are more innately driven to execute their etho/logos belief on the world. No other factors considered, a Je-lead is most predisposed to that behavior.

 

[scorpiomover]

@Ink

Matt Damon is ISTP

Could be. Matt seems like an ISTP.

and Kimmel ESTP for contrast,

Could be.Never seen him before. He didn't say much. So I have no data to argue for or against.

that high pitch voice you hear is definitely Fe. NOT inferior.

I don't go by physiognomical analyses of MBTI. Have only seen empirical guesses to support that theory. No theoretical explanations. No studies of hundreds of people. Nothing that I observed personally, that would justify that. Remember, also, she's a WOMAN. High-pitch is usually down to biological development of the larynx. You might as well say that you've found the genes for MBTI.

She is very inwardly focused, indicative of Pi

So INTPs are NOT inwardly focussed?

Great Si memory recall.

I'm an INTP, and many people are routinely amazed by my memory recall.

ISFJ fits best by far.

You're arguing that instead of Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, she is Si-Fe-Ti-Ne. You're just reversing the conscious and subconscious functions. Not enough to prove not INTP. You have to ALSO prove that Ti and Ne are only being used subconsciously, by automatic behaviour such as in body language, but not in conscious speech, and Si and Fe are used directly, such as in ISTJs, and ENFJs. Tell me that she throws temper tantrums and usually gets her own way, and you might have a point.

I provided some vids. Maybe cite some of the things she says, and how that is consistent with the behaviour of ISFJs, by citing online descriptions of ISFJs or ISFJS talking about themselves?

 

[scorpiomover]

@Auburn

...there is so much fallacy. lol.

We disagree. Yaaay. What a surprise.

Firstly, the fact (supposing it is indeed a fact, I don't know) that British women nag more than women of other country, is still a behavior. In fact, it confirms that nagging is behavioral and subject to different contexts such as cultures -- rather than intrinsic psychic processes. You kinda proved my point.

Except that I never said that they nag more than women of any other country.

Also, ALL actions that are done by people are by their very nature behavioural. You can't find anything that humans can do, that is "intrinsic psychic processes" that isn't also behavioural, unless you prove that it's purely non-memetic, which means that either you test a million people, and you prove that literally every one of that million, who all have gene variant A, have that behaviour, even under torture to not do so, and everyone without the gene variant, never do it, even under torture to do so, or something equally rigorous, or you have no basis for your argument.

Moreover, Jung explicitly wrote that parents can make children behave differently to their type.

Secondly, it's folly to characterize that way about all the people within a country. Simply being born in one part of the world rather than another has nothing to do with.. well, any of this.

You can't judge a panda that grew up in a zoo by the same standards as a panda that grew up in the wild. For one, the pandas that grow in zoos rarely mate, if ever. You HAVE to take into account one's upbringing, to work out how their typology would have developed according to their experiences. If that wasn't the case, then typology would produce the same characteristics in all individuals of the same type, and then it would be easy to type everyone, and your special contributions to typology would be already known and not worth posting.

There isn't more logic in Britain than anywhere else, nor are British people innately more logical --- nor are ethics irrational, for that matter.

You're feeling threatened by a challenge to your intelligence? Not my prob. Nevertheless, one can observe if there are general trends in the actions, physical behaviour and conversational behaviour of the people of a country. It changes from generation to generation, from region to region, from social class to social class, and there are plenty of individuals. But there ARE PATTERNS to people. It's the basis of Jung's work, that there are patterns to people. So cut the BS. That being said, I'm saying, that what Richard Dawkins writes, were someone down the pub to say that, he would be pullled down in an instant. Fancy using the Gangster Argument and expecting to get away with it. I mean, seriously.

For Americans, I gather, that simplistic arguments like that sway them. I mean, look at Fox News. People only show clips of it here, to lampoon Americans.

Also, you forget, that for Americans, he's not particularly good-looking. But compared to the high streets here, where people don't really take that much care in their appearance, he's practically a middle-aged Adonis.

Look at this, which is just Googling "British professors". Look at Richard Dawkins against Peter Higgs.

Actually, read the article.

Peter Higgs:

Professor Higgs is an atheist and has said he doesn't like that the particle is nicknamed the 'God particle', as he believes the term 'might offend people who are religious'.

Richard Dawkins:

Richard Dawkins last weekend told Qatar-based news network Al Jazeera he believed that raising a child a Roman Catholic was worse than child abuse.

