[passenger]

Did you realize that when INTP discuss (either in forums or verbally) that their rhetoric sounds as if it was a prayer? It's as if they are sculpting words on a conveyor belt.

[Tactical Panda]

When INTPs discuss issues it sometimes sounds to me like they are interested in discussing ideas rather than things.

I don't see the connection between prayers and conveyor belts.

[ManWithNoName]

As Ti thinkers I believe they are more apt to do thier thinking internally and kind of just state thier conclusions.

As Te thinkers INTJs I think tend to ramble along a bit more as we triangulate the answer.

I'm also not sure what you mean by sculpting words on a conveyer belt.

[TheObserver]

	Originally Posted by ManWithNoName To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	As Ti thinkers I believe they are more apt to do thier thinking internally and kind of just state thier conclusions. As Te thinkers INTJs I think tend to ramble along a bit more as we triangulate the answer. I'm also not sure what you mean by sculpting words on a conveyer belt.

I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I think it definitely depends on what is being conveyed. It also seems to me that any thinking person that has not organized his or her speech in a formal manner ahead of time is likely to state a conclusion before they provide the listener with a detailed account of the "thought journey" that they went through to come to the conclusion. I would also say that it is easier for me and probably for most people in general to fill in the details later instead of organizing the details to create a larger picture in sequential order. Even detail based sensing types such as the ISTJ are unlikely to convey their ideas in perfect sequential order in a conversation.

[thod]

	It also seems to me that any thinking person that has not organized his or her speech in a formal manner ahead of time is likely to state a conclusion before they provide the listener with a detailed account of the "thought journey" that they went through to come to the conclusion

Yes, but when the result is a 52 word sentence, something has gone wrong.

[Lilie]

	Originally Posted by ManWithNoName To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	As Ti thinkers I believe they are more apt to do thier thinking internally and kind of just state thier conclusions. As Te thinkers INTJs I think tend to ramble along a bit more as we triangulate the answer.

You forgot about Ne vs Ni. INTJs are much more concise. Sometimes I ramble on looking for an answer, but once I find it I distill it down to the basic idea and delete all the thought-process garbage. No one needs to read that.

	Originally Posted by passenger To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Did you realize that when INTP discuss (either in forums or verbally) that their rhetoric sounds as if it was a prayer? It's as if they are sculpting words on a conveyor belt.

Maybe. I tend to get bored a few lines in to a long post by an INTP. Just like I do with poetry/prayers. Get to the damn point! Conveyor belt does express the agonizing slowness of the whole thing.

[TheObserver]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yes, but when the result is a 52 word sentence, something has gone wrong.

No. Nothing has gone wrong.

[anticlimatic]

	Originally Posted by Lilie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You forgot about Ne vs Ni. INTJs are much more concise. Sometimes I ramble on looking for an answer, but once I find it I distill it down to the basic idea and delete all the thought-process garbage. No one needs to read that.

Trust me, Ni users, we do need to read that...particularly when the 'basic idea' you've distilled is the wrong one, and we're left wondering exactly what planet you've landed on. Informing us how you got there can help us retroactively adjust your course-- though I hear this isn't something J types ever prefer to do. :P

It's ironic to hear Ti run-off-sentences being described as beating around the bush, when in fact it's much more of a thorough overkill whacking of the bush in question. Perpetually avoiding the explanation of how you arrived to conclusions seems much more 'rambling' to us-- in an odd string of seemingly baseless and eccentric judgements, wherein each probing question simply leads to another, seemingly off-topic one.

Funny how that works.

[thod]

Then we need better grammatical constructs to deal with the situation. Excessively long sentences are unreadable. The purpose of a sentence is to make a single point. Explanations, caveats, references etc can go in the following sentences. This allows skim readers to bypass that level of information. The whole bundle of info forms a paragraph. New paragraphs are used to introduce a change of subject or viewpoint.

I find that INTP scratchings frequently suffer from attempting to fit too much information into a single sentence.

[scorpiomover]

	Originally Posted by passenger To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Did you realize that when INTP discuss (either in forums or verbally) that their rhetoric sounds as if it was a prayer? It's as if they are sculpting words on a conveyor belt.

So you had an Ni idea, and were so enthused by it, that when people told you it was a very stupid idea to implement, that you wouldn't listen, and they had to bring 15 different reasons to prove to you that you were wrong?

I feel very sympathetic to you, that you feel disappointed that your idea was wrong.

But if you had carried it out, then things would have screwed up badly, and everyone would have put the blame on you, because you were the one pushing it, and you would have got the sack.

He saved your job. Thank him.

If you don't, then next time, he'll probably keep his mouth shut. Then when you propose another Ni idea, and are so enthused by it, that you want to carry it out, and it's wrong, he won't disagree, and it will screw up, and then you really will get the sack. Then it will be too late to say that you wished he had spoken up, because your ex-boss won't re-hire you, because you screwed up badly.

[passenger]

	Originally Posted by Tactical Panda To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I don't see the connection between prayers and conveyor belts.

	Originally Posted by ManWithNoName To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm also not sure what you mean by sculpting words on a conveyer belt.

Look for example at this
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
thread where they argue the differences between the two. The INTJ answers are much more succinct. The INTP replies sound as if they are "threading" through their whole thinking process, conveying every detail and nuance. It's like a chain of words on a slow conveyor belt. Informative vs. directive style of speech.

[TheObserver]

Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Then we need better grammatical constructs to deal with the situation. Excessively long sentences are unreadable. The purpose of a sentence is to make a single point. Explanations, caveats, references etc can go in the following sentences. This allows skim readers to bypass that level of information. The whole bundle of info forms a paragraph. New paragraphs are used to introduce a change of subject or viewpoint. I find that INTP scratchings frequently suffer from attempting to fit too much information into a single sentence.

Who decides what an excessively long sentence is and why is it unreadable simply because it is longer than X amount of words? You claim the purpose of a sentence is to make a single point. I say the author decides what the purpose of the sentence they are writing is. Maybe I don't want to cater to skim readers. Am I allowed to make that choice?

You:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[hi5yourface]

Originally Posted by passenger To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Look for example at this To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. thread where they argue the differences between the two. The INTJ answers are much more succinct. The INTP replies sound as if they are "threading" through their whole thinking process, conveying every detail and nuance. It's like a chain of words on a slow conveyor belt. Informative vs. directive style of speech.

word mechanics.......speech tweakers.

[Munglik]

	Originally Posted by Tactical Panda To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	When INTPs discuss issues it sometimes sounds to me like they are interested in discussing ideas rather than things. I don't see the connection between prayers and conveyor belts.

Do you honestly prefer talking about 'things'?

[thod]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

Worth a glance.

I spell the word California as "TEXAS". I'm allowed to ain't I. If people don't understand, that's there problem. Its my personal choice.

[TheObserver]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. . Worth a glance. I spell the word California as "TEXAS". I'm allowed to ain't I. If people don't understand, that's there problem. Its my personal choice.

Your argument doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. You are comparing apples to oranges.

[OwenF]

	Originally Posted by passenger To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Did you realize that when INTP discuss (either in forums or verbally) that their rhetoric sounds as if it was a prayer? It's as if they are sculpting words on a conveyor belt.

Our Father, who art in Hypothetical Taylorist Neverland, hallowed be thy writing tablet. Thy thesis come. Thy analysis be heeded, in meatland as it is mindland. Give us this day our daily takeout Chinese, and forgive us our forgetfulness, as we have forgotten those who forgave us last week. And lead us not into idle speculation, but deliver us from the "Evil" disambiguation page on Wikipedia. For thine is the geographic area, the joules per second, and the aura produced by certain migraine headaches. For ever and cetera. Affirmative.

[thod]

Anyone can write, in whatever style they please, but this does not make it good writing. The objective is not simply to express oneself. It is to do so in a manner that others find both readable and enjoyable. If others cannot parse your sentences, then it is bad writing. Surely you have noticed that certain posters write better than others. This has nothing to do with the subject matter they are addressing. (Nope I'm not to inflate egos by mentioning names)

[Merle]

Originally Posted by anticlimatic To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Trust me, Ni users, we do need to read that...particularly when the 'basic idea' you've distilled is the wrong one, and we're left wondering exactly what planet you've landed on. Informing us how you got there can help us retroactively adjust your course-- though I hear this isn't something J types ever prefer to do. :P It's ironic to hear Ti run-off-sentences being described as beating around the bush, when in fact it's much more of a thorough overkill whacking of the bush in question. Perpetually avoiding the explanation of how you arrived to conclusions seems much more 'rambling' to us-- in an odd string of seemingly baseless and eccentric judgements, wherein each probing question simply leads to another, seemingly off-topic one. Funny how that works.

Could not agree more!

I've spent my entire life being told that my 'rambling' sentences could use a scalpel, though, so that doesn't surprise me. I've worked very, very hard to train myself to put full stops in my writing at regular and intelligible intervals
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


---------- Post added 06-21-2012 at 02:46 PM ----------

Originally Posted by OwenF To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Our Father, who art in Hypothetical Taylorist Neverland, hallowed be thy writing tablet. Thy thesis come. Thy analysis be heeded, in meatland as it is mindland. Give us this day our daily takeout Chinese, and forgive us our forgetfulness, as we have forgotten those who forgave us last week. And lead us not into idle speculation, but deliver us from the "Evil" disambiguation page on Wikipedia. For thine is the geographic area, the joules per second, and the aura produced by certain migraine headaches. For ever and cetera. Affirmative.

This sounds like a Paul Celan poem
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



p.s. Parentheses
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(for when you've used up your allotment of commas).

[TheObserver]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Anyone can write, in whatever style they please, but this does not make it good writing. The objective is not simply to express oneself. It is to do so in a manner that others find both readable and enjoyable.

Enjoyable? I am not writing for your enjoyment. I maintain that there is nothing wrong with a fifty two word sentence.

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	If others cannot parse your sentences, then it is bad writing. Surely you have noticed that certain posters write better than others. This has nothing to do with the subject matter they are addressing. (Nope I'm not to inflate egos by mentioning names)

Why can't you parse my sentences? I have noticed that certain posters write better than others, but I don't focus on the length of their sentences. I focus on content and clarity. There was nothing unclear about my first post.

[jndiii]

Originally Posted by TheObserver To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I think it definitely depends on what is being conveyed. It also seems to me that any thinking person that has not organized his or her speech in a formal manner ahead of time is likely to state a conclusion before they provide the listener with a detailed account of the "thought journey" that they went through to come to the conclusion. I would also say that it is easier for me and probably for most people in general to fill in the details later instead of organizing the details to create a larger picture in sequential order. Even detail based sensing types such as the ISTJ are unlikely to convey their ideas in perfect sequential order in a conversation.

For purposes of illustrating the difference between INTP and INTJ, a restatement of the disputed 52-word sentence and its paragraph:

I think it depends on what is being conveyed. One who has not organized one's speech ahead of time is likely to state a conclusion before one provides a detailed account of one's "thought journey." It is easier for me to fill in the details later instead of organizing the details first. Even sensing types such as the ISTJ are unlikely to convey their ideas in perfect sequential order while conversing.

My version is using my normal idiom on forums. The main difference between my version of the paragraph and the original is removal of all qualifiers beyond "I think". Doing so changes the word count of the disputed sentence from 52 to 26.

The typical INTP idiom tends to have several of these qualifying phrases which, to an INTJ, contain no meaning. Most of these phrases are just there to say, "this is my opinion, not strictly fact". Others are extra details that an INTJ would regard as extra fluff, e.g., using "any thinking person" in a way that doesn't distinguish from people in general, using "in a formal manner" after saying "organize", and using "the listener" as the object of "provide", while "detailed account" (the focus of the sentence's meaning) is placed in a prepositional afterthought.

Overall, there is an INTP tendency to use idioms that dissociate oneself from one's ideas, and to provide an indication of how confident one is that the specific ideas stated resemble one's ideal of truth. These idioms sound like fluff to the INTJ. Conversely, INTJs tend to assume that ideas are dissociated from oneself, and instead state ideas declaratively, without qualifiers. The lack of qualifiers sounds like imprecision and arrogance to INTPs.

Interestingly, both INTPs and INTJs can be extremely nitpicky about words and how to phrase things, but they have completely different approaches. INTPs nitpick on the definitions, so they tend to go for the exact right word, and if the exact right word doesn't exist, they'll add extra adjectives to make sure the precise meaning is clear as possible. INTJs nitpick on form and grammar, so to INTJs the extra precision of the INTPs seems excessive, making the grammar seem clumsy to the INTJ and obscuring the focus of the INTP's sentences.

It's rather impressive how common this pattern is. It's just as prevalent in the INTJ/INTP thread as it is in this one.

	Originally Posted by TheObserver To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Why can't you parse my sentences? I have noticed that certain posters write better than others, but I don't focus on the length of their sentences. I focus on content and clarity. There was nothing unclear about my first post.

@Observer, I want to be absolutely clear with you that I am not nitpicking your grammar. Your sentences were coherent to me as is. I only made the grammatical changes for comparison and contrast of INTJ vs INTP idioms, not derision. My idiom is just an idiom, used as a specific example of an INTJ idiom, and hopefully this illustrates how INTJ and INTP can say the same things very differently.

[Tactical Panda]

	Originally Posted by Munglik To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Do you honestly prefer talking about 'things'?

To me all the universe, reality, beauty and existence is a thing.

To me the approach of understanding it and managing it is dealing with the thing.

The idea of the idea of it is less important to me than the relationship between actual things and ideas - such as my relationship with a friend rather than my relationship with the idea of my friend.

Thus, when I talk to things I talk of ideas too - even when it comes to describing ideas of logic, which in practice has become a thing in consequence, implementation, and application. Although logic remains an idea.

Where things and ideas meet - if the situation is appropriate, such as during an investigation of evidence, I'd rather not have it any other way.

As to discussing ideas - depending on their meaning and if they have consequence to things, I may enjoy and spend a lot of time on it.

[Fujimoto]

Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Then we need better grammatical constructs to deal with the situation. Excessively long sentences are unreadable. The purpose of a sentence is to make a single point. Explanations, caveats, references etc can go in the following sentences. This allows skim readers to bypass that level of information. The whole bundle of info forms a paragraph. New paragraphs are used to introduce a change of subject or viewpoint. I find that INTP scratchings frequently suffer from attempting to fit too much information into a single sentence.

Simple writing is for simple people. If one doesn't have the attention span to read a well-developed, fully clarified sentence, that's not the fault of the writer.

[passenger]

	Originally Posted by Fujimoto To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Simple writing is for simple people. If one doesn't have the attention span to read a well-developed, fully clarified sentence, that's not the fault of the writer.

Intelligent people can fit a whole book into a sentence.

[anticlimatic]

	Originally Posted by passenger To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Intelligent people can fit a whole book into a sentence.

I turned in a one sentence book report once in high school, and argued this very point...

Teacher didn't go for it.