ENFP / ENTP Superficiality

[Santtu]

That's a bunch of comments that don't pertain to any issue at all. It's all about the "style" of arguments - wrong people arguing, people arguing an "unlikeable" point, etc.. So we've now got that you hate the idea Gabe. Is there anything in the means of arguments you would do to convince us otherwise?

We haven't hated you nor trashed your type down. You don't have to act as if it were. Blackwater hasn't challenged you to a fight here, and his comments have done nothing to persuade me think anything less of ENFP's than I've thought so far (and ENFP, is per latest test, the type I'm romantically inclined to).

It's also clear that you don't like this for whatever reason. You must know (per type theory) that we're not that much affected by dramatic arguments with style over substance - we're rather analytical.

It's ok that you let everything out. Could you move on to convincing us please? None of us here has impossible standards for convincing arguments. If you just start, maybe we'll eventually get convinced of your views.

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I don't think that ENxP's are superficial. Perhaps it is only my experience. I have been called many things in my life, but superficial is not one of them.

[Athenian200]

Originally Posted by Blackwater

Ok, so ENTPs are usually accused of being somewhat superficial and haphazard in their speculations and opinions. I can understand that.

But what I can't understand is why these charges are only rarely leveled at our ENFP siblings. I know quite a few ENFPs IRL and almost all of them have this tendency to splatter inconsistant and superficial points about them yet, in the case of ENFP, people are more like "oh they're just being silly" or even from an MBTI textbook I once read: "When ENFPs try to verbalize their insights the result often comes out cluttered and imprecise".

So basically, isn't this the same behavior from ENFPs as you've seen from ENTPs only with a different motive? Why then, should there be another discourse for dealing with ENFPs?

Personally, I think they're (both) just haphazard in throwing out opinions and speculations as they come. I would guess they're much less haphazard in ideas they've already defined and worked through. It's just that they process things externally first.

But I guess it's considered less superficial because ENFP's are using Fi secondary, and ENTP's are using Fe tertiary. People are more likely to consider Fe superficial, especially when it's weaker (although I don't think it's true). Also, ENFP's don't usually try to approach topics seriously enough to be accused of being superficial because there's no threat of people taking most of their ideas seriously, and they often manage to cheer people up, so people don't really want to criticize them for that.

[CzeCze]

Originally Posted by Blackwater

Maybe so, CzeCze, but I don't get it. You're basically saying that because another thread with a different premise that I did not even read was not to your taste I shouldn't post my inquiry now?

No...I was joking and even then I was not implying you shouldn't have posted. Does noone get my dry and high-brow if I do say so myself, humor?

I meant that other thread, ostensibly about determining the 'Most Objective Type' and which I redubbed the "NT Smackdown" reminded me of your OP. Answering the age old question, Who's The [insert superlative] of MBTI?

Except in that thread, the NTs and a valiant ST were duking it out amongst themselves to determine the title (though not necessarily for themselves, because that wouldn't be very objective now would it?), whereas I think this one is not gonna have any enthusiastic takers. And that thread did greatly amuse me for that reason.

Speaking of this thread:

I understand a little better from the responses what is meant by 'superficial'. I guess having a lot of interests or cycling through many hobbies or topics of conversation can seem "superficial" to others (like an ISTJ!) As in light? With bad connotations? I think Substitute has complained on another thread that more introverted or just shy types dismiss 'chit chat' as mindless or 'stupid' instead of a valid social mechanism. So perhaps it's a matter of POV of what is 'necessary' and what is 'unecessary' etc.

But I still don't understand the 'most superficial' title.

When I think superficial, I think of what your values are. As in valuing appearances and the trapping of life like popularity and posh surroundings above things considered 'substance' i.e. love, meaningful relationships, character building tribulations, etc.

And I think trad type theory acknowledges that ENTPs think deeply about their plans and why the world works? Wheras ENFPs feel deeply committed to causes or beliefs ("plans") and feel a cosmic pull to the world?

I think another reason why ENFP is not quoted as most superficial is because we're typed as being the opposite of superficial in that we have the 'crusader streak' (which is similarly found in our INFP brethren) and apparently look at everything in terms of good and evil and the world through the lens of our cosmic view. Now that's deep.

Also, we're the cheerleaders of the MBTI! And we all know cheerleaders aren't superficial.

And Gabe and Captain, I didn't read this OP as being bashing or ENFP bashing at that just because it was 1) directed at ENTPs (which I don't mind, it's nice to see some variety!) and 2) this is nothin' compared to the actual character assassinating hard-core (and dareisay at times bitter) posts I've seen since coming here!

Now carry on.

