User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 110

  1. #51
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I just about had a heart attack when you said that you develop a theory, then try to find the data to support it. This happens during the process too - the glossing over of details.
    Yes, I can see that some people do that, though if done properly, you're not specifically looking for evidence just to support it, you're looking for any evidence at all that's connected with it, in order to evaluate it in light of all pros and cons. Though in fact, in my case, usually I don't even have a theory to begin with. I'm not even sure if what I have is a problem. That's the thing... I don't like to even try to define something until I've enough data on it to see where it fits into the bigger picture.

    This can be a big irritation to detail centric and bottom lining types! Especially when they ask "what do you think about this" and you want to answer "see what? You made it out of thin air, with weak data - what is there to see? Come back when you have something useful".
    That's the thing... many abstract theories ARE useful. You can start out with a "what if?" and then look for ways to find out whether your "what if?" is possible, desired, necessary, etc. all of which would never have happened if you'd insisted that no theorizing was possible without FIRST knowing all those facts.

    (It often takes a bit of effort for me to not just post hundreds of "Did you know research has already been done on this topic?" Do I get to ask if Ns will ever start putting some effort into their thoughts before throwing them around everywhere... or would that be rude? )
    I always assume the research has been done into everything I could conceivably think of. But that's not the point

    It wouldn't be necessarily rude to ask that question, but y'know... perhaps you could allow for the idea that the 'throwing around' actually *is* the process of putting thought in? Especially with NP's, it's done in the open air. What you're hearing is the PROCESS, not the result. I don't personally get why you would see it as such a bad thing that somebody just thinks aloud... do we all have to have our thoughts sit an entrance exam before they're allowed expression??
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  2. #52
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    What the hell is the point of this topic?

    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  3. #53
    The Destroyer Colors's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    5x/o
    Posts
    1,271

    Default

    ptgatsby did a pretty stellar job of saying what I was going to try to say (and a bunch of other good stuff I wouldn't think of saying) while I was still mulling over how to respond to the emotion of being misunderstood.

    It's called a preference for a reason... All Ns use S and all Ss use N- it's just they use them in a different order. Ns want to find a general rule and just about infer a specific solution later. Ss want to find a specific solution and just about infer a general rule for the future.

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute
    Seriously though Esses, do you not understand the idea of talking hypothetically? I mean, can you not see that we're talking here about doing the same thing you do but in reverse? Whilst I obviously acknowledge that your approach has its merits, can you allow that the N's does too? Or does it really just seem all 'silly and pointless' to you?

    I mean for example I might have a specific thing in mind but it's personal to me, and I'm just trying to gather input to create a general theory from as many OTHER examples as possible. So i ask hypothetical questions. I don't want the other person to dissect this specific incident with me, I just want them to tell me how they'd respond to a hypothetically similar situation, or how they have responded to similar ones in their experience. Then I can relate what they tell me what I know, see the patterns and connect the dots and solve the problem myself. Is that not also a valid way to work?

    "I don't want you to solve my problem for me. I just want you to help me out with some information so i can solve it myself. Don't worry about context, facts, details etc, just answer my questions with whatever your genuine response is, muse over these things with me in the abstract, and that will help me."
    I never maligned the use of the hypothetical (as whole), and I'm very sorry if you read it that way. My response in the "N vs. S" thread was to highlight that individuals could level the same criticism at each other- but for very different reasons.

    For me, sharing something personal is necessary in asking other people to share something personal about themselves. (Obviously, there are plenty of experiments which don't tell the human participants key information for a reason- the real study subject even sometimes! The reason being that such knowledge could color the results. However, when it is not necessary, such information should be given.) It can feel very exclusive to give another to judge oneself/one's ideas without being given a chance to evaluate fully in return.

  4. #54
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    What the hell is the point of this topic?

    I dont know myself, I heard though there will be beer for free later
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  5. #55
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    I want to make it clear that I'm trying to highlight differences, not objectively claim one is better than the other. What I'd like to encourage is understanding from both sides, but since I am on one side, I naturally understand it better.

