Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,670 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
You'd assume an INTJ would be a chiller version of an NTJ because of their primary N collecting things before acting with an executive undertone. However when looking at a learning ENTJ their mind could be open towards the ways in which to execute things. Their Fi is inferior which should make them less one sided when it comes to personal convictions. Although, an INTJ's Fi could be so well developed that they're more in tune with people things, making them more co-operative (from a distance).

Just collecting some impressions... [We don't actually need to reach a conclusion here since there's two sides to a coin & every individual is different.]

What do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,552 Posts
Either or depending on the setting. One is morally more fixed in being the rational idealist. The other is a practical rational who will determinedly follow their own advice in much the same way.

I suppose INTJs are more likely, once ranting out to change their view over time once they have had time to balance out the new data; ENTJs are more likely to take the data in the first pass and consider it there and then (As they are not so rate constrained by Ni).
 

·
mafia mod
Joined
·
13,312 Posts
I would say the ENTJ's . Our inclination to get information from people and illicit discussion. We also like a good debate, and would be open to counter arguments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
I'm deliberately and methodically closed-minded. All ideas are guilty until proven innocent.

INTJs are more likely to be open-minded about crackpot ideas, given they like the elegance of a coherent story. Their minds are centripetal, while ENTJs have centrifugal minds. I'd rather have a diffuse group of propositions in my cognitive set that are all true, or at least empirically tested, than a coherent story that makes no friction with the world as we experience it.

For example-- I have a confirmed INTJ cousin who believes in 911 Truth, perpetual motion machines, and all sorts of gack that makes any sort of mental hygiene impossible. My uncle, another ENTJ, describes the unfortunate beliefs of his benighted son as being an inverse application of Ockham's Razor: the theory that is the most complicated is taken as the most likely to be true.

I know other INTJs who are brilliant, so I'm by no means laying down a law of nature. Crackpottery is just an occupational hazard for INxJs because of the inferior sensing function.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
Open your mind too much and your brain might fall out.

No, really.

If it's empirically proven beyond doubt, there is no point in speculating since the answer is known.

If it's not yet proven, but of a provable nature, it is to be subjected to empirical testing so that the answer can be known.

If it is a logical construct, though not of a provable nature, there is no point in discussing the matter since no conclusion can be reached. If useful - learn and apply. If not - discard.

If it's a matter of opinion that is relevant to reality, see what standpoint has the potential to create the greatest benefit and hold that standpoint until something better shows up.

If it's a matter of opinion and it's not relevant to reality, discard it as useless fluff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
I have a confirmed INTJ cousin who believes in 911 Truth, perpetual motion machines, and all sorts of gack that makes any sort of mental hygiene impossible.
What about building seven?

I was critical to this at first too, but damn. There is a lot of stuff in the official explaination that just does not match up at all. Like the melting temperature of steel, for example. Unfortunately, the 911 Truth movement is filled up with people who believe that the flesh eating satanic reptilian alien masons from planet X run the entire show. This makes uncovering shady governmental agendas that really exist a lot more difficult, if not impossible, since one has to sift out the bullshit to get anywhere.

Perpetual motion machines are bunk though. Unfortunately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
I'm going with INTJ. ENTJs may be more socially open-minded, but INTJs are overall more open-minded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Linesky

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
There is a lot of stuff in the official explaination that just does not match up at all. Like the melting temperature of steel, for example.
So in other words, countless numbers of bombs were installed in the buildings in a population center with 19,000,000 people, without a single person noticing, and hidden from view with magic fairy dust. This is your alternative hypothesis? Really?

And what's funny is that examples provided to show the incoherence of the official story do no such thing. Most of them are truths, but not the kind that matter. For example, some dopey college kids will tell you that jet fuel burns at 825C, while steel melts at 1525C. The steel couldn't have melted, right? But this is true and trivial, given steel loses 50% of its strength at 648C.

It is the pure credulity/lack of skepticism that pisses me off about these arguments. Like, uh, nothing is, um what it seems, man! The wool has been pulled over our eyes!

I'll tell you what-- I'll raise you, and assert that the World Trade Center existed is a conspiracy. There couldn't have been a Flight 93, because there never were buildings known as the World Trade Center! Haven't you heard? We all have been brainwashed to justify war to enrich greedy corporations. It all, like, makes sense, y'know!

One thing is fo sho. Idiocracy is upon us. Run for the hills!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
The only way you could know the answer to this would be to do an observational study on a very large number of a specific type of person in certain situations. And even after that you couldn't know for sure.

You definitely wont get an answer to your scientific question asking random people on the internet. Its just not a very scientific approach lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,670 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Open your mind too much and your brain might fall out.

No, really.

If it's empirically proven beyond doubt, there is no point in speculating since the answer is known.

If it's not yet proven, but of a provable nature, it is to be subjected to empirical testing so that the answer can be known.

If it is a logical construct, though not of a provable nature, there is no point in discussing the matter since no conclusion can be reached. If useful - learn and apply. If not - discard.

If it's a matter of opinion that is relevant to reality, see what standpoint has the potential to create the greatest benefit and hold that standpoint until something better shows up.

If it's a matter of opinion and it's not relevant to reality, discard it as useless fluff.
I agree/appreciate your input.
I wonder if you just felt like you needed to say that despite my initial post, or if you really read over this part: [We don't actually need to reach a conclusion here since there's two sides to a coin & every individual is different.]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,670 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
The only way you could know the answer to this would be to do an observational study on a very large number of a specific type of person in certain situations. And even after that you couldn't know for sure.

You definitely wont get an answer to your scientific question asking random people on the internet. Its just not a very scientific approach lol
Read above...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,207 Posts
JHBowden said:
So in other words, countless numbers of bombs were installed in the buildings in a population center with 19,000,000 people, without a single person noticing, and hidden from view with magic fairy dust. This is your alternative hypothesis? Really?

And what's funny is that examples provided to show the incoherence of the official story do no such thing. Most of them are truths, but not the kind that matter. For example, some dopey college kids will tell you that jet fuel burns at 825C, while steel melts at 1525C. The steel couldn't have melted, right? But this is true and trivial, given steel loses 50% of its strength at 648C.
They have an answer to that. There is said to be a scientific paper describing an exotic explosive powder, nanothermite, found in the dust. It is similar to the materials used for welding but more volatile, and was possibly mixed with paint or fireproofing and installed prior to the attack. The workers doing the installation would not have known about it. The collapse of building seven was weird, too, and the steel was melted, not just weakened. I'm not starting a debate though. I studied this subject for a little while then lost interest when I realized that I could not possibly sift through all of the "information" available to find the truth. Someone could have pulled that paper out of their arse for all I know, and I don't know enough about demolitions, metallurgy, etc. to judge the merits of the arguments.

(Sorry to bust in and carry on with this irrelevant tangent... I just couldn't resist it hehe.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
I've found that ENTJs tend to be more open minded. INTJs are more likely to settle into a routine and less likely to want to try new things, whereas ENTJs tend to be more excited to have new experiences. The best example I can think of is that most of the INTJs I know are picky (or at least habitual) eaters, while the ENTJs I know are the ones who will go out and eat weird things with me. Sushi, anyone?

I wonder if it's a matter of stronger Fi (INTJ) versus Se (ENTJ).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
Nitou: I studied this subject for a little while then lost interest when I realized that I could not possibly sift through all of the "information" available to find the truth.
We need not worry. Ockham's razor is just an extension of elementary probability. A theory that explains a lot of evidence with a few principles is more likely to be true than a theory that uses a lot of hypotheses to explain a small amount of evidence.

Most people believe the WTC collapsed because a few religious fanatics hijacked planes and crashed them on a suicide mission. The 911 troofer believes in remote controlled planes, hidden explosives with supersecret technology, the Israelis, the oil companies etc. etc. just a swarm of auxiliary hypotheses to explain just a widdle bit of data. To quote a great philosopher (ok it is just Maddox) it is like getting Bukkaked with stupid. The same pattern is used for other forms of bullshit -- creationism, lunar hoaxers, teh Nirth Certifikit -- if no evidence ever counts against such theories, that is, if even more auxiliary hypotheses are conjured to dismiss countervailing evidence-- then we're dealing with someone in a profoundly irrational mental state.

So stuff like astrology, dietary fads, ESP, ghosts, numerology, Dianetics, herbal remedies, UFOs, holistic medicine, tarot cards, astral projection, feng shui, afrocentrism, power crystals-- it is all bullshit, and obvious bullshit, and there is no shame in dismissing them as bullshit in a dogmatic manner. We only think otherwise because we're taught about great ideas in the history of thought, where, let us say, everyone thought so-and-so (Galileo, Columbus, etc.) was wrong and he turned out to be right. We're not taught all of the intellectual failures, even though there are far more ways for us to go wrong than to get it right. Just because an idea is innovative and/or challenges the status quo doesn't mean by the fact itself we must take it seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
We need not worry. Ockham's razor is just an extension of elementary probability. A theory that explains a lot of evidence with a few principles is more likely to be true than a theory that uses a lot of hypotheses to explain a small amount of evidence.
There is a great page called Architects and Engineers for 911 truth. They have a nice list of proof and sources. I qoute:

The Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:
  1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
  2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
  3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
  4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
  5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
  6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
  7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
  8. 1200-foot-dia. debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
  9. Isolated explosive ejections 20 – 40 stories below demolition front
  10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
  11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
  12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
  13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
  14. No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

  1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
  2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
  3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
  4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”
I consider this, together with the Building 7-explaination to be enough evidence to conclude that the official explaination is total and utter bunk. I have no idea of what actually happened that day, and I am not gonna jump to conclusions, but really, only because it's an official explanation does not mean it's honest and true.

Most people believe the WTC collapsed because a few religious fanatics hijacked planes and crashed them on a suicide mission. The 911 troofer believes in remote controlled planes, hidden explosives with supersecret technology, the Israelis, the oil companies etc. etc. just a swarm of auxiliary hypotheses to explain just a widdle bit of data. To quote a great philosopher (ok it is just Maddox) it is like getting Bukkaked with stupid.
I don't even have to give a better explanation than the official one. I just have to provide evidence that the government's explanation is bunk and leave it at that. By the way, what widdle bit of data are you talking about? The fact that pretty much every piece of evidence points at the towers being brought down by controlled demolition?

If I am to even begin to form an alternate explanation I have to go digging in the information sewers of the conspiratory parts of the internet, and I don't like to form hypotheses based on so fuzzy material. To be honest, nobody has any idea of what happened, and the only thing that's for sure is that the government is not giving a correct explanation. Everything beyond that is only speculative, and I am not getting into that.

The same pattern is used for other forms of bullshit -- creationism, lunar hoaxers, teh Nirth Certifikit -- if no evidence ever counts against such theories, that is, if even more auxiliary hypotheses are conjured to dismiss countervailing evidence-- then we're dealing with someone in a profoundly irrational mental state.
Agreed.

So stuff like astrology, dietary fads, ESP, ghosts, numerology, Dianetics, herbal remedies, UFOs, holistic medicine, tarot cards, astral projection, feng shui, afrocentrism, power crystals-- it is all bullshit, and obvious bullshit, and there is no shame in dismissing them as bullshit in a dogmatic manner.
There is always non constructive to dismiss something in a dogmatic manner. One should dismiss only after examining the evidence in each case. One can have a hypothesis, of course, but dismissal on dogmatic basis without adjusting according to actual evidence is dangerously similar to religion.

