Are ENTps the naive, childlike ones?

[Jonathan]

One of the interesting things about Socionics in the way it describes ENTps.

Intuitively, and based on observation, it would appear that the type of people who one would think would have to be ENTps are typically among the more worldly-wise NTs.

Between an INTp and ENTp, I would think that the INTp would be the one more into the world of the imagination, and the ENTp would be familiar with the "goings on" around one. Perhaps an INTp may talk about certain ideas that have a certain deep truth and creative insight, but the ENTp might point out some useful information from his/her many conversations and investigations that will help one consider how to implement an idea "out there" in the "real world" of people, organizations, and what's happening these days.

And, intuitively, it would seem that the INTps, being focused in the world of their imagination, would sometimes appear a little a naive about their surroundings, even childlike, not because they can't understand the world, but because their area of confidence is in exploring their own ideas.

So it's very interesting to me the way certain things said in Socionics seem to put it the other way around. I have no intention to pick on Rick here , but his insightful site offers a very good and representative example, when arguing that that Einstein was ENTp. He states:

Einstein had a childlike naiveté that is foreign to pessimistic, skeptical ILIs. He didn't have the negativism, realism, and sardonic attitude typical of ILIs, but was very much a romantic bohemian, idealist, and believer in "goodness, beauty, and truth."

This seems to portray ILEs as in their own childlike, idealistic world, and ILIs as stark realists, more knowledgeable about how to deal with the "real world out there."

In a sense, it appears that the Socionics definitions of ILE vs. ILI are reversed from the way many people conceptualize these two types.

How do these various perspectives fit with your understanding?

[xiuxiu]

This seems to portray ILEs as in their own childlike, idealistic world, and ILIs as stark realists, more knowledgeable about how to deal with the "real world out there."

In a sense, it appears that the Socionics definitions of ILE vs. ILI are reversed from the way many people conceptualize these two types.

How do these various perspectives fit with your understanding?

They fit well. It is more or less what I also have observed.

[Phaedrus]

Einstein had a childlike naiveté that is foreign to pessimistic, skeptical ILIs. He didn't have the negativism, realism, and sardonic attitude typical of ILIs, but was very much a romantic bohemian, idealist, and believer in "goodness, beauty, and truth."

I think that I have to agree with Rick here. The ENTps I know in real life are indeed childlike in an enthusiastic way that I am not, even though one might perhaps find me childlike in other ways. I have tried to type Einstein, reading some biographies and seen documentaries about him, and, as I have said somewhere else, he is a bit difficult to type, because he lies somewhere in between myself and an ENTp friend of mine. If I have to choose a type for Einstein, I would probably guess ENTp rather than INTp. Any other type is of course out of the question.

Something that I have thought a lot about, without having found the answers yet, is the relations between types and other neuropsychiatric phenomena. For example, it is clear that both Einstein and Wittgenstein had Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism, and yet it is also clear that they were not the same type. If Einstein was an INTp, I think that Wittgenstein must have been an INTj (which I think he was), but if Einstein was an ENTp, it is at least not totally impossible to imagine that Wittgeinstein might have been an INTp.

Asperger's Syndrome is most likely more relatively common among certain types than others. The INTp and/or the INTj come closest to a typical Asperger personality, but Asperger can be found in other types too. This is an area in which I predict many interesting scientific discoveries during the next decade or so.

It is also interesting that Rick puts Ayn Rand in the ENTp group. I have had some trouble with her type. Among MBTI people and Keirsey she is usually seen as an INTj, and I find many INTj traits in her. But her philosophy does not fit my general hypothesis about two kinds of philosophy in a satisfying way. If she was an ENTp, that problem would be easier to solve.

[diamond]

Not sure about naivete - I spose entp can be naive. On the other hand, I've spent my whole life grasping reality and developing strategies for dealing with it. But yes I think entp's have a fundamental idealism - they have to for the out of the box thinking.

[Phaedrus]

On the other hand, I've spent my whole life grasping reality and developing strategies for dealing with it.

I think most ENTps are better than me in that respect. In a sense I am "a romantic bohemian, idealist, and believer in 'goodness, beauty, and truth'", but I am probably also more pessimistic and skeptical than ENTps in general. ENTps are more childlike in a spontaneous, enthusiastic way, whereas I am perhaps childlike in a more "stubborn" way, refusing to grow up and be a "normal" person. I don't know what exactly we should mean by "childlike" here.

[Hugo]

The alpha quadra in general strikes me as naive and childlike.

ditto

[Jimbean]

Yes, ENTp's can and often are naive, but some are quite balanced.

When you say "growing up" as ENTp's refusing to "grow up," I think you mean lack of practicality. We grow up by striking some kind of balance between practicality and naivety.

[reyn_til_runa]

I would say I'm perceived as childlike in my curiosity, and in my expression of ideas and emotion.

Sometimes seeing an ant or an earthworm sends me into such delight that others cannot understand how at the very next moment I can appear so melancholy.

I often spontaneously voice ideas and whenever I do this, people around me tend to chuckle as if to say, "Are you for real? Surely you should not be so excited about this...."

This is to say that there's generally a disconnect between the upbeat manner of my expression and the gritty skepticism I experience internally.

Naive, no. Childlike, absolutely.

