Disclaimer

I’d love to have comments and critique of the points I make or input about the questions I raise as long as they are respectful, logically-based, and somehow supported.

I tend to go about finding fault with ideas or looking at issues with criticism, trying to find inconsistencies and often applying these ideas on a different scales to do so, all in a sort of devil’s advocate way. My critique of certain topics is not meant to sound overly pessimistic or inflammatory and hope it is not perceived in that way.

This method of reasoning is perhaps best explained by descriptions of my personality type (INTP – see below). I hope the points I raise make sense, as I strive to consider as much relevant information as possible. I attempt to consider cultural and historical relevancy as much as possible. While I usually feel like my arguments are logical, I’m not really an expert in most of these areas, and am open to rational and fair criticism of these ideas, or the pointing-out of issues or facts I’ve failed to take account of.

I hope the discussions that ensue will be respectful, reasonable, and productive.

Precise about their descriptions, INTPs will often correct others (or be sorely tempted to) if the shade of meaning is a bit off. While annoying to the less concise, this fine discrimination ability gives INTPs so inclined a natural advantage as, for example, grammarians and linguists.

INTPs value knowledge above all else. Their minds are constantly working to generate new theories, or to prove or disprove existing theories. They approach problems and theories with enthusiasm and skepticism, ignoring existing rules and opinions and defining their own approach to the resolution. They seek patterns and logical explanations for anything that interests them.

They see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into. They live primarily inside their own minds, having the ability to analyze difficult problems, identify patterns, and come up with logical explanations.

A major concern for INTPs is the haunting sense of impending failure. They spend considerable time second-guessing themselves. The open-endedness (from Perceiving) conjoined with the need for competence (NT) is expressed in a sense that one’s conclusion may well be met by an equally plausible alternative solution, and that, after all, one may very well have overlooked some critical bit of data. An INTP arguing a point may very well be trying to convince himself as much as his opposition.

In contrast to INTJs, an INTP will often make controversial, speculative points of argument, often annoying the discussion-partner, and make them in such a way as to leave the impression that he is very serious about what he says. In reality, the INTP is not actually even certain himself whether he really stands by what he is saying, but his Ne strongly suggests that there must be a core of truth there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: