# ENTJ Philosophers?



## Tainted Streetlight (Jun 13, 2011)

Being an ENTP (or maybe something else), I love Philosophy.

I can talk it, argue it, discuss it, BE it. I have a seemingly inherent ability to understand the bigger philosophical questions. Now this said, I may or may not be good at answering those questions, but I fancy I am.

Now I have a good friend, and ENTJ, who is one of the smartest kids in my school. I just got back from having a very long argument about the universe and everything.

So my question is as follows: can ENTJ's be successful philosophers? Every time him and I got to a critical point in our discussion--as has happened many times before--he denies my point without considering logic and it is very difficult to show him the very basic mistakes he is doing. He argues with what I call circular logic, never progressing, always ending up back at square one. He has before frustrated a whole Theory Of Knowledge seminar by refusing to release a position.

I personally have found him to be too stubborn to truly argue philosophy. Has anyone else noticed things like this? Is it something that is specific to ENTJ philosophers, or is there maybe something I have overlooked? *I* am willing to admit when I am wrong.


----------



## Transcendence (Apr 25, 2011)

I think ENTJs are exceptionally qualified to become philosophers, if they are mature and are introspective. 

As an introspective person, I find myself thinking a lot of the time. 
I could easily become a philosopher, and a lot of the time I am.


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

Nope. When you catch me not defining my position but rather staying neutral it means both positions can be true or not true. Hence, the most logical route for me to take is be neutral. 

External thinking is all about objective facts that's been proven. Now if neither side can prove the other wrong then it's gray area for me. 

Now even though I may not state a position it doesn't mean I don't have one. It might just be that what I think is different from what I feel.

EDIT: I think most ENTJs won't entertain philosophy until Ni is more developed. In my teens-early 20s I wasn't into all the philosophy material I had to read. If I couldn't use it, there was no point in me learning it. But I've found some use of it with the change of direction in my career. Let's just say I frequent Barnes & Noble these days.


----------



## MartyMcFly1 (Nov 14, 2010)

One of my best friends is an ENTJ and is quite philosophical. He understood my philosophical ramblings in our youth, but never took an interest in philosophy until about 2 years ago. Now we have debates about philosophy/politics all the time. During these debates I get the feeling that I'm much better at delivering my points so that he and everyone who happens to be around can understand, but I'm sure he feels the same way.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Ayn Rand...


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Ayn Rand...



I thought she was INTJ?


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Monkey King said:


> I thought she was INTJ?


She is listed as that on a lot of sites, yes, but she just seems so very very very Te...I think ENTJ makes more sense for her.


----------



## Bellsouth (Aug 4, 2011)

What were you arguing, let's argue.


I'll even start- is life all just probability, and when something really unlikely happens since we can't explain it we have to use spirits and gods?

can you in any crazy way create your own life, like they say as you think you shall become. How does this work?


----------



## Thorgar (Apr 3, 2010)

xNTPs make better philosophers due to their Ti. xNTJs tend to move on when they find something that works, finding it pointless and tedious to refine the theory further.


----------



## day_dreamer (Nov 8, 2010)

Thorgar said:


> xNTPs make better philosophers due to their Ti. xNTJs tend to move on when they find something that works, finding it pointless and tedious to refine the theory further.


As far as my observation goes, XNTJs believe in something that can be used or has a practical application. Anything else is a waste of time for them, usually. Even though they have an awesome potential to become philosophers, they seldom tread that path. 

Where as for XNTPs, it is the idea, the theory of possibilities and perspectives is all that matters because their entire life is based on the principles they have thought a lot about. And those principles come from the truth/ideas, which is why ideas are held close to their heart more than application. They can deduce theories/possibilities with minimum facts just by studying tendencies. XNTJs might understand that but they will probably not support it unless they have something concrete that proves it.


----------



## Chinchilla (May 27, 2010)

Thorgar said:


> xNTPs make better philosophers due to their Ti. xNTJs tend to move on when they find something that works, finding it pointless and tedious to refine the theory further.


 I'm not a big fan of philosophy. My problem is that some philosophical questions cannot be proven right or wrong. It isn't like math, there is no right or wrong answer. In regards to religious philosophy there are no theories and there are is very little proof for them. Philosophy can have me running in circles not sure what I am aiming at and in the end it just wastes my time when I could have been doing something more productive. Some philosophy I do like, for instance the more scientific kind and the political kind. Trans-humanism is interesting to me, along with the idea of a singularity. I also like the different ideas of consciousness and the debate on AI.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight (Jun 13, 2011)

Thanks for all of the responses guys. What I have found is something similar to what someone else has said, that ENTJs are much more willing to accept on authority... and then move on. In that way, as a philosopher, an ENTJ could be progressive (i.e. moves quickly to deep understanding of the subject) but not efficient (no refined positions, no easy going neutrality as someone suggested). I find that of all of my friends, he is the least willing to admit he is wrong, because if he accepted it once, of course it was right then, even when there are major holes in his arguments.

P.S. he was trying to make the argument that living a more ordered, rational life was key to deriving the most happiness from life. 
He started with the premise "nothing inherently has meaning in the universe" and then unfailingly ended up with more inherent meaning. Meh.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

lirulin said:


> She is listed as that on a lot of sites, yes, but she just seems so very very very Te...I think ENTJ makes more sense for her.


There seemed to be a lot of Ni in her too...the importance of the "men of unborrowed vision" and whatnot. I've known INTJ's who are at least as Te strong as she is in RL too.

But more importantly you can preach a nondominant function (as Thomson, I think, has said) and still it doesn't mean you have it as your lead. Anyone can value any function, even the tertiary and inferior. Through personal observation I've come to believe that there is a tendency for people (not universal or anything) to value their auxiliaries more than their primaries (maybe we take the dominant for granted?), though you might disagree with that. Someone told me Beebe has suggested this too.

I don't know...she just seems to give off such an "I" vibe to me.

As for ENTJ philosophers, if Madalyn Murray O'Hair counts as one (I see her more as an "activist") I'm pretty sure she's ENTJ.

More generally, it's possible for any type to be successful at anything (in general), but much harder for certain types to accomplish certain things. So I don't think the question should be "can they", but "do they tend to succeed" (sorry for being nitpicky, but I don't think it's a good idea to talk of types in such a limiting way, even if there is truth to it...could discourage people from taking up certain activities that might better themselves).


----------

