Here, have a read (link).I didn't eliminate anything. I just inferred that your point about your big list of stuff being ISTP is garbage, because ISTP isn't even the first thing that any of these things would suggest, when you consider actual evidence. I can say it more bluntly: your way of attributing things to "Ti-Se" and then matching him to ISTP because of said list, is garbage. Especially when it can probably be shown that everyone of those things is more INTP than ISTP. Try digging up statistics and see what you fine. This one's on you buddy. Not just "it's visual so Se!!!" I guess this is what you may be able to call Introverted Thinking, but it's really just Bad Thinking.Now that you've done the work of eliminating the ENTP typing from the list of popular possbilities we can focus more on the ISTP vs. INTP. Again, thank you.Try reading about the guy. At the very least he is clearly N and clearly P. Yes I am using subjective thinking to evaluate him but it's subjective thinking about his goddamn personality, not just some tenuous function and Keirsey connections to topics which aren't S > N.I don't see why your subjective metric in determining his type should be used as a counter argument in any way. Just because you don't use the same metric I used to determine Da Vinci's type doesn't mean my typing of him is wrong. So again, it's a wall of mootness.Way to miss the point completely.ISTP and INTP are both Ts, so of course it's relevant if you're stating that 'the vast majority of scientists are thinkers' as a counterpoint to Da Vinci being an ISTP and having a strong aptitude for science.You are so stuck in a subjective thinking rut that you think the garbage you barfed up qualifies as evidence.I already have.Oh cute, is this your idea of humor? Ha ha ha.I agree. Da Vinci being typed as INTP is wrong.The MBTI bias.Which bias would you prefer people to lean toward?What part of "sacrificing accuracy" don't you understand? I think the conventional methods lead to inaccurate results. I think many of these conventionally-S-typed artists should be typed as N.How unfortunate that you're a proponent of conventional methods to reinstate ideas and conclusions you've become familiar with.I use MBTI, buddy. Of course how I actually do it is "subjective" but at least I do it with some self-awareness and actually look at MBTI personality traits rather than false equivalences to MBTI.I don't see why your subjective metric in determining his type should be used as a counter argument in any way. Just because you don't use the same metric I used to determine Da Vinci's type doesn't mean my typing of him is wrong.The picture shows that it's N types that appreciate art. People who appreciate art also tend to make art. Surely, this can't be hard for you to grasp.I don't know why you're arguing against ISFP being considered as the archetypal artist, it has nothing to do with Da Vinci being ISTP. The link you provided is talking about the value of introversion among designers, which also has nothing to do with Da Vinci being ISTP.
And design is a very SJ subset/applied variation of art. You can dispute this and call it subjective, which it is, but if design is predominantly N, you couldn't possibly believe that the larger set of art would be, could you?
And let me remind you: I'm not trying to "prove" that he's N based on this stuff. I'm just trying to correct the garbage you are spewing out with actual objective data. Use your supposed "Te" for once.Hahaha, is this some kind of joke? Try having some self-awareness instead of projecting what you're doing onto me.I'm very sorry, but you haven't really shown any convincing evidence that my typing of Da Vinci as ISTP is wrong. Have you considered that your admitted subjectivity is causing cognitive dissonance, because I sincerely don't understand the pain, anguish, and horror of losing one of the sacred cows of INTPs. All I'm doing is putting Da Vinci in his rightful place in MBTI, which is ISTP.Why thank you.If it's of any consolation, I think your Ne is immensely entertaining.Instead you just attributed a bunch of random areas that Da Vinci was involved with to SP or "Ti-Se". Maybe you didn't do exactly that but goddamn if it is any better.I never said I believe "NTs can't be interested in arts" nor "NFs can't be interested in science."Yep, stuck in your subjective thinking rut where everything is "Ti-Se" because you say so.I wasn't typing him based on his interests per se either.
I look for the cognitive functions that underlie his interests, then look for the most common functions that show up.
In addition to that, I apply the same cognitive function metric in his personal philosophies.
In addition to that, I apply the same cognitive function metric in all his works that manifested in the real world.
In Da Vinci's case it's overwhelmingly Ti-Se, which is ISTP through and through.