# The NTs NT



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

It's pretty much agreed that an INFP is an NFs NF

So who do you consider to be an NTs NT?

I think I'll go for.....INTJ


----------



## MegaTuxRacer (Sep 7, 2011)

What's your criteria for being the NT of the NTs?


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

Not the NT of NTs, but which emboides them the best

INFP is loving, kind, passionate, has strong morals, wouldnt hurt anyone unless values are compromised.........NF
INTJ is intelligent, efficient, logical, focuses on the objective, confident..............NT

I wouldnt pick ENTJ because theyre more focused organising people than systems
I wouldnt pick ENTP and INTP because theyre not as efficient


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

mkeath said:


> What's your criteria for being the NT of the NTs?


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

What's the NF of NF's? 

NF response: "Everyone is special in their own right, and I don't think we should judge like that."


What's the SP of SP's?

SP response: Michelangelo.


What's the SJ of SJ's?

SJ response: Huh?


----------



## MegaTuxRacer (Sep 7, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


>


I get it. Cause there's an iron, and she's ironing. Not related to the thread, but she is also a woman who is fulfilling the stereotype that women perform housework. Heh.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

mkeath said:


> I get it. Cause there's an iron, and she's ironing. Not related to the thread, but she is also a woman who is fulfilling the stereotype that women perform housework. Heh.


I'm happy you pointed this out, mkeath.


----------



## MegaTuxRacer (Sep 7, 2011)

dalsgaard said:


> I'm happy you pointed this out, mkeath.


Well you know if I don't do it, there's a risk that nobody will. I am happy to provide this service to PersonalityCafe.com community members free of charge.


----------



## Pendragon (Dec 31, 2010)

If half of the NTs are efficient, and the other half are inefficient, then why is being efficient an embodiment of an NT?


----------



## Paradox of Vigor (Jul 7, 2010)

Pendragon said:


> If half of the NTs are efficient, and the other half are inefficient, then why is being efficient an embodiment of an NT?


The concept that one type within each of the four is the best embodiment for all of them is ridiculous to begin with. Has no one heard of Keirsey Temperament Theory? That drives me nuts.

There is no NT of NTs, nor XX of XXs. If this whole thing was just a large joke, I am stupid and apologize.


----------



## Riverlioness (Nov 25, 2011)

INTJ
INTP
ENTJ
ENTP

Wait...they are all the NTs NT.

You didn't say we had to make ONE choice.:wink:


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Pendragon said:


> If half of the NTs are efficient, and the other half are inefficient, then why is being efficient an embodiment of an NT?


Because we like efficiency. 

Oh, and you just got eliminated.


----------



## Pendragon (Dec 31, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> Because we like efficiency.
> 
> Oh, and you just got eliminated.


:dry:

10char


----------



## Empecinado (May 4, 2010)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> Not the NT of NTs, but which emboides them the best
> 
> INFP is loving, kind, passionate, has strong morals, wouldnt hurt anyone unless values are compromised.........NF
> INTJ is intelligent, efficient, logical, focuses on the objective, confident..............NT
> ...


xNTPs are more efficient than ENFPs. We're not too preoccupied crying and hugging strangers.


----------



## Coppertony (Jun 22, 2011)

Dude, ENTPs are like hardcore efficient, man. If we set our mind to something, we rock at it. Of course, we never set our mind to anything, but that doesn't contradict the implication at all thankfully xD.

Besides, the ENTPs are the most awesome of the NTs, and the NTs, because they're all pretty awesome, must be exemplified by pure awesomeness. Therefore the ENTP is the awesomest of the awesome: the NT of all NTs. 

But yeah, seriously, it all comes down to what the qualities of any group or object are. You can't conceive of the 'best' car or the 'most' car-like of cars without an understanding of what makes a car a car, and how something can be more like a car than something else. So declare your definitions first, and then we can work from there.


----------



## L (Aug 12, 2011)

Hmmmm... honestly I would have to cast my vote into either INTJ's or ENTP's.... not sure which I would choose over the other however....

But if you want to take into account us INTP's and a love of everything that is knowledge you can't count us out either, seriously, most of us are like walking wikipedia banks. Then you have the fact that INTJ's are probably the most efficient type (close call between XNTJ's but I believe Introverts win out by just a bit). Then there are the ENTP's that have a little bit of the INTPness but they are more likely to be able to do things with their knowledge rather than us INTP's.


