/lit/ - Literature

You are going to get insulted over using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, OP. Brace yourself. I myself don't have any recommendations unfortunately.

>>17120860
there is no robot literature.
checkout complete works of Kant, Schopenhauer and Wittgenstein.

my diary desu

>>17120860
Some hard scifi autism cringefest.

Kill your fucking self normalfag

>>17120860
u should look for 70iq recs rather than this manufactured personality shit.
what are u even expecting in a intp rec?
>omg this is like soo me!
the test is meaningless if youre going to base ur reading (and ur personality by proxy because ure a nerd) on it.

>>17120860
Summa Theologica

Only read the wiki page on it but it seems like INTP.

>>17120860
If you are INTP, literature is probably you.

>>17120860
Analytic philosophy, New Atheism, basically everything that carries the spirit of reddit.

>>17121033
>literature is probably you.
uhh... bros? how do i become literature?

>>17121070
If you are literarily inclined, shed your verbal layers accordingly so that your work may become a personalization of yourself.

>>17120860
True INTP is knowing personality tests are bullshit

>>17121070
You write an autobiography. It's not that hard, anon.

>>17120860
Wikipedia

>>17120860

Tangential: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH3_Yd1sNDY

>>17120860
Bronze Age Mindset, The Unabomber Manifesto, White Identity, Ender's Game, (Mother 3)
>>17120968
For me it's Ender's Game.

Katawa Shoujo

Something like Nietzsches Maxims and Interludes in BG&E, basically a whole pile of different ideas that can either be autistically obsessed over or skimmed through in succession for a minor dopamine hit each time

This is the true essence of INTP

>>17121540
Nice

>>17120860
Get out of here nerd, this is ENTP territory.

Ask me anything, I am like the oracle, my sublime intuition will answer all.

>>17120931
>You are going to get insulted over using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, OP.
As they should be, it's as good as a horoscope. It was made by a bored housewife and her daughter. People who fall for it are morons.

>>17121624
why are you gay?

>>17121630
I'm too meta for you.

Demian and Steppenwolf

>>17121624
why don't you fuck off back to twitter, filthy tourist?

The average anti-MBTI poster.

>bro you cant typify people based on personality characteristics and modes of engagement with the world, thats LITERALLY the same thing as ascribing personality by birthday!
Thank god we live in an age where pseuds make themselves easily recognizable.

>>17121629
Whatever you say. But it's more than that. 16Personalities / Testfags in general are the worst.

>>17121750
MBTI is basically a form of self-advertising. As there's no scientific basis behind it, the only use it for someone to broadcast what they feel they are. It's just another facet of consumerism.

What actual use or purpose does it have other than for people to pat each other on the back for literally nothing?

>>17121761
>But it's more than that.
Prove it. It's simply for people on social media to jerk each other off. It's facebook-tier garbage for garbage people.

>>17120860
A Confederacy of Dunces. The main character is an INTP.

>>17121766
>theres no practical application for it. Its bad.
Utterly cringe post.

>>17121766
>As there's no scientific basis behind it
Define "scientific basis".
I'm really curious what metaphysical elements you ascribe to your reddit conception of Le Science~
Because MBTI typology is based on repeatable, controlled profiling experiments going back to Jung, who invented psychological typology and set the groundwork for applying the scientific method in psychology.

What's some ISTP literature? More importantly, why the fuck did it type me as an ISTP? I guess we'll never know

>>17121824
Check the chart

>>17121883
huh, it just says "fag"
back to the peculiar sex life of adolf hitler it is then

>>17121883
but INFPs are always the hugest fags

>>17121669
Jealousy isn't a good look anon.

>>17121797
Seethe more retard.

>>17121809
>Define "scientific basis".
Being remotely consistent and reproducable for one thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator#Reliability

>"One problem is that it displays what statisticians call low "test-retest reliability." So if you retake the test after only a five-week gap, there's around a 50% chance that you will fall into a different personality category compared to the first time you took the test."

>Large numbers of people (between 39% and 76% of respondents) obtain different type classifications when retaking the indicator after only five weeks

>Because MBTI typology is based on repeatable, controlled profiling experiments going back to Jung

Prove it.

I'll repeat it again, MBTI is a form of self-advertising, nothing more. You'll have some people who think of themselves as "people persons" and they'll not doubt mark themselves as extroverted and then everyone will get together to pat each other on the back with choruses of "Me too!" as they regale each other with stories of their stereotypical actions.

As it's completely self-reported, it's just a report of what people think about themselves. The only validity it would have it if someone had the introspective powers to truly and objectively analyse themselves at which point, why even have the test? Someone with that level of insight wouldn't be wasting their time with such trivial matters.

There is zero difference between someone posting "look what I bought!" online and someone posting their MBTI outcome. It's pure consumerism.

>>17121766
>there's no practical application for it
Are you retarded?

>>17121966
What use does it have? As it's completely self-reported it's just self-advertising. What is the point of it?

There's no difference between the MBTI and something like a dating profile. It's just people telling others how they view themselves while pretending it's scientific.

>>17121184
I think we all know that, it just creates easy to use personality clusters : /
The FFM is more psychologically valid, but it doesn’t create clusters of personalities which are use to use, mostly just measuring the balance of a few main traits.

>>17120860
INTP myself. Pic related helped me to understand, getting the big picture, purpose etc.

I swear most of the people I talk to here are INTP including myself, yet only 3% of people supposedly are INTP. Interesting stuff.

>>17120931
>You are going to get insulted over using [astrology for people with linked-in accounts], OP.
Good

>>17121977
It provides a frame for understanding my own personality, as well as others.

>>17122432
Normie types dont hang out on 4chan, its all INTP/INTJs with a few ENTP/ISTPs here and there

>>17120979
fap your way back to /pol/

...

>>17122472
A lot of Infps anon.

>>17121960
>low-retest reliability
So by this logic because there's bias in self-diagnosis testing for mental health is completely pointless.
>some people arent self-aware enough to administer the test to themselves, that means the test itself is bad.
stop posting you midwit.

>>17122462
Seems awfully limiting to think of yourself as defined by four fixed factors. I don't see what useful insight that it gives you that you can't get by normal introspection.

I'm not surprised that brainlets think you can sum someone up in four words. MBTI posters are worse than Guenon fags. You should all go back to r9k.

>>17121960
>Being remotely consistent and reproducable for one thing.
>most stemlords can't replicate their peers' memes
>not only ignore this but demand higher standards from others

So THIS is the power of /r/atheism?

INTJ book recc?

>>17122494
>self-diagnosis testing for mental health is completely pointless
Mental health is not the same as defining someone's being. Plus, self-diagnosis is pretty shit for the most part, that's why people go to professionals. Let me guess. you're a self-diagnosed sadboi with the heart of a poet and you're sad because no one but your MBTI-bros understand you ;_;

>>17122502
>I'm not surprised that brainlets think you can sum someone up in four words
I don't think that you fucking cringe faggot, I much prefer Jung's original typology which just provides a very useful frame of reference and perception, but I don't have to walk into every thread and say "uhh uhh I'm actually very smart and have this and this problem with specifically mbti being this accurate or such and such," you're such a pseud man.

Only a moron could not see the usefulness of the categories, but of course they don't fully explain the personality.

>>17122533
Wow, the retard who thinks hes much too high IQ for personality tests also lacks basic fucking reading comprehension. Who would have thought.

>>17120860
All literature is INTP, other types would require other factors, like sensory input, or the ability to influence the progress. INTJ retards can go back to their pick your own adventure books, and everyone else can go back to their consoles and their shitty friends.
Pool's closed

>Only a moron could not see the usefulness of the categories
And yet no one ever states it. It's just seething when people call them out on how retarded they are. The only think I've seen people do with the MBTI is jerk each other off while going "OMG, LITERALLY ME". If anything, it's a hindrance to self-development to try and quantify yourself like that.

