You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

savageorange comments on "Stupid" questions thread - Less Wrong Discussion

40 Post author: gothgirl420666 13 July 2013 02:42AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (850)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: savageorange 15 July 2013 02:13:35AM 0 points [-]

Data ("data"?) point: I test reliably as NF (ENFP, specifically) and SaidAchmiz's objections seem quite similar to my father, who is clearly (by both of our estimations, and tests) NT (INTJ). I can think of another relevant person, who tests as INFP and seems to be at pains to encourage interaction, and yet another who is also ENFP and similarly tries hard to encourage interaction. So I was rather surprised to see you painting SaidAchmiz's objections as non-NT.

My current model suggests that what I am promoting is F values (possibly NF, but I don't know any SF's well enough to compare) with an extraverted slant

(but not as much of an extraverted slant as SaidAchmiz seemed to think, I agree that even if at the time being drawn out of ourselves is an unpleasant experience, everyone, extraverted or introverted, gains something of real worth if they really attain that level of self-detachment regularly.)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 15 July 2013 04:36:04AM 6 points [-]

I think it was NT as in NeuroTypical (not on the autism spectrum), not NT as in intuitive-thinking.

Comment author: savageorange 15 July 2013 07:53:09AM 1 point [-]

Haha, that makes sense.

... Only on LessWrong :)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 15 July 2013 06:18:15PM 1 point [-]

I think science fiction fans (or at least the ones I know) could also have managed the correction.

Comment author: SaidAchmiz 15 July 2013 04:36:50PM 1 point [-]

NancyLebovitz's correction is accurate, but here is another "data" point, because why not:

I test as INTP (strongly INT, with a closer to even split between P and J, though reliably favoring P).