Can you honestly say that an ENTJ would say that it was better for you to rape your own child, than to raise him as a Roman Catholic? Seriously? Is extroversion the inability to comprehend just how offensive that is? Imagine if he said that to someone who had been abused by a family member or family friend, which is the most common form. Do you think they'd agree with him? Seriously? In what way is he not oblivious of how offensive he is?

Or.. you could just be a Je-lead, who are more innately driven to execute their etho/logos belief on the world. No other factors considered, a Je-lead is most predisposed to that behavior.

You're just picking up on the fact that I'm trying to be do more with my life, by trying to adjust my attitudes to do more of sticking with what works, and by trying many things. If you're going to type me that way, then a few weeks ago, I was an INFP, 6 months ago, I was an INFJ, and a year ago, I was an INTJ.

You can't type people that easily. You know it. You don't like it. Stop avoiding it.

 

[Auburn]

I didn't mean "you" specifically, I meant it in the general sense and actually referring to Dawkins (who I read as Je-lead). I don't know what type you are... >.>

I said "no other factors considered" for a reason. Obviously one can't type people that easily and I'm the one whose against typing via behavior here, but I said that if no other factors/variables are considered -- certain things are true -- and this is true in any field of study. Like how we describe laws of motion easier with frictionless surfaces, etc. Contextual thinking is the basics of formal logic...

That said, I agree Dawkins is quite oblivious to how offensive he is -- that is often part of lacking Fe, and moreover, of having Te. You're suggesting a TeNi would somehow not be so oblivious to such a thing, but it's actually quite the opposite. TeNi are quite prone to be inconsiderate and crass, both in their humor and conduct. (once again, disposition. not a prerequisite of being TeNi/ENTJ nor what defines one).

But I don't think we'll come to agree on anything... so I'll take my leave.. ^^;
I think I may have a solution to all this confusion in typology by tomorrow!

 

[Ink]

@Ink

Could be. Matt seems like an ISTP.

Could be.Never seen him before. He didn't say much. So I have no data to argue for or against.

I don't go by physiognomical analyses of MBTI. Have only seen empirical guesses to support that theory. No theoretical explanations. No studies of hundreds of people. Nothing that I observed personally, that would justify that. Remember, also, she's a WOMAN. High-pitch is usually down to biological development of the larynx. You might as well say that you've found the genes for MBTI.

So INTPs are NOT inwardly focussed?

I'm an INTP, and many people are routinely amazed by my memory recall.

You're arguing that instead of Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, she is Si-Fe-Ti-Ne. You're just reversing the conscious and subconscious functions. Not enough to prove not INTP. You have to ALSO prove that Ti and Ne are only being used subconsciously, by automatic behaviour such as in body language, but not in conscious speech, and Si and Fe are used directly, such as in ISTJs, and ENFJs. Tell me that she throws temper tantrums and usually gets her own way, and you might have a point.

I provided some vids. Maybe cite some of the things she says, and how that is consistent with the behaviour of ISFJs, by citing online descriptions of ISFJs or ISFJS talking about themselves?

The Fe voice is high-strung, emotionalliy charged and excitableish, that's what I saw in her, she does it way too much to be ITP... The Si-dom memory recall is not a better memory recall, it's just a better visualization of all the distinguished physical elements of the situation.

 

[scorpiomover]

The Fe voice is high-strung, emotionalliy charged and excitableish, that's what I saw in her, she does it way too much to be ITP...

She's a Jewish girl. They all have that high-pitched voice. They all talk as if they're highly strung, emotionallly charged, and excitable. Even the INTJ girls.

The Si-dom memory recall is not a better memory recall, it's just a better visualization of all the distinguished physical elements of the situation.

She's Jewish, and she's 40. Jews are taught to visualise from young, and by the time an INTP is 40, they've also heavily developed their Si.

 

[Ink]

ITPs have inferior Fe.

She's a girl, and she's highly-strung by nature, just like all INTPs. FYI, your voice is probably a lot higher than you think it is.

That's nice. But I really don't see Sarah Silverman expressing any greater visualisation than INTPs. I certainly see quite large differences between her and an SJ. For one, if you turned to an SJ and started saying the voting laws were unfair, they'd probably just say "you're wrong. don't be such an idiot." or they'd say "the government do what they want." and then rant about it for half an hour, in a way that would never be funny, unless you were laughing AT the person.

ISFJs show the most similar brain patterns to INTPs, that's why you are mistaking her for one probably. Lol, why do you think my voice is more high-strung than I think?

 

[scorpiomover]

ISFJs show the most similar brain patterns to INTPs, that's why you are mistaking her for one probably.

I can't see her brain patterns.

Lol, why do you think my voice is more high-strung than I think?

1) Because you're a P. Males that exude confidence, like Js, have a lower baritone. Male thats are accommodating, like Ps, have a much higher vocal tone.
2) Because you're an N. Males that are more in touch with their physicality, like Sensors, also have a lower tone, and males that are more thinking and abstract, like Ns, have a much higher tone.
3) Because you're an Introvert. Males that spend a lot of time with others by choice, like Extroverts, find that other males usually associate males with a higher vocal range as being camp, unmasculine, weedy, and with probable homophobic leanings. It puts a lot of males off them, and if they are not cued in to the social cues for violence and bullying, likely to get bullied. So extroverted males who already have a high tone, make an effort to lower it. But also, that happens naturally with people whose bodies build up all over and including the throat area, which happens when you get into sports and fights a lot, and especially as a kid, when you're growing. The reverse happens to Introverts. Their lack of exposure to others, usually results in a lack of exercise, and a lack of fights, and so the body doesn't have to toughen up, and when muscles don't get worked, then they atrophy, and so the result is a higher vocal tone.
As a result, an INTP male is likely to have a much higher vocal tone than average.
That's backed up by what I saw in school and in my university, where we had 50,000 students, but where the environment was reasonably suited for introverts, provided they didn't go into the areas where the locals lived.

Now, you might have realised that consequently taken that into account. But had you done that, you would have realised that I might have seen that as a potential point, and there would have been at least some indication in your words of that, and I saw none at all. Ergo, you're not taking that into account. That you're an introvert, means that you're using your own self as a baseline, and you're not aware of any reason to consider that you might be squeakier than the baseline.

On top, INTPs tend to suffer from low self-esteem, anxiety and depression, and especially when they are young. This is often referred to as being highly-strung. In other forums, it's been noted and agreed by INTPs, that INTPs tend to not be that great at controlling their emotional outbursts, until they get control of Fe, which normally happens into mature age. Highly-strung people are known for having many outbursts with highly-strung , squeaky voices, that are positively brimming with their emotional selves. It's just that with INTPs, it's normally the horribly depressive squeakiness. So there is another reason for you having such a voice.

 

[scorpiomover]

I didn't mean "you" specifically, I meant it in the general sense and actually referring to Dawkins (who I read as Je-lead). I don't know what type you are... >.>

Funny, because I was pegged as an uber-logical, head-in-the-clouds, wild-theories, absent-minded professor type, since I was 5 years old, by everyone I met, and in every type of test I've ever done, except for MBTI tests, where most have said INTP, but on some I've got a slight variant.

That said, I agree Dawkins is quite oblivious to how offensive he is -- that is often part of lacking Fe, and moreover, of having Te. You're suggesting a TeNi would somehow not be so oblivious to such a thing, but it's actually quite the opposite. TeNi are quite prone to be inconsiderate and crass, both in their humor and conduct. (once again, disposition. not a prerequisite of being TeNi/ENTJ nor what defines one).

There is real ignorance of people's feelings, and there is feigned ignorance of people's feelings.

If someone is put in charge of a group, or starts his own business and employs others, and they are ignorant of people's feelings, then they have no clue about how to deal with people. Half their employees do what they're told. The other half do the opposite. The net effect is zero. The company is just as productive and profitable without him, and this shows in the profits, because profts have not improved for all the time he's been there, other than what would have happened no matter what.

Then there is the guy who feigns ignorance. He understands people's feelings. He only feigns ignorance when it's more useful to get things done than not feigning ignorance. So he actually gets more done, than even the people who understand people's feelings very well, and always show that. Profits go up and up and up, far more than anyone ever expected.

ENTJs are usually called the CEO, or the Field-marshal, because under their command, the make the company do extremely well.

 

[Ink]

1) Because you're a P. Males that exude confidence, like Js, have a lower baritone. Male thats are accommodating, like Ps, have a much higher vocal tone.

That is just ridiculous... J or P have NOTHING to do with confidence. Please go learn what MBTI is all about before you bother typing someone.

 

[scorpiomover]

That is just ridiculous... J or P have NOTHING to do with confidence. Please go learn what MBTI is all about before you bother typing someone.

Js like to make decisions. Ps prefer to avoid making decisions. Confidence is highly associated with decisiveness. But if you prefer, then I'll rephrase it as those males who tend to be overly-decisive, tend to have a lower vocal tone, and the reverse is also true.

 

[Ink]

Js like to make decisions. Ps prefer to avoid making decisions. Confidence is highly associated with decisiveness. But if you prefer, then I'll rephrase it as those males who tend to be overly-decisive, tend to have a lower vocal tone, and the reverse is also true.

IPs make decisions just as much as EJs, they just do them internally. Does INTP Paul Newman have a squeky voice? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKRWD9ec_Eo

 

[~~~]

A younger person with a deeper voice doesn't necessarily always employ that voice. ENTJs do learn to adapt to the world around them and the world often doesn't particularly appreciate the young ENTJ.

 

[PhoenixRising]

I recall a image of 16 types, with stickers and slogans for each type, on their attitudes to love. The one for INTPs was "Loving you is easy".

I don't know who created that, but it doesn't sound accurate to me. Most people differ somewhat, even within the same type, so there may be other INTPs out there with a different worldview and resulting behavior in relationships. Being Ti dominant though, perfectionism is often the aim in any endeavor for an INTP. So it makes sense that any imperfection perceived in a mate would be picked apart and there would be an attempt to 'correct' it. From what I've seen, other people usually take this as an attack upon them self, or an unfair judgement. This causes a lot of pain and frustration for other types trying to be in a relationship with an INTP.

 

[scorpiomover]

IPs make decisions just as much as EJs, they just do them internally.

Which means people don't automatically know those decisions are made, and others cannot be expected to perceive them as decisive.

Does INTP Paul Newman have a squeky voice? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKRWD9ec_Eo

I don't have a squeaky voice. But that doesn't mean that I can't. It means you can't assume that just because women have higher pitched voices than men, that everyone who has a squeaky voice is a Feeler. It also means that just because some woman you dated who had a squeaky voice criticised you, does not mean that everyone with a squeaky voice is a Judger.

If you can back it up with rigorous statistical studies, that out of 10,000 patients with a squeaky voice, who were given tests by a computer, 100% were typed as one of INFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ or ESFJ, then you might have a point. Otherwise, where is the evidence?

Where is the reason?
Do you seriously think that Thinkers cannot ever have a squeaky voice? Why?
Do you seriously think that people who are Perceivers cannot ever have a squeaky voice? Why?

Where is the call to reason?
Where is the call to evidence?

You were the one to make an incredibly extraordinary claim, with your claim about a person with a squeaky voice having to be an FJ. You didn't provide reason or evidence to back it up. You just stated it, as if everyone should take your word for it, as if you were some infallible pope. You want to make extraordinary claims? Then as Carl Sagan said, you have to provide extraordinary proof. If not, then expect to be treated like an idiot.

Still, I didn't rip your idea apart. I did start. But then I thought better of it. I put it one line to make you think. I added "probably" so that you had a chance to defend yourself. Then I re-thought better of that, and edited that out as well. But no, you couldn't let it go, could you? So, I gave you a rational argument as to why you MIGHT have a high-pitched voice. None of it was definite.

I wrote that you may not have noticed. That left you a way out. You could have just rung up a friend, and asked if you had a high-pitched voice. Even if he/she said you did, if he was a friend, then he would have reassured you, that it was nothing to worry about.

You had lots of ways out. You didn't take any of them. You basically talked yourself into a corner, all because you were adamant that Sarah Silverman HAD to be an ISFJ, and because you refused to accept that it was theoretically possible that one of your theories could be wrong.

One of the wonderful things about being an INTP, is that we love failure, because humans learn from our failures far more than from our successes. Why deny that? Why be who you are not?

 

[Ink]

Which means people don't automatically know those decisions are made, and others cannot be expected to perceive them as decisive.

I don't have a squeaky voice. But that doesn't mean that I can't. It means you can't assume that just because women have higher pitched voices than men, that everyone who has a squeaky voice is a Feeler. It also means that just because some woman you dated who had a squeaky voice criticised you, does not mean that everyone with a squeaky voice is a Judger.

If you can back it up with rigorous statistical studies, that out of 10,000 patients with a squeaky voice, who were given tests by a computer, 100% were typed as one of INFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ or ESFJ, then you might have a point. Otherwise, where is the evidence?

Where is the reason?
Do you seriously think that Thinkers cannot ever have a squeaky voice? Why?
Do you seriously think that people who are Perceivers cannot ever have a squeaky voice? Why?

Where is the call to reason?
Where is the call to evidence?