[Ms. Kensington]

i also agree that the naive impression people put on alpha comes from extreme confidence and weight being put on possibility. Someone who says "that dream is not realistic" might be seen as not naive. But i think we all know that that attitude is not what determines naivite, but in fact is just an attitude.

[Phaedrus]

When you say "growing up" as ENTp's refusing to "grow up," I think you mean lack of practicality.

Yes, lack of practicality is an important part of my own reluctance to "grow up". But I am an INTp. The ENTps I know are more practical than I am.

[Creepy-pokeball]

The ENTp I know from gaming always "wants to find a way to live forever." Im like, "Oh, shut up . Youre dying some day lol." And then there was his "moment of truth" last month. He saw a bum and became all neurotic thinking that would be him in 10 years. He went on and on and on and on..... and on about it. I was like . And then he had an idea. He then decided he was too smart to end up like that. Again, I was

[discojoe]

Stop arbitrarily attributing behavioral qualities to entire quadras. What a stupid thought process.

[Joy]

arbitrarily?

Alpha Quadra

The Alpha Quadra's role is bringing new ideas and information into the Socion. The members of this quadra do not enjoy conflict and try to minimize it. They enjoy investigating new ideas and possibilities while in a comfortable atmosphere. The Alpha Quadra's "age" is childhood, due to their sincere curiosity.

Beta Quadra

The Beta Quadra's role is the introduction of new orders and orginization for the resistance of environment. The members of this quadra are characterized by their active nature and fighting spirit, and political orientation. This quadra is always accompanied by stomy, dramatic emotions. They are compelled by glory and honor, and do so with self assertion. The Beta Quadra's "age" is youth, as they accept new rules but aren't afraid to fight for themselves.

Gamma Quadra

The Gamma Quadra's role is criticize and remove the flaws and mistakes of the past. The members of the quadra are characterized by their sharp rejection of obsolete ideas and evil. They are socially oriented. The Gamma Quadra's "age" is maturity.

Delta Quadra

The Delta Quadra's role is the ensuring of a stable environment and a stable source of resources. This is the most conservative group, they value stability. They like high quality goods, and respect talented, uncommon people. The Delta Quadra's "age" is old age, due to their conservatism and wisdom

[diamond]

Joy since when are you istj now? I thought you were entj.

[Creepy-pokeball]

If I was a mod, her name would be Rainbow.

[discojoe]

Yeah, arbitrarily. That cited "research" is blatantly generalized and sounds like crappy intuitive reasoning.

[Joy]

I'm sorry. I cannot prove socionics.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Yeah, arbitrarily. That cited "research" is blatantly generalized and sounds like crappy intuitive reasoning.

lol. what's new?

[discojoe]

I'm sorry. I cannot prove socionics.

You don't need to prove all of socionics in order to reasonably validate certain aspects of it.

[Joy]

so you've researched every aspect of quadras and have determined that the cited information is bullshit?

what parts of socionics are not bullshit?

[discojoe]

so you've researched every aspect of quadras and have determined that the cited information is bullshit?

what parts of socionics are not bullshit?

The parts that aren't. I just don't know which ones.

[Joy]

the thing about alpha being like kids, beta being like teenagers, gamma being like adults, and delta being like old farts is bullshit for sure though, right?

[MysticSonic]

Those seem more metaphorical than anything else, Joy.

[Joy]

I'm not arguing for or against anything... I haven't really thought about it.

[Jonathan]

Phaedrus: I don't know what exactly we should mean by "childlike" here.

Yeah, I guess that word is a bit vague. But perhaps we can operationalize my thought process here with the following example:

Suppose you have two people, and you're sure one is INTp and the other ENTp...but you're not 100% sure which one.

Based on traditional, intuitive understandings of what extraversion and introversion are (not necessarily Socionics-based), how likely is it that the aspects of ENTp's personality highlighted in this thread would cause people to think that the INTp is the extraverted one, and that the ENTp is the introverted one?

And in this example, I'm not talking about the fact that INTps may be outgoing or talkative at times....I'm talking about a deeper sense...that is, to what extent the essential characteristics of INTp and ENTp in Socionics may cause those types to flipped from the way many people understand them.

[Creepy-]

the thing about alpha being like kids, beta being like teenagers, gamma being like adults, and delta being like old farts is bullshit for sure though, right?

I personally like that differentiation.

That is not to say that Alphas cannot be mature, or Deltas the opposite, of course.

But the Alphas all have their naivetes in certain areas --


Like I said before, there would seem to be an sort of "progressive trend" of the functions

Thinking
Intuition
Sensing
Ethics

The leading functions are all in a sort of "early stage" in the alpha group, and I would expect there to be some sort of a progression to beta and so on. But in alpha, the curiosity, naivete, and general wandering/exploring/childish-ness of that nature comes through in what I have seen.

Futhermore, would it not make sense that the base, first level, or origin of thinking is internal/introverted? The base, first level, or origin of Intuition be external? Sensing internal, and Ethics external?


Speculation, but perhaps interesting thoughts



By the way, I'm definitely alpha

[Creepy-]

(The "thinking progression" by quarda)

A
B
G
D



Ethics
A
B
G
D



==

==

==



Intuition
A
B
G
D



Sensing
A
B
G
D




=========
=========



Perhaps it is fitting that the progression of rational functions is linear, as opposed of irrational functions

http://www.socionics.com/advan/irra.htm
Check out those visuals! I like them.