[substitute]

Oh, one other thing I learn from arguing with my brother is that when an ENTP and an ENFP argue, neither of them will ever see the other's point of view entirely. It's a lost cause. Something keeps getting lost in the translation, as though there were some naughty pixie standing between us that twists our words somewhere en route from our mouths to the other person's ears. No other outcome is possible, apparently, than the ENTP walking away thinking the ENFP is an unreasonable and hysterical person, and the ENFP thinking the ENTP is mean and cruel and arrogant. In actual fact, none of these judgements is correct, most of the time.

We're better off teaming up our formidable persuasion skills to use on others, than trying to persuade each other of anything.

[Gabe]

Originally Posted by Santtu

That's a bunch of comments that don't pertain to any issue at all. It's all about the "style" of arguments - wrong people arguing, people arguing an "unlikeable" point, etc.. So we've now got that you hate the idea Gabe. Is there anything in the means of arguments you would do to convince us otherwise?

We haven't hated you nor trashed your type down. You don't have to act as if it were. Blackwater hasn't challenged you to a fight here, and his comments have done nothing to persuade me think anything less of ENFP's than I've thought so far (and ENFP, is per latest test, the type I'm romantically inclined to).

It's also clear that you don't like this for whatever reason. You must know (per type theory) that we're not that much affected by dramatic arguments with style over substance - we're rather analytical.

It's ok that you let everything out. Could you move on to convincing us please? None of us here has impossible standards for convincing arguments. If you just start, maybe we'll eventually get convinced of your views.

I suggest that you stop pretending like you have to filter my words an put all of them in a context of 'feeling language'.

Let me start again. Blackwater believes that both extraverted intuition types can be superficial superficial, yet he believes that ENTPs get punished and ENFPs get away with it. Which is why I hate this thread already, because this means it's about bias (no matter what you preferences are).

I also don't experience this. However, I do remember a thread titled "ENFX hypocracy", where blackwater had a nice unfair and unfounded chance to bitch about ENFPs. There. problem solved.

Also, I forgot to ask, but what do you mean by superficiality, Blackwater. I'm not even sure superficial is the exact right word. Incoherent speech isn't superficial. Interest in everything isn't superficial. When you mention the Jung qoute, you must draw up the most superficial people you've ever met or something. And if your 'superficial' is the same as the 'hypocritical' you talked about earlier, than you're wrong, and you're not even talking about type. So, what about these ENFP's you know is so superficial?

[Athenian200]

It's a pity so many threads have to degenerate into arguments like this against the person's motives instead of having real discussions and talking about the presented information. This has happened countless times, a thread is started and people start questioning the motives of the person starting it instead of actually responding to what was said.

I really wish you would all just stop arguing on this level and try to discuss the topic rather than each other, okay?

[Nadir]

Originally Posted by athenian200

It's a pity so many threads have to degenerate into arguments like this against the person's motives instead of having real discussions and talking about the presented information. This has happened countless times, a thread is started and people start questioning the motives of the person starting it instead of actually responding to what was said.

I really wish you would all just stop arguing on this level and try to discuss the topic rather than each other, okay?

But I thought they were illustrating the concept with a live example! ;)

[substitute]

athenian and Nadir: here, here!

Gabe - I don't think he was saying he "believes" ENFP's get away with it and ENTP's don't, I think he was more trying to say that it's his perception that this tends to be the case, and he's asking for input to help him figure out whether this is true or not. C'mon man, surely you know it's a sorta fundamental Ne thing to not start out with a theory, but to start out with a hunch that you want to scrutinize and turn into a theory with the help of outside input. EP types in my experience very rarely actually believe that their perceptions = reality. I can understand you getting the wrong end of the stick but it really does look to me as though you're fighting against a non-existant attack/enemy... the guy is asking for other people's perceptions on the subject, not pontificating with pre-existing opinions

At least, that's what I get from it - am I right Blackwater?

Your reaction does kinda remind me of my brother though; he tends to spit feathers a bit, too, much to my bewilderment... I wish he'd just calm down and tell me clearly and specifically what he thinks I said so that we can clear up the misunderstanding (and it almost always is just a misunderstanding - we nearly always discover EVENTUALLY that we're batting for the same team all along!!), rather than sit there covering us both in feathers! Not that it does much good a lot of the time anyway, because when I try to explain that he got the wrong meaning, he just seems to spit even more feathers and say I'm lying to 'get out of it' or accusing him of lying when I'm just saying that he's mistaken (then of course, I'm saying he's stupid, IHO ), and stuff that amounts to "I know what you think and mean better than you do" ... which hardly helps his case...

[substitute]

Having said all of that first paragraph there, I've just realized that all that stuff about the OP is stuff I pretty much extrapolated intuitively... haha... there's actually just as much evidence there that Gabe could be right as there is that I could be. Maybe I just recognized the workings there and went straight to the heart of what he was wondering about when he phrased the question... or maybe my intuition is having an off-day and I was actually wrong!

Never mind, carry on!!