You were the one to make an incredibly extraordinary claim, with your claim about a person with a squeaky voice having to be an FJ. You didn't provide reason or evidence to back it up. You just stated it, as if everyone should take your word for it, as if you were some infallible pope. You want to make extraordinary claims? Then as Carl Sagan said, you have to provide extraordinary proof. If not, then expect to be treated like an idiot.

Still, I didn't rip your idea apart. I did start. But then I thought better of it. I put it one line to make you think. I added "probably" so that you had a chance to defend yourself. Then I re-thought better of that, and edited that out as well. But no, you couldn't let it go, could you? So, I gave you a rational argument as to why you MIGHT have a high-pitched voice. None of it was definite.

I wrote that you may not have noticed. That left you a way out. You could have just rung up a friend, and asked if you had a high-pitched voice. Even if he/she said you did, if he was a friend, then he would have reassured you, that it was nothing to worry about.

You had lots of ways out. You didn't take any of them. You basically talked yourself into a corner, all because you were adamant that Sarah Silverman HAD to be an ISFJ, and because you refused to accept that it was theoretically possible that one of your theories could be wrong.

One of the wonderful things about being an INTP, is that we love failure, because humans learn from our failures far more than from our successes. Why deny that? Why be who you are not?

Skimmed your post. Everyone has a high-pitched and a low-pitched voice, all I was saying that was how a high-pitched strong Fe voice sounds, gets more excited at certain places than others etc etc. Confidence = low pitch (not as low for all of course, depends how your body is structured), confidence MIGHT be VAGUELY related to type but that's only because of how society values certain things etc. Low voices are related to confidence, only fair conclusion.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Why do British accents make people sound perma-drunk?

Edit; Or are all British people just drunk all the time?

 

[Double_V]

In my experience(s) ENTJ woman are not that hard to find. They gravitate toward administrative jobs, and will do just about anything to get them. It appears to me they are very manipulative and frequently 'use' people and situations to get what they want. And they want everything.

I generally find that in the work officesthey are narcissistic/think quite highly of themselves, and ... never know/understand the basics of whatever job or situation the want to dominate. Including men. I always find in purplexing that someone who wishes to be in charge so badly fails to understand what they are in charge of.

There has been one trolling for a guy for years over the ENTP site we came from. If you go there and say what you want I'm sure you'll find her. Some of ENTP guys hide from her, even created other accounts so she wouldn't know they were there .

Come to think of it, I think there are two of them over there. Give it a whirl.

 

[SpaceYeti]

In my experience(s) ENTJ woman are not that hard to find. They gravitate toward administrative jobs, and will do just about anything to get them. It appears to me they are very manipulative and frequently 'use' people and situations to get what they want. And they want everything.

I generally find that in the work officesthey are narcissistic/think quite highly of themselves, and ... never know/understand the basics of whatever job or situation the want to dominate. Including men. I always find in purplexing that someone who wishes to be in charge so badly fails to understand what they are in charge of.

There has been one trolling for a guy for years over the ENTP site we came from. If you go there and say what you want I'm sure you'll find her. Some of ENTP guys hide from here, even created other accounts so she wouldn't know they were there .

Come to think of it, I think there are two of them over there. Give it a whirl.

What ENTP site? Linkinate, please?

 

[Chad]

I guess I don't really no that mach about the ENTJ personality type. However I have found that a balance between balance/common ground is helpful in a relationship. I this way I think an ENTJ might work for an INTP very well.

I am married to an ISTJ and even though we don't always agree we have many areas of common ground and she balance my negatives with here S and J. I am a bit more E than my wife and we are equally both T.

For me the one thing that I think I always need in a mate is a strong T I couldn't find myself in a happy relationship for long with someone who didn't like to think.

I is not as important to me as T however I do enjoy the ability to have more alone time. E can be very clingy and this sometime irritates me.

S can be irritating as well because of there lack of imagination. It very helpful when you are trying to achieve a goal but outside of work time its becomes practicality can become boring. This is why I push my wife during our time and she push me during work time. It creates a more balanced approach to both of our lives.

J this has to be my least favorite personality type. As it involves quick thinking (with often times is over simplified logic). However, no matter how much this may bug me its a useful ability to have. This is why my wife is in charge of the impromptu decision making (like what to watch on TV or what move to watch tonight, when and how we pay the bills, and what to eat tonight). I am in charge of the long term planing/researching (like researching vehicles, houses, universities for my wife to go to pharmacy school, voting, where we are going to move and settle down and doing taxes). This is not to say that I don't discusse all of this with my we I just do the research.