----------



## MegaTuxRacer (Sep 7, 2011)

Paradox of Vigor said:


> I am stupid and apologize.


Don't _say_ that about yourself!


----------



## Pendragon (Dec 31, 2010)

Coppertony said:


> Dude, ENTPs are like hardcore efficient, man. If we set our mind to something, we rock at it. Of course, we never set our mind to anything, but that doesn't contradict the implication at all thankfully xD.
> 
> Besides, the ENTPs are the most awesome of the NTs, and the NTs, because they're all pretty awesome, must be exemplified by pure awesomeness. Therefore the ENTP is the awesomest of the awesome: the NT of all NTs.
> 
> But yeah, seriously, it all comes down to what the qualities of any group or object are. You can't conceive of the 'best' car or *the 'most' car-like of cars* without an understanding of what makes a car a car, and how something can be more like a car than something else. So declare your definitions first, and then we can work from there.


I giggled, and then realised why this question is ridiculous.

You can't have something that's more carlike than something else - either it is a car, or it isn't (excluding quibbling about utes and volkswagons). With the MBTI, it's even more clear-cut, you either are an NT or you're not, there's not really an in between unless you haven't decided your type yet.

So, to say "INTJs are more NT like than ENTPs" is like saying "Ferraris are more car like than Toyotas." It doesn't really make a lot of sense. Both the Ferrari and the Toyota are motorised vehicles with four wheels, and both the INTJ and the ENTP are N and, uh, T.


----------



## L (Aug 12, 2011)

I think you guys have missed the point of having a light hearted, fun, thinking session about something completely absurd.....

I believe this thread was made for fun lol.


----------



## Coppertony (Jun 22, 2011)

L_Lawliet said:


> I think you guys have missed the point of having a light hearted, fun, thinking session about something completely absurd.....
> 
> I believe this thread was made for fun lol.


Ahaha, dude, my post was so full of logical fallacies and undefended claims, should have had a field day with it man. Challenge me! Put your fists up and fight! This is distracting me from writing a final paper on Aquinas so you better be sure that it's light-hearted and fun 

To respond to Pendragon, there's a few other ways we could interpret that. Take the classic example of the knife. A knife has the quality of cutting things, a good knife cuts things well. The best knife of all knives, then cuts things best. The knives' knife, then, might be something that acts as a knife to the knives as normal knives as to us, or it might be the exemplary, best example of a knife (just as you might say a man's man, a chef's chef, etc.). Sure, all knives cut, but some knives cut better than others.

So suppose we say that an NT has a certain quality, let's call this reason. The best NT, the NT's NT, then, might be that NT which exemplifies reason. Some of the big claims that have to go into this, then, are 1) What does it mean to be an X's X, 2) What is the quality of an NT, and 3) is the quality of an NT something that can be compared, like ability to cut, or something that is absolute, like whether a knife has a handle or not.


----------



## Emerson (Mar 13, 2011)

Coppertony said:


> Ahaha, dude, my post was so full of logical fallacies and undefended claims, should have had a field day with it man. Challenge me! Put your fists up and fight! This is distracting me from writing a final paper on Aquinas so you better be sure that it's light-hearted and fun
> 
> To respond to Pendragon, there's a few other ways we could interpret that. Take the classic example of the knife. A knife has the quality of cutting things, a good knife cuts things well. The best knife of all knives, then cuts things best. The knives' knife, then, might be something that acts as a knife to the knives as normal knives as to us, or it might be the exemplary, best example of a knife (just as you might say a man's man, a chef's chef, etc.). Sure, all knives cut, but some knives cut better than others.
> 
> So suppose we say that an NT has a certain quality, let's call this reason. The best NT, the NT's NT, then, might be that NT which exemplifies reason. Some of the big claims that have to go into this, then, are 1) What does it mean to be an X's X, 2) What is the quality of an NT, and 3) is the quality of an NT something that can be compared, like ability to cut, or something that is absolute, like whether a knife has a handle or not.


Argumentum ad Nausaem
Argumentum ad homineum
Straw man
Cum hoc ergo proctor hoc
Argumentum ad antiquitatum
Englishmans Fallacy

This is a post full of logical fallacies.


----------



## Dynamic Equilibrium (Oct 31, 2011)

I think of Einstein as the quintessential NT - brilliantly, unboundedly eccentric and groundbreakingly insightful. He was INTP.


----------



## L (Aug 12, 2011)

Coppertony said:


> Ahaha, dude, my post was so full of logical fallacies and undefended claims, should have had a field day with it man. Challenge me! Put your fists up and fight! This is distracting me from writing a final paper on Aquinas so you better be sure that it's light-hearted and fun


In all honesty I didn't even read your post lol....

But when I get bored of Skyrim in a few hours and need a break I'll be sure to come back and critique your post lol.


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

L_Lawliet said:


> I think you guys have missed the point of having a light hearted, fun, thinking session about something completely absurd.....
> 
> I believe this thread was made for fun lol.


The OP didn't specify and all though it was obviously for fun, the responses doesn't have to be. Perhaps I'm just too serious ::shrug:: or perhaps I find utility in knowing who can rep NTs as a whole in one type.

I vote INTJ as well. They have the perceiving nature of being a Ni dominant and the
and the focused drive of NTJs.


----------



## Pendragon (Dec 31, 2010)

Coppertony said:


> Ahaha, dude, my post was so full of logical fallacies and undefended claims, should have had a field day with it man. Challenge me! Put your fists up and fight! This is distracting me from writing a final paper on Aquinas so you better be sure that it's light-hearted and fun
> 
> To respond to Pendragon, there's a few other ways we could interpret that. Take the classic example of the knife. A knife has the quality of cutting things, a good knife cuts things well. The best knife of all knives, then cuts things best. The knives' knife, then, might be something that acts as a knife to the knives as normal knives as to us, or it might be the exemplary, best example of a knife (just as you might say a man's man, a chef's chef, etc.). Sure, all knives cut, but some knives cut better than others.
> 
> So suppose we say that an NT has a certain quality, let's call this reason. The best NT, the NT's NT, then, might be that NT which exemplifies reason. Some of the big claims that have to go into this, then, are 1) What does it mean to be an X's X, 2) What is the quality of an NT, and 3) is the quality of an NT something that can be compared, like ability to cut, or something that is absolute, like whether a knife has a handle or not.


I disagree. Even though one knife cuts things better than the other, they're both still knives. One isn't more like a knife than the other, it's just better. If we applied this to NTs, then we'd get into subjective opinions and arguments, but that wasn't the question. The question was "Which NT is the NT's NT" or, to put it a better way


> Not the NT of NTs, but which embodies them the best?


This isn't a question of the best, but rather of which one shares most of the qualities of the others. For example, say you had one hundred knives, and say that all but one of them were blunt. Now, the one sharp knife would certainly be the best quality knife, but it certainly doesn't embody the group. In this case, you would say that the knife that 'embodies the group' would be one of the 99 blunt ones - not the best, but the ones sharing qualities.


----------



## Hastings (Jan 8, 2011)

Pendragon said:


> I giggled, and then realised why this question is ridiculous.
> 
> You can't have something that's more carlike than something else - either it is a car, or it isn't (excluding quibbling about utes and volkswagons). With the MBTI, it's even more clear-cut, you either are an NT or you're not, there's not really an in between unless you haven't decided your type yet.
> 
> So, to say "INTJs are more NT like than ENTPs" is like saying "Ferraris are more car like than Toyotas." It doesn't really make a lot of sense. Both the Ferrari and the Toyota are motorised vehicles with four wheels, and both the INTJ and the ENTP are N and, uh, T.


All NTs are NT by definition, but the thread isn't about which NT is literally more or less NT than the others. Rather, it's about which, if any, NT comes closest to fulfilling the idea of NTs as a group. It might be easier to make the case with INFPs for NFs (general descriptions of NF types seem to fit INFP to a higher degree than the other NF types).


----------



## Mr. Limpopo (Oct 7, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> What's the NF of NF's?
> 
> NF response: "Everyone is special in their own right, and I don't think we should judge like that."
> 
> ...


Lol, add NT response to this and it's "MBTI for Dummies in less than 50 words".


----------



## DeductiveReasoner (Feb 25, 2011)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> It's pretty much agreed that an INFP is an NFs NF


If INFP is an NFs NF, then shouldn't INTP be the NTs NT? I mean, they're roughly equivalent to their respective temperaments.