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    Yes, I can see that some people do that, though if done properly, you're not specifically looking for evidence just to support it, you're looking for any evidence at all that's connected with it, in order to evaluate it in light of all pros and cons. Though in fact, in my case, usually I don't even have a theory to begin with. I'm not even sure if what I have is a problem. That's the thing... I don't like to even try to define something until I've enough data on it to see where it fits into the bigger picture.
    Sure - I seperated the part you quoted from the rest of my post because that's how I feel (so I kinda answered the question objectively first, then subjectively).

    But this description is the problem. If you don't know what you are looking for, how can you know when you have found it? Is it just when you find something? That doesn't sit well with me I need to know what you are looking for, so that I can then answer it properly - that is, give you data on the topic you want to solve.

    (Illustration: You recently asked about bullying and different personality types in another thread. There is huge amounts of research on bullying now, including a lot on personality influences (though, not much with MBTI, but there never is ) Did you want to know? Or is it just for discussion? Which would feed the theory, which would create more theories to work on? Which is your preference? I could answer your questions on personality and theories in a very dry way, and even explain what the sub-scales show so that you don't have to theorize much. You wouldn't like that, would you...? Yet, that will provide a great deal of data around the problem, but it will be structured and not leave much room for you to theorize inside.)

    I do understand the need to understand something, the drive to gather data, to model it. I'm not that different. But we do have a strong divergence when it comes to defining something. To me, the theory serves as a tool to solve a problem. As above, with the bullying, I know the answer to a high enough degree of confidence that I don't need to theorize. Do you want to reach that point, really? I never feel that NPs do want to, and avoid it at all costs!)

    That's the gap we face when we talk. You start theorizing, I see you struggling for an answer, and so I give you an answer. At the same time, I can provide you an answer, and then you'll ask me what it means, and I'll answer "exactly what it says", and I'll get frustrated with your need to find meaning - you'll be thinking about how closed minded I am. Both of our feelings end up being correct - they don't come from being right, but not being able to close the gap. One of us can't be ourselves in that situation.

    Opposing functions (and we) will always be in conflict, in that regard. It probably becomes worse coming from me, who uses Ti like a sledgehammer for any problem (way more than the INTPs ). I will have structure, even if it means I'm going to try building a giantic rib frame for a personal submarine on a whim. My methodology is very well honed, and it doesn't agree with your well honed method. Doesn't mean that we aren't useful to each other, but we might not be useful when we work on the same thing, in the same room!


    That's the thing... many abstract theories ARE useful. You can start out with a "what if?" and then look for ways to find out whether your "what if?" is possible, desired, necessary, etc. all of which would never have happened if you'd insisted that no theorizing was possible without FIRST knowing all those facts.
    Do you consider a theory abstract after it has been validated? I don't.

    "What ifs" are not my strong point, naturally. But this is intentional for me (well, 'I don't regret it intentional'). If you come up with 1000 theories, but only 100 are validated, is it better or worse than me coming up with 100 theories, but 90 being validated.

    What if you assign a low confidence to the validation? (Meaning, you don't really know which of the 100 are actually good?) However, I know that NPs tend to be happy with this, because they don't really think that much of their own theories. I can't afford that luxury - no practical application means the theory doesn't exist (and then, if I need a theory to apply, it has to work, so I need very high confidence.)

    Again, just to avoid making it sound like I'm attacking Ns in general, this is my perspective, and my frustration. Yes, abstractions are useful, but they can't be useful for *me*, now, in my project or life. I can't take an N theory and use it because I can't *trust it*. I need to validate it, but when I validate it, I'm removing the whole N-centric approach.

    Both Ns and Ss reach this point, just in a different order.

    I would say that N theories are useful because of their farther reach, but my general feeling is to never trust an obvious N theory - that is, if I can tell where it came from, it probably isn't refined enough. I'm looking for middle ground between abstract and validated.


    (The other side of this is that many "S" theories are so obvious that there is no point calling them theories. It is all a matter of scale. Too big to be validated isn't useful, too small isn't useful... but inbetween? Perfect.)

    It wouldn't be necessarily rude to ask that question, but y'know... perhaps you could allow for the idea that the 'throwing around' actually *is* the process of putting thought in? Especially with NP's, it's done in the open air. What you're hearing is the PROCESS, not the result. I don't personally get why you would see it as such a bad thing that somebody just thinks aloud... do we all have to have our thoughts sit an entrance exam before they're allowed expression??
    Putting 'thought' in doesn't impress me as a methodology, and that's the issue. I'd rather be out gathering the validation long before you guys have discussing something. It would be like facing an entrance exam and instead of studying, you guys think about the exam a lot.