 

[Double_V]

[FLV][/FLV]

What ENTP site? Linkinate, please?

ENTPdotOrg.

 

[~~~]

Why do British accents make people sound perma-drunk?

Edit; Or are all British people just drunk all the time?

It's for comedic effect old chap.

 

[scorpiomover]

Skimmed your post. Everyone has a high-pitched and a low-pitched voice, all I was saying that was how a high-pitched strong Fe voice sounds, gets more excited at certain places than others etc etc. Confidence = low pitch (not as low for all of course, depends how your body is structured), confidence MIGHT be VAGUELY related to type but that's only because of how society values certain things etc. Low voices are related to confidence, only fair conclusion.

Fe => FJ. Js are associated with confidence. So either you are wrong about confidence, or wrong about Fe voices, or both.

If you want to re-define the word "confidence", it already has an existing usage and understanding, and so then you are not using the correct term.

You still also have NOT provided ANY basis for your extraordinary claim about Fe voices.

 

[scorpiomover]

Why do British accents make people sound perma-drunk?

Edit; Or are all British people just drunk all the time?

WTF? British people sound completely different when sober and drunk. Sober has a clear, crisp note to it. Drunk has a clear slurring of the voice.

A lot of North American voices, on the other hand, are pretty difficult to distinguish between sober and drunk. Hearing how often Americans will have a beer, I had thought that some of it was because of that.

 

[~~~]

... never know/understand the basics of whatever job or situation the want to dominate. Including men. I always find in purplexing that someone who wishes to be in charge so badly fails to understand what they are in charge of.

Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. Organisations can be more effective if they take advantage of the strengths of many. If they don't then a more thoughtful ENTJ will work on their weaknesses.

 

[Duxwing]

Fe => FJ. Js are associated with confidence. So either you are wrong about confidence, or wrong about Fe voices, or both.

If you want to re-define the word "confidence", it already has an existing usage and understanding, and so then you are not using the correct term.

You still also have NOT provided ANY basis for your extraordinary claim about Fe voices.

Your claim is rather extraordinary in itself. I've met several very confident women with high pitched voices (even when compared to other women) and one of them is an EXFJ, no less. A better word for what you've described, then, is dominance, but that claim doesn't hold water, either. Teddy Roosevelt absolutely could not be bullied, and his pitch was quite high, almost poindexterish. Yet TR was anything but a poindexter: he was a portly gentleman who enjoyed wrestling a bear that he kept as a pet in the White House, went down to an opposition state alone after passing extremely unpopular legislation (the legislation being the elimination of racial segregation in the civil service, if I remember correctly), and even continuing a campaign speech after taking a bullet in the chest. And yet, as I mentioned, his voice was high and nasal-- not at all what your model would predict. Ergo, you ought to revise your model to account for how the utterly insane (there's no denying that Teddy had a screw loose) levels of confidence, dominance, and even aggression of Theodore Roosevelt didn't lower his voice one bit.

-Duxwing

 

[scorpiomover]

Your claim is rather extraordinary in itself. I've met several very confident women with high pitched voices (even when compared to other women) and one of them is an EXFJ, no less.

What? So, if Ink said that all dogs are black, and I said that that's not necessarily true, you'd say that the only other option is no dogs are black? This isn't an either-or. There are more options than all squeaky voices are FJs, and no squeaky voices are FJs.

The rest of your post is all based on this presumption, and so is entirely redundant.

 

[SpaceYeti]

WTF? British people sound completely different when sober and drunk. Sober has a clear, crisp note to it. Drunk has a clear slurring of the voice.

A lot of North American voices, on the other hand, are pretty difficult to distinguish between sober and drunk. Hearing how often Americans will have a beer, I had thought that some of it was because of that.

So... drunk all the time. Roger.

 

[Ink]

Scorpiomover, can you read? I just said voice-pitch is completely unrelated to type. You misunderstood me.

OnT: Pure ENTJness (and funny):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q7kUFS-0XQ

 

[scorpiomover]

Scorpiomover, can you read? I just said voice-pitch is completely unrelated to type. You misunderstood me.

OnT: Pure ENTJness (and funny):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q7kUFS-0XQ

I don't know how well-known Dennis Leary is in your country. But amongst 40-year-olds in the UK, he's extremely well-known, and well-liked by pretty much everyone, INTPs, INFJs, INTJs, ISTPs, pretty much everyone. You'd have to go very far to find someone who does NOT like his jokes.