----------



## busyCHilD (Sep 1, 2011)

Taken from the Kiersey website

All Rationals share the following core characteristics
1) Rationals tend to be pragmatic, skeptical, self-contained, and focused on problem-solving and systems analysis.
20 Rationals pride themselves on being ingenious, independent, and strong willed.
3) Rationals make reasonable mates, individualizing parents, and strategic leaders.
4) Rationals are even-tempered, they trust logic, yearn for achievement, seek knowledge, prize technology, and dream of understanding how the world works.

With these characteristics, I don't know if we can really pick the NTs NT since each type shines in a different area. But if I had to choose, I would narrow it down to INTJ or INTP, maximizing efficiency or maximizing clarity.

Having the clearest understanding should lead to maximized efficiency, it isn't as effective in the opposite direction. Giving the INTP the advantage of avoiding costly errors that may have been made by the INTJ who wasn't as worried about every detail (Ni rejecting patterns not relevant to the idea). If we are starting on even playing fields, I vote INTP as the NT's NTroud:


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

mkeath said:


> Don't _say_ that about yourself!


"I am stupid and _he_ apologizes?"


----------



## Coppertony (Jun 22, 2011)

Mr. Limpopo said:


> Lol, add NT response to this and it's "MBTI for Dummies in less than 50 words".


That *was* the NT response . . .


----------



## L (Aug 12, 2011)

busyCHilD said:


> Taken from the Kiersey website
> 
> All Rationals share the following core characteristics
> 1) Rationals tend to be pragmatic, skeptical, self-contained, and focused on problem-solving and systems analysis.
> ...


That is true with the maximized efficiency or clarity, but the thing about INTP's is though.... we're basically knowledge whores. Even if we do attain maximum clarity we will always doubt that we have reached it and try to find more clarity and that is rather self defeating. If only we could get over that self doubt and just recognize that we are the best:tongue:


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

Empecinado said:


> xNTPs are more efficient than ENFPs. We're not too preoccupied crying and hugging strangers.


Js in general are more efficient than Ps a lot of the time
and stop getting so emotional, I'm not belittiling xNTPs...just that they are more concerned with the understanding the knowledge than using the knowledge...and they will use it when they need to


everyone put it this way....if you just met someone and had to type them as an NT...who would you choose....
it wouldnt be ENTJ or ENTP personally...too much people interaction
it would be INTJ or INTP....

and personally i would choose the coldness over the eccentrics to type as the NT


----------



## Empecinado (May 4, 2010)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> Js in general are more efficient than Ps a lot of the time
> and stop getting so emotional, I'm not belittiling xNTPs...just that they are more concerned with the understanding the knowledge than using the knowledge...and they will use it when they need to
> 
> 
> ...


Relax. It was a joke. I was teasing you.


:shocked:


----------



## INTJellectual (Oct 22, 2011)

Coppertony said:


> Besides, the ENTPs are the most awesome of the NTs, and the NTs, because they're all pretty awesome, must be exemplified by pure awesomeness. Therefore the ENTP is the* awesomest of the awesome*: the NT of all NTs.


LOL. I love how the arrogance of ENTP amuses me while other types would find it annoying.


----------



## MegaTuxRacer (Sep 7, 2011)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> everyone put it this way....if you just met someone and had to type them as an NT...who would you choose....
> it wouldnt be ENTJ or ENTP personally...too much people interaction
> it would be INTJ or INTP....


I would type them correctly. I mean if someone is an ENFP, I would type them as an ENFP. By the way, I know what you mean by your question, but I am not going to answer it the way you want to because it's a really bad question to ask an NT. We don't think like that, and it distracts from achieving truth. It's not even an intellectual exercise. Actually the only intellectual exercise would be to either point out the fallacies in your premise, troll you, or troll the other NTs.



> and personally i would choose the coldness over the eccentrics to type as the NT


Coldness? Most of my friends would typify me as a very warm individual. However, I am eccentric.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Coppertony said:


> That *was* the NT response . . .


Actually this whole thread is the INTP response, generally questioning the premise, assumptions and definitions of the question.


----------



## Coppertony (Jun 22, 2011)

INTJelligent said:


> LOL. I love how the arrogance of ENTP amuses me while other types would find it annoying.


Please, I can make anyone love me except for SJ's and women after the age of 30. Those are the two demographics I haven't managed to quite crack yet.


----------