We only think otherwise because we're taught about great ideas in the history of thought, where, let us say, everyone thought so-and-so (Galileo, Columbus, etc.) was wrong and he turned out to be right. We're not taught all of the intellectual failures, even though there are far more ways for us to go wrong than to get it right. Just because an idea is innovative and/or challenges the status quo doesn't mean by the fact itself we must take it seriously.
Agreed, once again. But on the other hand, just because a bogus explaination that contradicts all available evidence is signed by the government, it does not mean that we have to take it seriously either. The level of seriousness is only measured by the amount of evidence supporting the theory. All else is irrelevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,423 Posts
You'd assume an INTJ would be a chiller version of an NTJ because of their primary N collecting things before acting with an executive undertone. However when looking at a learning ENTJ their mind could be open towards the ways in which to execute things. Their Fi is inferior which should make them less one sided when it comes to personal convictions. Although, an INTJ's Fi could be so well developed that they're more in tune with people things, making them more co-operative (from a distance).

Just collecting some impressions... [We don't actually need to reach a conclusion here since there's two sides to a coin & every individual is different.]

What do you think?
Fi is just a "that's right and that's wrong" process. It's not related to relations with other people.

In my experience, ENTJ's can be open minded when they haven't made their mind up on something yet. Once they have, there is very little open mindedness left.

INTJ's are more open minded, but not in an Fe way at all. They´re not going to consider other opinions because of who they are. Actually, thinking about it more now. INTJ's aren't open minded at all. Being open minded requires to allow uncertainty into the equation and INTJ's won't do that. You can change an INTJ's conclusion in a heart beat if you come up with something that destroys their logic. In a way you can call that being open minded, but it isn't really.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
932 Posts
The INTJs I know are a lot more open-minded than the ENTJs I know collectively. However, I think this depends more on the person than the type. It is inconclusive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,736 Posts
First, I'd like to preface this post with a disclaimer. This is not meant to be an evaluation of all ENTJs and all INTJs. Rather I'm simply adding my own experiences with ENTJs/INTJs as well as a bit of my perspective as an INTJ, which is hardly a large enough sample to reach a conclusion. In fact, I'd venture to say that degree of open-mindedness is dependent on the individual rather than type. Rather, I'd propose that neither the ENTJ nor the INTJ is more open-minded, but rather that they are open minded in different ways.

That being said, let's return to my personal experience. To put it simply, I'd say that INTJs are quicker to dismiss a viewpoint or idea, but are more open to changing their ideas, if that makes sense. I've found that the ENTJs I know are more willing to listen to other viewpoints, but I have hardly ever seen them (it's very rare) change their ideas/opinions/views based on either another person or experience, while the other INTJs (and myself) that I know are much faster to dismiss (and do so more bluntly) ideas we consider stupid (or have actually very quickly evaluated in our heads and dismissed) or disagree with. However, I know that at the very least, the other INTJs I know, and myself, have had our viewpoints changed and/or accepted new ideas because of our logic being destroyed/new evidence being presented more often than the ENTJs I know. In other words, I've found the ENTJs I know to be more open to "hearing out" a wider variety of ideas than myself and the other INTJs I know, but I've found that said INTJs tend to more readily recognize, embrace, and accept the ideas that really are compelling (so long as the evidence and logic is there), while the ENTJs are more resistant to change, even when evidence against them begins mounting.

Adding my perspective as an INTJ, I admittedly dismiss a lot of ideas as silly or irrelevant, and it might come across as "closed-mindedness," but the reality is I simply process them very quickly and disagree. I suspect this is true of most NTs in general however. One possibility I see is that while the ENTJ and INTJ both do this same thing, the ENTJ is better at outwardly communicating that he/she is actively thinking about an idea before dismissing it, while as an INTJ I may come off as more close-minded as I perform the high-speed analysis almost completely in my head (and very quickly as I'm not constrained by speech).

To conclude, I will reiterate that this is not meant to be applied to all INTJs and ENTJs, but is ONLY my own personal experience. In fact, I would be surprised if it was the same for others, as I'm leaning toward this being more of an individual trait. However, I'm curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
317 Posts
I am extremely open minded :) So I vote for ENTJs
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top