As to his humour, it's a bit loud and intense, sure. It's also very oriented at pointing out the inconsistencies in modern society. "Lou Gehrig,..., died of Lou Gehrig disease. How do you not see that coming?"

I guess, that if we agree that spotting logical inconsistencies is the skill of Te-doms, and Ti-doms can do, well, nothing, then what you are saying could be perfectly plausible.

Or, on the other hand, if you are saying that you have stage fright and suffer from fear of social interaction, to such an extent that you cannot possibly imagine getting up on a stage like that, even if it would allow you to express all your ideas, and get paid extremely well for it, then you're simply an INTP who has social phobias, much like many people around today, because you aren't taught to socialise and interact with others, as your grandparents, your great-grandparents, and everyone used to be taught.

 

[Ink]

What the hell are you rambling about scorpiomover?

 

[Reluctantly]

What the hell are you rambling about scorpiomover?

Get the hell out of my head, Charles.

 

[scorpiomover]

What the hell are you rambling about scorpiomover?

Leary is as much of an ENTJ, as the majority of posters here are.

 

[Ink]

Leary uses Te-Ni-Se-Fi in that order. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjG1Kh8GKuo

 

[scorpiomover]

Leary uses Te-Ni-Se-Fi in that order.

It must be sooooo obvious to you, that you think that everyone immediately sees the reasons why Leary has to be dominant in Te, and auxiliary with Ni, and tertiary with Se, and have inferior Fe. But I just don't see the connection, Honestly, and I think that it would not be obvious to many scientists.

So, for the entire rest of the planet, or, just for argument, just me, perhaps you'd like to explain the obvious, in a way that a scientist would agree with?

 

[Ink]

It's not that big of a deal to have everyone agree with me, but sure I'll try to point out some things... His thinking is very logistical, "your studio is bigger now", indicative of Te-Se... When he thinks of the past his Ni is very quick to visualize it, very "out-there-Se-handgesturing" while he demonstrates the vision... He represses his Fi (it occasionally peaks out, when he hugged the robot at the beginning for example) etc...

 

[scorpiomover]

It's not that big of a deal to have everyone agree with me, but sure I'll try to point out some things... His thinking is very logistical, "your studio is bigger now", indicative of Te-Se...

You mean that you've never noticed that a room you're in is bigger than it used to be? Of course you have.

Notice his words. Craig says that Dennis is famous. Dennis replies to him "Well, you're famous. Look at the size of your studio."
First, returning the compliment to a friend, which is a strong indicator of Fe.
Then the argument: A big studio indicates fame. It's true that in the USA, the bigger the star, the bigger the studio. But not because it's practical. Often, the smaller stars are bands. The big stars are usually one person. The reason is what it signifies, that the bigger star gets the better treatment, and hence the bigger room (James Ven Der Beek made a whole episode of it. It's an emotional comparative one-upmanship between different stars in terms of how much they are valued by others, their current employers, and so is Fe.

He also follows on with saying how Craig started off without any fame. He keeps looking back at the past to compare it to the present. Heavy use of Si.

He represses his Fi (it occasionally peaks out, when he hugged the robot at the beginning for example) etc...

I thought that was a bit odd. I've seen plenty of robots brought on TV. First time I've seen someone kiss one. Either he was trying to achieve a laugh, or he's repressing his Fi so much he's turned it into Fe.

When he thinks of the past his Ni is very quick to visualize it, very "out-there-Se-handgesturing" while he demonstrates the vision...

You mean that you aren't aware that these are normal behaviours for INTPs? How?

Hand-gesturing was known in the 70s and the 80s to be extremely typical of a guy with really "out there" ideas, the sort of ideas that would ONLY be associated with Ne.

Also, his visualisation: He started to describe how people in the UK have pubs, where people perform. It's not relevant. It doesn't add to the story. All he had to say was that Craig was doing a gig. That's what INTJs do, and ENTJs do, because Ni is good at reducing a multi-faceted idea down to a concise few details. Watch how he adds that Frank Skinner is famous in the UK. Who cares who Frank Skinner is? It's not relevant to the story. INTJs HATE that sort of waffle. ENTJs tolerate it, but only barely.

It IS the sort of extra details that xNTPs like to throw in there.

But perhaps it's a cultural difference? This is all obvious to me, from growing up in the 70s and the 80s, and watching countless xNTP absent-minded professors with wild ideas on the Open University and generally on the science programmes on British TV.

Perhaps your experiences of people is completely different? Perhaps you've never come across an animated xNTP?

xNTPs have 2 modes: non-animated and animated. The animated one is the playful one, which also comes across as very funny, and very eccentric in INTPs. The non-animated one is the robotic one, which usually comes out when we feel stressed.

Could it be that the INTPs that you are used to, are heavily criticised when they show their playful side? It wasn't always like that. People used to be far more appreciative of INTPs, in the 70s and the early 80s. Could it be that you never experienced that level of uncritical and unjudgemental freedom of expression?

 

[Ink]

Are you saying Denis Leary is INTP? I'm not gonna start an argument with you, I don't even know where to begin, the way you're going about this is wrong in every way. I'll just agree to disagree. I think your understainding of MBTI is very limited. Mind you ENTJs and INTPs have a LOT of similarities a lot of times, both being dominant judgers, Thinker dominants, intuitive, sensing, repressed feeling...

 

[scorpiomover]

Are you saying Denis Leary is INTP?

I've seen him typed as ENTP. But social criticism is part and parcel of the INTP's bag. On the other hand, I can see some Fe-ness in there, and so have considered ENFJ. But I'd like a fuller analysis of all his qualities, to be sure.

I'm not gonna start an argument with you, I don't even know where to begin, the way you're going about this is wrong in every way.

Then tell me what I'm doing that's wrong. What rules have I broken? What sin have I committed?

I think your understainding of MBTI is very limited.

Depends on what you call limited. Is a rocket more limited than a wagon? A rocket is more powerful, and can travel much farther. It has far more range. But even an idiot can use a wagon. From the perspective of the limited individual, the understanding of the one who values the space-ship, is very limited. So you are being very unclear, unlike an INTP, for some reason. What exactly do you mean by "limited"?

Mind you ENTJs and INTPs have a LOT of similarities a lot of times, both being dominant judgers, Thinker dominants, intuitive, sensing, repressed feeling...

If you noticed, I posted that INTPs sometimes behave like ENTJs, months ago, and before my post, I don't see any posts here that suggested that ENTJs could be at all like INTPs.

 

[Ink]

I don't feel like teaching typing to you from the ground up, sorry, we'll agree to disagree?

 

[scorpiomover]

I don't feel like teaching typing to you from the ground up, sorry, we'll agree to disagree?

We can agree that you stated some of your conclusion, and on those, I stated that I disagreed with them. We can agree that I gave my reasons. You did not give yours.

How can I disagree with a conclusion that has no foundation? Maybe a Feeler might be reasonable in that, because his thoughts are processed by the subconscious, and so can't explain his reasoning. But not a Thinker. A Thinker can explain his reasoning. Why would someone not explain why he thinks as he does, when that will only enlighten us all as to the truth?

Perhaps I know nothing? Yet, on INTJf, and on THIS site, I have come across many posts from posters who posted problems in typing themselves, and in others, and other problems, that they could not solve. I posted my analysis, as did others. Yet I have received many, many visitor messages saying how spot on I was. How can it be that I can write so much, and yet in so many posts, describe others to a T using MBTI and Jungian functions, unless I understand typology extremely well?

The evidence is too much against you, and you do not even want to explain. What else can one do, when the evidence is so solely on one side? Go against it, and with you?

 

[Ink]

We can agree that you stated some of your conclusion, and on those, I stated that I disagreed with them. We can agree that I gave my reasons. You did not give yours.

How can I disagree with a conclusion that has no foundation? Maybe a Feeler might be reasonable in that, because his thoughts are processed by the subconscious, and so can't explain his reasoning. But not a Thinker. A Thinker can explain his reasoning. Why would someone not explain why he thinks as he does, when that will only enlighten us all as to the truth?

Perhaps I know nothing? Yet, on INTJf, and on THIS site, I have come across many posts from posters who posted problems in typing themselves, and in others, and other problems, that they could not solve. I posted my analysis, as did others. Yet I have received many, many visitor messages saying how spot on I was. How can it be that I can write so much, and yet in so many posts, describe others to a T using MBTI and Jungian functions, unless I understand typology extremely well?

The evidence is too much against you, and you do not even want to explain. What else can one do, when the evidence is so solely on one side? Go against it, and with you?

Please create a thread where we can all try and type Leary.

 

[scorpiomover]

Please create a thread where we can all try and type Leary.

Done.

What type is Dennis Leary?