Is the best type to be XXXX?

[Mr. Beef]

Post thoughts

[Dom]

ENFP obviously!

;)

Why? I needn't tell you huh!

[Mr. Beef]

<_<

[Nadiar]

How could there be a 'best type'? Thats a pretty useless atitude for someone to take. Each type has its own strengths, and each individual can develop one type more than another through effort and practice. Someone who was truly a XXXX couldn't understand 16 of the types, while someone who actually had a personality would understand 1 type very well, 3 others pretty well, and an additional 2 types decently.

Anyway, INTP is obviously 'the best'

[Dom]

How could there be a 'best type'? Thats a pretty useless atitude for someone to take. Each type has its own strengths, and each individual can develop one type more than another through effort and practice. Someone who was truly a XXXX couldn't understand 16 of the types, while someone who actually had a personality would understand 1 type very well, 3 others pretty well, and an additional 2 types decently.

Anyway, INTP is obviously 'the best'

Until i got to your last sentence I was going to say something about taking things far too seriously!

[Kljoki]

Well, it depends on what you mean by that. If you mean an emotionally stabile, logically non abusive, considerate, reliable, dependent, open minded, trustworthy, humble, wise, modest, insightful, determinate, praiseworthy person, then yes, it is.

I think being in that state would be incredibly lost and profound. When I think about it those people have no reference point to align themselves to and would have a broader and broader range of understanding as they approach a finer and finer universal type and would eventually reach a state of a pure type as they align themselves with everything they stand for, their essence. The same would go for any other crosstype or type. An extreme case of neurosis where the world becomes the ideal or the essence of a type. A pure type can only exist as one entity, its type, and this would cause a different world to form where no other type may exist. A pure all type would pull this of because all types are within his essence.

Then there is the other extreme, where an all type would be nothing. In this state an individual has no real perception, judgment, or any other determining factor, a complete loss of identity, quite contrary in nature to the gain for a pure type. The world is seen through eyes that fade away as one approaches the middle of everything and reality slowly stops existing. A person would no longer be a person but would again become one with the essence. But here instead of becoming the essence, the essence becomes you.

Just a random thought I had about the idea.

[Dom]

Well, it depends on what you mean by that. If you mean an emotionally stabile, logically non abusive, considerate, reliable, dependent, open minded, trustworthy, humble, wise, modest, insightful, determinate, praiseworthy person, then yes, it is.

I think being in that state would be incredibly lost and profound. When I think about it those people have no reference point to align themselves to and would have a broader and broader range of understanding as they approach a finer and finer universal type and would eventually reach a state of a pure type as they align themselves with everything they stand for, their essence. The same would go for any other crosstype or type. An extreme case of neurosis where the world becomes the ideal or the essence of a type. A pure type can only exist as one entity, its type, and this would cause a different world to form where no other type may exist. A pure all type would pull this of because all types are within his essence.

Then there is the other extreme, where an all type would be nothing. In this state an individual has no real perception, judgment, or any other determining factor, a complete loss of identity, quite contrary in nature to the gain for a pure type. The world is seen through eyes that fade away as one approaches the middle of everything and reality slowly stops existing. A person would no longer be a person but would again become one with the essence. But here instead of becoming the essence, the essence becomes you.

Just a random thought I had about the idea.

:horror:

Edit: So XXXX denotes a lack of personality not a very close balance between the preferences? would a dead 50/50 prefence split not be ebst as suggested beign able to draw on all the componets of type as required?

[eyebyte_atWork]

Where is HeadPhonez?

[Neppy]

there's no best type. Certainly favourite types.

If somebody happens to be exactly 50/50 on all functions though... that would be an oddity. If it's even possible.

[Zephyrus055]

I'd imagine that having Fe would be nice.

Naw, ENTPs are the best type. I envy their INTP abilities (debate, thinking, logic, rationality) and ability to connect with and seduce others (Fe) at the same time.

Hell, ENTPs can make lots of money with their inventions too.

[Dom]

Damn my pesky F!

[distraction tactics]

ESTJs. Full steam ahead and completely oblivious.

...What a way to live! :whistle:

[Mr. Beef]

How could there be a 'best type'? Thats a pretty useless atitude for someone to take.

If you read the title it says "XXXX, best type?". It's ironic of you to argue against me when i'm really supporting what you're saying....there's no best type. XXXX is the best because they have the most balance (assuming they're not only balanced but well-developed in all areas....not like some guy who has had a lobotomy and basically has no personality).

[Sackanaka]

I've for awhile now that balancing a dichotomy can either translate into a trait reflective of maturity (taking positives of both sides) or immaturity (lacking positives of either side). Since mbti alone cannot distinguish this as it relies heavily upon the person analyzed and thus severely biased, all that's left is speculation and hopes, in which a good deal of people interject their own personal opinion often reflective of their own type or envies.

[joft]

what if you take the positives and the negatives of both sides? or neither?

[Sackanaka]

what if you take the positives and the negatives of both sides? or neither?
:$ (http://usuarios.lycos.es/toxicoyeah3/mwvsmegsfinal2.jpg)

[Umbrosia]

I wrote about a different kind of XXXX in a thread that got deleted I think.

As opposed to 50/50 splits, the XXXX I wrote about was a sort of chameleonic ability, where someone was ability to put himself into and act as any MBTI at the flip of a switch. (or four, rather.) If you are who you are when you're alone, why not be something else when you're with other people? I am naturally a hard core intp but I've forced myself to study and understand my esfj aspects, and that is my ultimate goal as a person, to be able to place myself in any temperament at will for any given situation.

[Dom]

How could there be a 'best type'? Thats a pretty useless atitude for someone to take.


If you read the title it says "XXXX, best type?". It's ironic of you to argue against me when i'm really supporting what you're saying....there's no best type. XXXX is the best because they have the most balance (assuming they're not only balanced but well-developed in all areas....not like some guy who has had a lobotomy and basically has no personality).

Sorry my bad.............