User Tag List

First 51314151617 Last

Results 141 to 150 of 234

  1. #141
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    I meant current function theory. I thought that was obvious.
    Umm yeah, it was obvious. My point still stands. Current function theory does explain the things you mentioned--you just haven't found it yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    I'm so textbook Ni it's not even funny. I'd think you'd get that if you knew much about Ni.
    I agree that you are textbook Ni. I don't believe I implied otherwise. The point was that Ni doms sometimes have this problem but never realize it about themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    Thanks for the references. I have the Berens and Nardi and I find it practically useless and cliche. I am not interested in Enneagram although I think they have developed a kick-ass conceptual model. I am always intrigued with Myers-Briggs because they actually have a large enough organization to fund research and testing of personality types. I'm not very interested in Beebe; I got turned off from the beginning with his 8 function model seemingly based in his own mind, but not grounded in any sort of observation. I could be wrong here, and I welcome any critique of his work regarding his most valuable impact. I will probably get his book later, after I've studied the main gurus. I have been all over the Lenore Thompson Wiki and like it, for the most part. I cannot find where she gets her information for her work in that wiki. I will buy her book and check it out.
    Beebe's model is essentially identical because his 8 functions are subdivided into sixteen when you factor in orientations. It's very close to Jung's model.

    Lenore is by far the best modern author on the subject. She didn't actually write the Wiki; that was mostly written by Ben Kovitz, an INTP fan of hers.

    I think Lenore's book will clear up a great deal of misconceptions for you. It certainly did for me. You might find her writing style more palatable and easier to understand as well, since she self-identifies as an Ni dom.



    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    I respect your opinion on this. If you don't think you use Fi, you probably don't. But I also have my own observations to go by, so I can't just take your (or anyone's) word for it. You should know this about Ni doms.
    I'm not questioning your observations; I'm questioning your categorization of them. I occasionally use Fi, but not very often. You don't seem to understand the fervor with which Ti defends ideas. Ti is to thoughts what Fi is to feelings and neither is very keen on giving up much ground in those areas.

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    For the sake of argument, and the pursuit of truth, I will say that IF the aux and tert functions are oriented the same way, they will bleed over into each other somewhat, and the effect, especially of the tert, might be very difficult to see. Sort of like how some perceive Ni and Si bleed over into each other. For example, I feel an emotional attachment of you to your ideas that seems to go beyond what I know of Ti users. In fact, I usually feel Ti to be very detached, at least in Ti doms, IxTPs, very non-emotional, and very logical. If what you, and Jag, are saying is true, that we are seeing the emotional adherence of you to your Ti ideas getting challenged, then Ti doms should have even more reason to feel emotional, or invested (if you like) in being challenged. However, with the tert-opposite idea, IxTPs would use Fe, not Fi, which might be the reason; which might be what makes the difference.
    All four functions bleed over into each other routinely. Each of the pairs (Fe/Te, Fi/Ti, Ne/Se and Ni/Si) shows the most similarity to each other, but each is different in subtle ways that contradict the preferred mode of operation of the other.

    ITPs are markedly less animated and less overtly emotional than ETPs. Note also that Ne and Se tend to enjoy exaggeration and dramatic argumentation for the purpose of making a scene, especially on the internet. Extroverted Perceivers, especially, are far more concerned with entertaining a potential audience than they might let on.

    Since you can't hear tone of voice or get any body language or other physical cues over the internet, it's easy to mistake the aggressive style and colorful language for excessive emotional involvement, but really that's just part of the game. Look at the arguments ENTPs have with each other, especially--they like to see who can burn the other more creatively.

    Hell, my girlfriend is ENTP and if you read some of our light-hearted conversations in pure text form you'd probably think we despise each other. You miss a lot (and end up making wrong inferences) when dealing with people over the internet.

    Ne+Ti's line of reasoning is basically: "This person is clearly incorrect, so I'm justified in being blunt and over the top in pointing it out. Hahaha isn't this fun?" Te+Ni and Se+Ti can do the same thing.

    People frequently accuse Jaguar of being angry or emotional too, but he's not. He's no more emotionally invested in forum arguments than you are--but people like to pretend he is so they can justify his aggressive personality to themselves. That's how E_T_ types are commonly perceived by others, especially Fs. "This guy sure is being a dick--I'll just assume he has serious emotional issues because that makes me feel better about it."

    Of course, Thinkers obviously have emotions. Nobody is claiming that we don't. But it does get sort of old when Feelers constantly try to dictate our own feelings to us. We simply are not paying as much attention to them as you are and when you repeatedly insist that you know how we feel better than we do, you're going to tend to get rude responses.

    There's a time and a place when operating on feelings is appropriate, but most of the time we're not really even thinking about that. Some of us are awfully competitive; we'll even shout at each other during arguments sometimes and then go right back to getting along normally. This doesn't make any sense to a lot of Feelers because they inherently associate this sort of behavior with strong emotion and don't understand how or why anyone would be so aggressive if not for emotional reasons, but often E_T_ types are just using argument as a form of sport or competition, and what you perceive as "emotional defense" of their ideas is little more than a competitive attempt to win a game. (In many cases, ability to stand one's ground via aggressive argumentation actually earns respect points from Thinkers. We're just not operating from the same priorities you are.)

    If you didn't know what boxing was and you saw two guys standing in a ring hitting each other, you'd probably assume they hate each other and are fighting for very emotional reasons. Many Fs simply don't realize what Ts are doing in this kind of argument or why, and so in an effort to rationalize what they see as totally inappropriate behavior, they attach the only motivation they understand to it: out of control feelings.

    The more we try to explain, the more you insist that our denial is "evidence" that your theory is right. It becomes utterly impossible to explain our real motivations to you, at which point we get irritated and tell you to piss off (which further cements your "out of control emotions" theory for why we were arguing in the first place.)

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    But this tert-opposite idea of mine is but 1 tiny piece in the whole personality typology 10,000 piece construct. I have made an observation, and I can only wait to see where it falls into place. It goes somewhere, I'm just not sure where.
    ITPs usually express Fe by forming little cliques with other ITPs that are based around being elitist toward "outsiders" who aren't cool enough to ITPs. Go and have a look around INTP central and you'll see exactly what I mean. The hilariously ironic part is that, since Ti is dominant, they view themselves as purely logical and independent thinkers who don't need that silly social group thing, but they don't even realize that in the process of asserting this image they end up unconsciously banding together to express inferior Fe.

    Another potential problem with your "tertiary is opposite the dominant" theory is that it gives types that share the last three letters (which are most often seen as very similar to each other) different functional makeups. Suddenly terms like "STPs" don't make sense anymore because ESTPs and ISTPs have different functions. In practice, the two are extremely similar and tend to get along very well for just that reason. I went through my phone recently and tallied up the types of all my contacts and found that I socialize with more INTPs than any other type--because we have the same functions and get along well. Your theory would suggest that I use Fi vs. their Fe, and that they use Se vs. my Si...but anyone who's ever spent a few hours with an INTP can tell their Se is, in most cases, practically nonexistent.

    It's easy to see Si in them when they get stuck in their anti-social thought loops about how trying new things in terms of interacting with others is guaranteed to fail because it's always failed before. Check out the stuff about dom+tert loops in Lenore's book and I think you'll see what I mean.

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    OR maybe it's confusing because of all the missing pieces. Like looking at a painting only half finished. What's more confusing? Looking at an unfinished Escher or looking at a finished Escher? I guess that would depend on your viewpoint, and how you like to think.
    I suppose cognition will be easier to understand if/when the day comes that we understand it completely, but I don't think that will make it more simplistic.


    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    But I never claimed to be operating within a Jungian framework, and if "you got that from my posts then you really missed the point by a mile." All I said, in response to your repeated criticisms, was that I agree with a lot of what Jung and others say. If you judge with your Ne, that I "got Jung's theories wrong" that's your problem. I see Jung through my own vision, my Ni, so I will necessarily judge his work differently than you, and intuit different things than you. Furthermore, I never made conjectures about what you believe. If anything, I'm the only one asking questions here when I want more information, instead of making false assumptions.
    Ne doesn't judge anything. Jung coined all of the functional terms. Using Jung's terms implies that you are working within a Jungian framework. If I go around talking about amphibians and marsupials I shouldn't be surprised when people assume I'm talking about biology.

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    I make my own framework. I never adopt another person's framework if it means something important to me, or affects my view in some personal way. It's just not how I think, which is what you don't seem to get either. I'm not telling you, "Hey, Sim, don't go memorize every detail from every author who ever wrote anything with the word function in it," because I know that's just what Ne's do.
    Then you have yet another erroneous perception of Ne. Memorizing details is the exact opposite of Ne; it's an Si thing. If anything Ne is negligent of minor details. I can't remember everything any of the authors I've read said about typology. If I'm correcting you it's because you've missed huge, broad conceptual ideas, not trivial minor details.

    Like that one, for instance. Memorizing every detail is not only not something Ne doms are in the habit of doing, it's one of the things they dislike most and are typically the absolute worst at. This is what leads me to question your understanding...you're not just slightly off here, your statement about Ne is the absolute antithesis of its real tendency.

    If you make your own framework, it's very confusing when you use the terms from a different framework but assign them your own definitions.


    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    As to the bolded, you haven't passed my tests yet. You think I'm going to philosophize with someone I can't even communicate with? No thanks.
    k
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #142
    Alexander the Terrible yenom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    I've never visited your wall in my life, goofball.
    And your hatred comment, was quite recent.

    Any other bullshit lies you want to post?


    Thats for you Jaguar
    The fear of poverty turns people into slaves of money.

    "In this Caesar there are many Mariuses"~Sulla

    Conquer your inner demons first before you conquer the world.

  3. #143
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,431

    Default

    Bite me.

  4. #144
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    lol @ Jag's April Fool's type
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #145
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,431

    Default

    What if Jag was masquerading as an ENTJ for a year to prove MBTI is horse shit?

  6. #146
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    ^ and of course you picked the best type to be! Who wouldn't?
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  7. #147
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Umm yeah, it was obvious. My point still stands. Current function theory does explain the things you mentioned--you just haven't found it yet.
    Maybe. Maybe not.



    Lenore is by far the best modern author on the subject. She didn't actually write the Wiki; that was mostly written by Ben Kovitz, an INTP fan of hers.
    I know.

    I think Lenore's book will clear up a great deal of misconceptions for you. It certainly did for me. You might find her writing style more palatable and easier to understand as well, since she self-identifies as an Ni dom.
    Well, it will certainly illuminate, hopefully, what she knows and thinks. That doesn't necessarily translate to truth for me, but it contributes.


    I'm not questioning your observations; I'm questioning your categorization of them. I occasionally use Fi, but not very often. You don't seem to understand the fervor with which Ti defends ideas. Ti is to thoughts what Fi is to feelings and neither is very keen on giving up much ground in those areas.
    I still feel tert Fi in you. I know Fi and I know Fe. What can I say? We have different opinions on that. I have recently met an entp irl, a male, and I will be checking him out closely in the near future for that tert F. So far, I only feel Fi in him as well.


    All four functions bleed over into each other routinely. Each of the pairs (Fe/Te, Fi/Ti, Ne/Se and Ni/Si) shows the most similarity to each other, but each is different in subtle ways that contradict the preferred mode of operation of the other.

    ITPs are markedly less animated and less overtly emotional than ETPs. Note also that Ne and Se tend to enjoy exaggeration and dramatic argumentation for the purpose of making a scene, especially on the internet. Extroverted Perceivers, especially, are far more concerned with entertaining a potential audience than they might let on.
    What I meant is that you saying you getting irritable about Ti, and that it's not Fi, doesn't hold much weight with me, especially when I gave my example about INTPs not really getting emo when people disagree with them. Since they (Fi/Ti) bleed over into each other a bit, it could be easy to miss.


    Since you can't hear tone of voice or get any body language or other physical cues over the internet, it's easy to mistake the aggressive style and colorful language for excessive emotional involvement, but really that's just part of the game. Look at the arguments ENTPs have with each other, especially--they like to see who can burn the other more creatively.

    Hell, my girlfriend is ENTP and if you read some of our light-hearted conversations in pure text form you'd probably think we despise each other. You miss a lot (and end up making wrong inferences) when dealing with people over the internet.
    I understand.


    Ne+Ti's line of reasoning is basically: "This person is clearly incorrect, so I'm justified in being blunt and over the top in pointing it out. Hahaha isn't this fun?" Te+Ni and Se+Ti can do the same thing.

    People frequently accuse Jaguar of being angry or emotional too, but he's not. He's no more emotionally invested in forum arguments than you are--but people like to pretend he is so they can justify his aggressive personality to themselves. That's how E_T_ types are commonly perceived by others, especially Fs. "This guy sure is being a dick--I'll just assume he has serious emotional issues because that makes me feel better about it."

    Of course, Thinkers obviously have emotions. Nobody is claiming that we don't. But it does get sort of old when Feelers constantly try to dictate our own feelings to us. We simply are not paying as much attention to them as you are and when you repeatedly insist that you know how we feel better than we do, you're going to tend to get rude responses.

    There's a time and a place when operating on feelings is appropriate, but most of the time we're not really even thinking about that. Some of us are awfully competitive; we'll even shout at each other during arguments sometimes and then go right back to getting along normally. This doesn't make any sense to a lot of Feelers because they inherently associate this sort of behavior with strong emotion and don't understand how or why anyone would be so aggressive if not for emotional reasons, but often E_T_ types are just using argument as a form of sport or competition, and what you perceive as "emotional defense" of their ideas is little more than a competitive attempt to win a game. (In many cases, ability to stand one's ground via aggressive argumentation actually earns respect points from Thinkers. We're just not operating from the same priorities you are.)