>I much prefer Jung
ngmi

>>17121977
It's great at feeding the narcissism in everyone
There's a reason astrology is still going strong after Millennia, despite being obvious nonsense

>>17122547
>also lacks basic fucking reading comprehension
Point out what I missed. You tried to refute my argument that because the MBTI is completely biased (as it's completely self-assessed) then by extension so is self-diagnosis for mental health. You're then implying that self-diagnosis is useful so my point is wrong. I'm saying that (1) you're making a false equivalency between mental health and your horoscope and (2) self-diagnosis is pretty shit for the most part.

Any books for capricorns?

imagine seething so much about the mbti

>>17122572
The MBTI is quite literally a spook. For a board that memes Stirner so much, it's amazing that people on here fall for it. I can understand why it's so popular on boards like /r9k/ but /lit/ should honestly be better.

>>17122588
Tropic of Cancer

>>17120860 John Green, Le Carre, and Austen were typed as INTP on idrlabs before it went to total shit.
Most importantly, what is some ISFP lit? Any fantasy or Sci-fi recs?
>In before Bukowski and Kerouac

>>17122603
>For a board that memes Stirner so much
9/10ths of threads are about religion, pol-shit and incel reeing at women/trannies/niggers. IMBT is genius level as far as /lit/ is concerned.

>>17122583
>You tried to refute my argument that because the MBTI is completely biased (as it's completely self-assessed) then by extension so is self-diagnosis for mental health. You're then implying that self-diagnosis is useful so my point is wrong.
Yeah I'm done arguing with you bro. You are the perfect example of someone who thinks they're smarter than they actually are. Go back, reread the posts and reflect so you dont look so fucking stupid next time.

>>17122561
>the Jungian categories define the whole personality and are a quantification
Are you literally retarded? You want to be so arrogant yourself but you can't understand so basic an idea. It's not an absolute definition of the individual, it's just saying some people, and usually when someone for example is what is considered an "extroverted intuitive" type they exhibit those same characteristics for the rest of their life. I wonder what characterisation you think is better, or you think it's better to be in absolute un-definition and confusion don't you. I gather you think that's more accurate and scientific somehow.

Jung doesn't say "because you're an extroverted intuitive you're always going to be impractical and have an underdevelopment of introverted sensing," though he does say that often that is the case. Again, these categories aren't something statistically exact and domineering, they're just frames of reference which are often very accurate. MBTI isn't wholly bad, but it's a lot worse than Jung if you want to be so autistic about it.

>Jung bad
I wonder what goes through the minds of people who just completely reject Jung. They've never read him, and they always have the most ridiculous understanding of him. As you've already shown, you somehow persistently misunderstood that the typology is summing up the whole personality, or that it's quantitative.

>>17122609
The Alchemist if you are "spiritual", Ishmael if you "care about the Planet"

>>17122637
>you've missed my point but I repeatedly refuse to say how
XD

>>17122572
>astrology is just superstition
Wow man you're stupid, completely irrespective of it being believed to define a person's life and that coming in the form of housewife gossip, you're just a moron if you think it's symbolically or philosophically irrelevant.

>>17120942
Wtf, those are my 3 favorite philosophers.

>>17122657
>Wow man you're stupid
No, that would be you

>>17122639
>these categories aren't something statistically exact and domineering, they're just frames of reference which are often very accurate
The second you try and quantify and categorise yourself remotely, you've already begun to limit yourself.

Personalities are infinitely complex and are as much about the environment and local context as it is inherent to the person. In the same way that idiots obsess over political ideology instead of policy, morons like you waste time and effort on "personality types" instead of actually engaging in real introspection.

>>17122661
oh no no no no

>>17122653
I dont understand why you think im supposed to care if you get it or not. If you lack reading comprehension thats your problem, I couldn't care less.

>>17122690
Three replies now without elaborating. So this is the power of the MBTI.

>>17122703
Yeah I'm not going to out of spite. Eat shit nigger.

>>17122712
Four

>>17122721
The last (You) you're getting out of me. Savor it.

>>17122680
The way the typing actually works, though, you are asked your preferences, and it spits out a shorthand for you to easily tell others.
>No I don't like parties or meetings, I don't care about your loud action movies, I just like books. And see here, it's not because I'm weird, I'm just INFP, and this site here says that we'll get along great as long as you give me some time to myself, preferably all day every day

>>17122688
What’s wrong with them?

>>17121624
What does Ti combined with Ne feel like?

>>17122743
Like warm apple pie

>>17121883
>mfw I really browse quora and leave the impression that I read more than I actually do

>>17122726
Retard.

>>17122648
Why are these things in quotes?

>>17122765
Because it's feely baloney

>>17122680
Ah! And this shows your irrational dislike of it. It doesn't come from a reason, but that you just can't imagine understanding it in yourself.

>you're wasting too much time wahh!
Lmao what a cope. Do you think one can't spend the shortest time understanding these relatively simple concepts and then moving on from them, or do you think they're frameless concepts with no real attachment to a particular self? You can think about them, and go beyond/use them for a real understanding of oneself. THe practical mundane idiosyncrasies many of which I would have not understood or noticed had it not been for mbti. I've already explained, just be honest with me, yourself and your own arguments and we'll be at an end in this conversation already. Someone as arrogant as you is not honest about himself very easily.

Baudrillard is rolling in his grave.

>>17122806
french gobbledygook

>>17122773
I think ISFPs get confused with INFPs.
ISFP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJViRJQr4x4
INFP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CTsGievjMU
INFP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkgkThdzX-8
ISFP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnl5X5MQKTg

>>17120860
All postmodern lit is INTP: Pynchon, Delillo, etc.

Book recommendations for an INTP Aquarius? I really liked Lolita.

>>17120931
True, I have friends that believe in Myres-Briggs and I insult them regularly for it

>>17120860
horrorscopes.

because myers-briggs personally tests are about on par.

>>17120860
i'd actually recommend NOT reading...chances are if you're intp you do that already. intps need to practice conviviality otherwise there is a strong tendency toward narcissism and neuroticism

>>17120860
Any INFJ here?
Anyway i'll drop some INFJ literature:
>Hitler
>Plato
>Jung
>Dostoevsky
>Tolstoy
>Dante Alighieri

What is the best start sign?

>>17124114
brainlet

>>17121883
I want to languish in my genius.

t. entp

>>17124716
Mbti is better

>>17120860
>do test first time
>get INFP
>do it again some time later
>get INTP
>do it again some time later
>get ISTP
>people want to argue this is science
>inb4 "muh functions"

>>17121716
t. sophist manchild incapable of thinking for himself unless /lit/ tells him to

>>17125291
Better in what regard? In terms of archetypes astrology has a wide breadth of history it has covered unlike MBTI. In terms of scientific validity there is no meaningful difference.

>>17122984
Ne is probably the worst, shittiest function ever. Se is way better.

There is nothing wrong with MBTI when it is applicable, which it often is.

>>17125365
Bugman logic.

>>17125418
No it’s just logic

>>17125422
>companies ostracize individuals through categorization and systemization
>like the uncritical Redditor he is, argues this is a good thing

>>17125422
Logic is innately bugman.

>>17122627
Religion is more important and worthwhile than any form of MBTI discussion.

>>17125295
You weren't being honest about yourself anon. I've always got the same result.

>>17125307
You don't have to seethe that hard over a joke anon. He's right, people shouldn't be so autistic over debunking things.

>>17125350
Do you know what Ne does anon?

>>17122472
>Normie types dont hang out on 4chan
This doesn't happen anymore. People now shitpost from their toilet

Jo Nesbo books
Notes from the Underground
No Longer Human
Witold Gombrowicz (pornographia, Cosmos are about dudes coming up with abstract theories based on anomalous information and acting to perpetuate and figure things out that nobody would ever give a second thought)

>>17125295
Which time did you lie the most?

>>17125501
>You weren't being honest about yourself anon. I've always got the same result.
What does that mean? What quality does "honesty" attribute to your test results? Do I have to be in a perfectly content mood when I take the test? Does being angry or sad dilute the results? Are my emotions at the time at taking the test fake then? And what of my experiences that can change my outlook on life in the span of only a year? Would that too, not effect the results?

>>17125563
I didn't "lie" about anything, Fake Butterfly.

>>17125501
>You don't have to seethe that hard over a joke anon. He's right, people shouldn't be so autistic over debunking things.
>insists MBTI is a science
>thinking at any point your sophism will excuse you

>>17125508
Generates ideas. Jumps from topic to topic. Sacrifices consistency for "le randomness". Reddit's favorite comedians and scientists tend to be Ne because Reddit is Ne.

>>17125572
Well if you're an introverted nerd that can barely talk but want to be, and imagine yourself as an extroverted chad that can interfere. I.e. you weren't being honest about yourself, your life and your personality.

>>17122753
kek

>>17124212
entirety of 4chan is intj
that is our /lit/ you fucking faggot

>>17125604
And what about cases where introverted nerds do get out of their shell and make a change for themselves? I remember one question where it was along the lines of "If you were at a party, would you rather sit out or hang with the crowd?", which is subjective and entirely dependent on both experience and current outlook on life.

>>17125578
So does the needle swings back and forth too much when you answer it differently or are you saying it’s all random?
Do these three results sound anything like aspects of you?

>>17125597
You're retarded. Ne is intuition, it gives ideas and knowledge focused outward. I'm right about literally everything because of it, because my intuition will necessarily tell me what's right, very rare is it wrong, and I am given chief knowledge about the world people like you only have secondarily. Ne doesn't want randomness any more than anything else, being an Entp I want to find an order in it all and am constantly categorising what is new; it is just I constantly focus on something new to fuel my drives. Given that these drives can be purely focused on intellectual pursuits, ideally it comes out in the form of genius as a Socrates or Da Vinci.

Intuition actually sees patterns, it's anti-randomness.

>>17125625
The other questions will gather it. Occasionally you get something like an Intp who has more extroversion than introversion on the pure statistics, but their personality is evidently Intp so they're still given it.

>>17125629
>A bunch of schizo rambling
>Person claims to be an Ne user
Yep.

>>17125636
>The other questions will gather it.
No, not really. The rest of the questions were subjective too.
>Occasionally you get something like an Intp who has more extroversion than introversion on the pure statistics, but their personality is evidently Intp so they're still given it.
Sounds to me like the quota is arbitrary, hm?

>>17125627
>So does the needle swings back and forth too much when you answer it differently or are you saying it’s all random?
I'm saying the test lacks rigor, yes.
>Do these three results sound anything like aspects of you?
At the time, yes, but only through a combination of current mood/outlook and placebo.

>>17125629
Ni shits all over Ne.

>>17122778
>>you're wasting too much time wahh!
Your autistic obsession with categorization and meaningless navel gazing is the definition of time wasting.

>>17125330
So what you're saying is that /lit/ should have astrology threads instead of MBTI threads.

>>17125666
Hey, nice Satanic trips. Yeah, we kinda came to the same conclusions years ago when this first came out.
No wonder no one talks about their books

>>17125657
>No, not really. The rest of the questions were subjective too.
the entire point of the test is to be subjective

>>17125710
Yes. They couldn't be worse. Ironic retard-posting is better than unironic retard-posting.

>>17125418

Pretty sure sperging out about MBIT not being the the most precise and succinct divination of someone's mind is the definition of bugman logic.

>>17125758
Okay, then. Well, I'm a Capricorn, what books should I read?

>>17120860
here are 6 INTP philosophers

>>17125943
Kant wasn't INTP

>>17125943
No Spinoza? rip