Most sexual NT? | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Most sexual NT?

DevilDoll said:
Sex drive as well as sexual preference has little to nothing to do with MBTI type. I have met many different NTs of each type aall of which has different preferences and drives. You can't be o generic as to say an ENTJ has more sex than an INTP.It just doesn't work that way. One specific INTP might have far more sex than their ENTJ buddy. Functions lay the ground work. We build on it.
Click to expand...

^ Word.

Any time someone tries to categorize and/or stratify aspects of human nature with MBTI, failing occurs.
 
Last edited:
I think though, you are seeing the difference in how an NT dialouges about things though [MENTION=4864]swing[/MENTION]. I would say that the conversation may seem uncomfortable and argumentative but it is actually pretty congenial. :)
 
Stormy1 said:
I think though, you are seeing the difference in how an NT dialouges about things though [MENTION=4864]swing[/MENTION]. I would say that the conversation may seem uncomfortable and argumentative but it is actually pretty congenial. :)
Click to expand...

Okay, first: I have no problem with this kind of discussions. In fact, I do this very often in real life. I was actually thinking about the people in here. I mean some have decided to leave the playing field to vend frozen desserts.

Second: The thread is a mess. I think there are 3-5 open-ended approaches in here. The biochemical, the abstinence, and so on. There are no clean premises.

Third: Online discussions have a bias towards Ti-style discussions. It's hard to bring in your intuition, experience, anecdotal stuff. In real life you often have this moments where you try to explain something difficult and the other say "I know what you're saying". And you just know they got it. Never happens online.

So, if you draw the balance, the answer is clearly no.
 
swing said:
Okay, first: I have no problem with this kind of discussions. In fact, I do this very often in real life. I was actually thinking about the people in here. I mean some have decided to leave the playing field to vend frozen desserts.

Second: The thread is a mess. I think there are 3-5 open-ended approaches in here. The biochemical, the abstinence, and so on. There are no clean premises.

Third: Online discussions have a bias towards Ti-style discussions. It's hard to bring in your intuition, experience, anecdotal stuff. In real life you often have this moments where you try to explain something difficult and the other say "I know what you're saying". And you just know they got it. Never happens online.

So, if you draw the balance, the answer is clearly no.
Click to expand...


I prefer Te style discussions though.....well, any type of T discussion is preferable over a Fi discussion *teases*
 
Stormy1 said:
I prefer Te style discussions though.....well, any type of T discussion is preferable over a Fi discussion *teases*
Click to expand...

Who wants logic and rationality when you can feel your way through a subject and just yell at everybody?
 
bickelz said:
Te arguments sound f@#king exhausting. Its all about making charts...
Click to expand...
Some may. It is all about organizing the data into whatever efficent model works best. I think the tone of this thread is pretty classic if you are speaking to an NT audience. NT's won't "play along" with an idea that is riddled or based upon faulty premises. I would think that if the question was more concisely stated as to what type of NT is portrayed as less inclined to be sexual according to loosly based MBTI descriptors, there may have been more answers regarding the original OP. However the answers would be based upon an analysis of the MBTI models rather than directed as acutal assumptions of individuals.

Since that is not the case, next best thing to do is derail the thread. *laughs*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back