    I answer "what do I need to know to understand this" first, then go hunting for it. When you guys don't do that, it feels like you are just spinning wheels pointlessly. That's where the Smallest link between two points comes in. I want to make as few intuitive leaps as I can, which means more data to fill in the gaps. To hear that data is often not welcome in these situations... that's a very heavy statement to put in. It isn't always true - depends on the balance on the individual/the theory being worked out. But to be biased against data during the forming process isn't a high compliment to me.

    But we are different people, with different methods. I respect the outcome of Ns in the big picture, but dealing with them locally requires understanding, and tolerance. Better that they vet their own ideas first, then bring them to me to review... I can't handle being part of the process as well!


    Hence, fewer, long posts, on topics that I can contribute and not get rejected

    ---

    Also note that there are fallacies to the preferences as well - Ss might invalidate theories that they can't see in their own life (often falling prey to statistical issues, like clumping, etc). I'm not pointing out these because they are intrinsic to the method we use anyway.

  6. #56
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Woah PT, you've had some seriously bad experiences at the hands of some crazy N's by the sounds of it...

    Then again, knowing INTPc the way I do... I can understand it

    Hm... what else...?

    Ah yes, your research and facts would've been very very welcome in the bullying thread, I can tell you that. By me, at least, obviously I can't speak for anyone else but ... you're wrong though that this really is always the end of the discussion. If 'the facts' were always the end of a discussion then nobody would ever go in search of NEW facts.

    Example: suppose you said 20% of people bullied in school had red hair. How is that the end of the discussion? How is there nothing more to say? What, like one wouldn't naturally ask 'why is that?' and consider the psychology behind it, perhaps theorize as to ways to challenge it? Suppose you then come and slam another load of data on the table that says research has shown that it's because XYZ, and of the following methods N was shown to be the more effective strategy. Again, how is that end of story? Why were the others not effective? Is there some way that they could be tweaked and tried again and yield different results? Were the criteria for deciding what was successful comprehensive enough? Do I agree with them?

    The thing is, your facts are only the result of human beings as you say, going out to find them. But humans are fallible and can miss things. Especially when they're concentrating on something specific, when they're looking only for a certain thing, knowing in advance what that thing is. Sometimes it pays to beach-comb; you never know what you might pick up that somebody else missed. Guard against not seeing the wood for the trees.

    When you said this:

    I know the answer to a high enough degree of confidence that I don't need to theorize
    That made me jump almost as much as I made you jump earlier
    I just can't help thinking when I hear things like that, you know, sure, that's what people said about the sun going round the earth once...

    Do you consider a theory abstract after it has been validated? I don't.
    Yeah, I kinda do. I tend to think of it as 'theoretically validated'. That is, the theory that it's validated rests on the evidence gathered to have been comprehensive, exhaustive and correctly interpreted. But there's always room for doubting those things, for me.

    "What ifs" are not my strong point, naturally. But this is intentional for me (well, 'I don't regret it intentional'). If you come up with 1000 theories, but only 100 are validated, is it better or worse than me coming up with 100 theories, but 90 being validated.
    What if one of my 10% was a cure for AIDS?
    Thing is though, as I go through my life, I can honestly say that 90% of my theories are validated sooner or later, since I don't tend to theorize except on things whereof I have a reasonable level of confidence in my prior knowledge... that knowledge being itself a back catalogue of theories that are yet to be disproven, based on a combination of research, experience and intuitive connections... it just takes longer for it to play out in the real world, really, in order to be seen to the senses... but if I lived my life in a state of only ever being right 10% of the time, wouldn't I by now have been committed to some kind of home for the terminally incompetent?? LOL And yet... I seldom pay attention to those things you feel are so important and straight A'd my way through school by guesswork, without ever looking at those tables in the textbooks. So, whatever you want to say about it, it WORKS *for me*

    Putting 'thought' in doesn't impress me as a methodology, and that's the issue. I'd rather be out gathering the validation long before you guys have discussing something. It would be like facing an entrance exam and instead of studying, you guys think about the exam a lot.
    Ah... yeah. Actually, it's more a case of putting a lot of thought into figuring out exactly what needs to be done, considering lots of alternatives so that I don't go running out and spending all afternoon collecting data that turns out to be completely useless.

    I answer "what do I need to know to understand this" first, then go hunting for it.
    I do a similar thing, but I also do "why do I want to understand this? by what criteria will I judge whether I have understood it?" as well...

    I want to make as few intuitive leaps as I can, which means more data to fill in the gaps. To hear that data is often not welcome in these situations...
    It sure is welcome by me!!! It's like I'm trying to see what the top of a tree looks like and when I turn around, someone's put a ladder there. How incredibly useful, thank you very much!!!

    To me that data is very useful, though its main use is as a springboard for figuring out where else it can go.

    Ha... well look, I don't want to go down that whole S vs N path, so well worn it's more like a trench nowadays... heh.

    My main aim (now that I'm able to articulate it) was to see what light could be shed on the subject in the hope it might reduce Colors' frustration a bit, as understanding does tend usually to lead to easier tolerance. But my point of origin was with a Sensor expressing what felt to me to be a misunderstanding leading to negative feelings which I thought might be unnecessary.

    I personally have no axe to grind with sensors, I just figured that this particular bone of contention could use some addressing

    But please PT, to say I wouldn't welcome input is like saying a Labrador Retriever wouldn't welcome a nice juicy steak In fact, the input that challenges and forces me to think and rethink is the most welcome of all. Your kind of input (like the ISTP I have in my RL) gives me mulling matter for days! No danger of rejection here for you dude
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  7. #57
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    oh yeah and... I didn't really wanna go into it a great deal unless others felt it was warranted, but there is a lot of research that's been done into the intuition process and how in fact, perhaps it has more basis in fact than given credit for... y'know, the idea of subconsciously taken-in data that the brain sifts through on a subconscious level to reach an instant conclusion that you 'just know', without being able to explain why?

    It remains true that when challenged (I've been practicing actually by challenging myself for fun) I often CAN back-engineer 'how' I knew something, though it's a long and meandering process that would bore to tears any listener.
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  8. #58
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    oh yeah and... I didn't really wanna go into it a great deal unless others felt it was warranted, but there is a lot of research that's been done into the intuition process and how in fact, perhaps it has more basis in fact than given credit for... y'know, the idea of subconsciously taken-in data that the brain sifts through on a subconscious level to reach an instant conclusion that you 'just know', without being able to explain why?
    what happens when two intuitive thoughts disagree?

    this is sort of my beef with it. i have no problem with generating ideas, but everybody has ideas and the difference between good ones and bad ones is up to reality, not the person who came up with them.

    after all, reality is ultimately what we all have in common, and if someone wants their ideas to hold value to other people then they will need to show validity there somehow.

  9. #59
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
    what happens when two intuitive thoughts disagree?

    this is sort of my beef with it. i have no problem with generating ideas, but everybody has ideas and the difference between good ones and bad ones is up to reality, not the person who came up with them.

    after all, reality is ultimately what we all have in common, and if someone wants their ideas to be respected then they will need to show validity there somehow.
    yeah, that's why we talk about them with each other to compare, contrast, reconcile and kick to the kerb that which doth not make the grade!

    Oh, I mean, that's why we EN's...
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  10. #60
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    yeah, that's why we talk about them with each other to compare, contrast, reconcile and kick to the kerb that which doth not make the grade!

    Oh, I mean, that's why we EN's...
    but if ideas have been wrong in the past, how can you "just know" anything? this is the disregard for objectivity i think gets on the nerves of people like pt and I

    what of people who continue to have such a high opinion of their own thinking but cant manage to succeed in achieving what they want in life or solving problems that other, less "enlightened" people have less trouble with?

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] Any NT's in Orlando Florida or around the area??
    By brandie187 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2010, 08:24 PM
  2. [Other] Any NF's IN Orlando Florida or around the area?
    By brandie187 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-24-2010, 03:32 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-15-2009, 05:28 AM
  4. Food Budgets Around the World
    By Totenkindly in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-07-2008, 09:19 PM
  5. The City in the Bush
    By Mole in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 11:24 AM

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