    If you didn't know what boxing was and you saw two guys standing in a ring hitting each other, you'd probably assume they hate each other and are fighting for very emotional reasons. Many Fs simply don't realize what Ts are doing in this kind of argument or why, and so in an effort to rationalize what they see as totally inappropriate behavior, they attach the only motivation they understand to it: out of control feelings.

    The more we try to explain, the more you insist that our denial is "evidence" that your theory is right. It becomes utterly impossible to explain our real motivations to you, at which point we get irritated and tell you to piss off (which further cements your "out of control emotions" theory for why we were arguing in the first place.)
    Makes sense.

    ITPs usually express Fe by forming little cliques with other ITPs that are based around being elitist toward "outsiders" who aren't cool enough to ITPs. Go and have a look around INTP central and you'll see exactly what I mean. The hilariously ironic part is that, since Ti is dominant, they view themselves as purely logical and independent thinkers who don't need that silly social group thing, but they don't even realize that in the process of asserting this image they end up unconsciously banding together to express inferior Fe.
    K

    Another potential problem with your "tertiary is opposite the dominant" theory is that it gives types that share the last three letters (which are most often seen as very similar to each other) different functional makeups. Suddenly terms like "STPs" don't make sense anymore because ESTPs and ISTPs have different functions. In practice, the two are extremely similar and tend to get along very well for just that reason.
    They would still share the dom and aux though, just flipped. I wouldn't think the tert would make that much difference.

    I went through my phone recently and tallied up the types of all my contacts and found that I socialize with more INTPs than any other type--because we have the same functions and get along well. Your theory would suggest that I use Fi vs. their Fe, and that they use Se vs. my Si...but anyone who's ever spent a few hours with an INTP can tell their Se is, in most cases, practically nonexistent.
    I've already considered those problems, and I have a different idea about irrational functions in the aux and tert positions.

    It's easy to see Si in them when they get stuck in their anti-social thought loops about how trying new things in terms of interacting with others is guaranteed to fail because it's always failed before. Check out the stuff about dom+tert loops in Lenore's book and I think you'll see what I mean.
    Yep. And okay.



    Ne doesn't judge anything. Jung coined all of the functional terms. Using Jung's terms implies that you are working within a Jungian framework. If I go around talking about amphibians and marsupials I shouldn't be surprised when people assume I'm talking about biology.
    Said that on purpose. Meant to say it. Another idea.......Forgive me but I only have so much time in my day. Coining new terms for things doesn't happen overnight.

    Then you have yet another erroneous perception of Ne. Memorizing details is the exact opposite of Ne; it's an Si thing. If anything Ne is negligent of minor details. I can't remember everything any of the authors I've read said about typology. If I'm correcting you it's because you've missed huge, broad conceptual ideas, not trivial minor details.

    Like that one, for instance. Memorizing every detail is not only not something Ne doms are in the habit of doing, it's one of the things they dislike most and are typically the absolute worst at. This is what leads me to question your understanding...you're not just slightly off here, your statement about Ne is the absolute antithesis of its real tendency.

    If you make your own framework, it's very confusing when you use the terms from a different framework but assign them your own definitions.

    You're saying all this because I used the word "memorize."

    This is perfect example that I don't use Ti well. I don't care if you "memorize" or if you take it all in. It's the same thing to me, or might as well be. That doesn't, at this point in my thinking, affect me or where my mind is at at all. There will no doubt come a time when it is a big deal, in developing more ideas and cementing those ideas, making definitions; but everything in its time.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  8. #148
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Would you mind posting your definition of Fi?
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #149
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Would you mind posting your definition of Fi?
    P.T.--Jung, pps. 387-388 seems good enough to start.

    As Jung says, noticing and understanding Fi is more a subjective feeling than an conscious thought process.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  10. #150
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    People frequently accuse Jaguar of being angry or emotional too, but he's not.

Similar Threads

  1. Long Hair V.S. Short Hair
    By kyuuei in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-06-2017, 08:07 PM
  2. [NF] NF: since we think 'differently' than normal folks...
    By niki in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 10:54 AM
  3. Range in MBTI types.
    By Nillerz in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-01-2008, 06:10 PM
  4. Thinking/Feeling game: Same Difference
    By rivercrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-14-2007, 08:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO