User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 52

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocap
    Now what judgements are, their own entities. Each decision can be molded. That is, decisions are changed.
    Yup.

    Actually, Costrin has it backwards. It's the perceptions that don't change. What happens actually, is that when new perceptions come in that don't coalesce with the previous ones, one of them has to be thrown out. But they're not changed. Judgement decides which perceptions are good and which are faulty. But even still, those perceptions are still there, they're just usually ignored.

    Ultimately, what judgement boils down to are decisions.

    Anyway, a decision can change when new perceptions come in. Especially when gaps are filled.
    Yes! That was my problem with Apollanautís description of Judging.

    But conversely, I suspect this is what would happen when J interferes with P. From another thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc
    I don't think so. The byproduct, for any type, probably comes from Ji or Je.

    Ji can make IPs closed minded and stubborn about relinquishing their understanding of a subject.
    Je can make EJs closed minded and stubborn about understanding something new once they've determined what they know is the only valid information.
    A Pe Dom might use their Ji (Ti/Fi) to justify their understanding and keep closed minded about accepting contrary information.
    A Pi Dom might use their Je (Te/Fe) to determine that their understanding is the correct one and be closed minded about changing their minds.

    So, we ALL can be closed minded at one time or another. Just depends when and what for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Apollanaut View Post
    Zarc, by irrational I did not mean crazy!
    I didn't say so. o_O

    I think we are actually on the same page here, I am in complete agreement with this:
    We are, yea.

    As for intuition, it does indeed rely on the unconscious mind. As I stated, it is usually triggered by an external object or an internal image, from which the unconscious mind generates an idea or thought (an "intuition") which itself becomes conscious. However, the person having the intuition may remain entirely unconscious of the original triggering factor. For example, my own intuition generates an unending stream of thoughts, speculations, ideas and fantasies. If I pay attention to a particular idea or train of thought I might be able to track it back to its source ("Where did this idea come from?") but more often than not, I have no idea what triggered the intuition in the first place.
    Yes, I see it clearly now. It's about "delving into the unconscious" as you wrote prior, not N being unconscious itself. It wasnít until I was halfway through, identifying, that it struck me where to find the information I needed to clear up my misunderstanding. Voila! . Ha.

    In all honesty, I've been trying to divorce myself from the rather fanciful understandings of N and in particular Ni. I've become rather sensitive lately to the selective understanding that most people seem to have of it, putting N on a pedestal, so to speak. One way was disregarding unconsciousness from MBTI but thatís not exactly quite what I mean. Ugh. Wording this is difficult. Or maybe that Ni seemed so natural to me considering it unconscious was to render my use over it impotent and consequently all Pi users too. >_> I hope I made sense. Basically, I'm not even sure I did disregard them but instead changed the meaning of them. But yea, thanks.

    Y'know, I find this funny, but it just occurred to me that I answered it myself, without realising it, when I said with regards to perceiving: "You're aware yet unconscious?" (Take lucid dreams, for ex, you can have full or partial awareness yet you're physically unconscious. It's just a new perception of reality!) and to then to Evan: "We become aware of the information, or conscious, as it occurs to us." As it occurs! LOL!

    Quote Originally Posted by Costrin
    Hmm...
    Hmm is right. That was all a quickie, biggie guess. The idea was fun to play with, though. I might need to replace the bits on consciousness. Hmm... Edit: actually, I'm thinking it still works.

    Under what circumstances are shadow functions accessed?
    Quickie answer. The kinds we've yet to acclimate ourselves to or arenít able to rely on our primary/auxiliary. Iíll further this later.

    You mean Si/Se and Ni/Ne?
    By similar perceiving functions, I meant itís Introverted or Extraverted counterpart. So it might be easier for an Si dom to access Ni as opposed to Ne.

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costrin View Post

    Hmm...

    Could you elaborate a bit on Je?
    To keep it in mind:
    Quote Originally Posted by zarc
    Receiving information (P) vs Processing information (J)

    Je evaluation/ determines the worth (relative to otherís standards) of what it is processing

    Evaluation means to examine the worth.
    What I mean by relative to otherís standards, I meant by the established principles. The inherent structure is already there. As they were already created, they were done so by other people. Since guidelines exist, Je measures them to ensure they work to what its accustomed to. If there is uncertainty by what it will become accustomed to Je will switch to Pi. Si will try to figure out what it might be by turning to prior experiences. Ni will try to figure out what it might be by creating new view points on the situation.

    If the guideline doesnít yet exist that is when Je will turn inwards to Pi to create one - based on similar ones (Si) or creating new ones (Ni).

    If Je is focusing (processing info) on efficiency and productivity of a group or task it will determine how well it was performed. If Je finds the system or the people within the system lacking, due to its evaluation of it, it will reorganize to improve.

    Take Fe. Relationships are built around established principles. Fe determines the relative worth between people (the people are the "information being processedĒ) The ďotherís standardsĒ would be the level of importance that the other person has to Fe. Your family, friends, acquaintances. You can distance or remove yourself from your family if you dislike them but you can never sever the connection you have. It exists. It cannot unexist. You can change the relative importance of a person by disowning your parent or divorcing your spouse or change your view of them etc but youíre really just reorganizing their worth (of importance) to you. Which was due to your overall evaluation of them.

    Fe will gather its efficient by how receptive people are to its care of them. It will gather itís been productive when its helped someone out to their (the other personís standard of) satisfaction. You smile at a person and they smile back, Fe triumphs. When Fe fails, it turns to Pi (same as above on Pi but just based on personal situations).

    And.... But Iím stopping here. Was this helpful and less convoluted than my other posts? lol

    Btw you previously wrote F is subjective (canít remember if anyone corrected you). Only Fi. Fe is objective. It's a personal objective whereas Te is an impersonal objective. Can you see that now?

    Oh, and I notice you write ExtrOvert instead of ExtrAvert. Most people make that mistake. It's a bane to the understanding of MBTI (and I know you actually care to understand). Well, both Introvert and Extravert are commonly misunderstood, since people ascribe behaviors onto the them and the functions. People are Introverting or Extraverting a process, not a behavior. zzzzz (This gripe is not with you, btw)

  3. #33
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    By similar perceiving functions, I meant itís Introverted or Extraverted counterpart. So it might be easier for an Si dom to access Ni as opposed to Ne.
    Mmk.

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    To keep it in mind:
    And.... But Iím stopping here. Was this helpful and less convoluted than my other posts? lol
    Yeah, I understand what you meant more now. Although, I might ask you to do a similiar analysis for Te also.

    Btw you previously wrote F is subjective (canít remember if anyone corrected you). Only Fi. Fe is objective. It's a personal objective whereas Te is an impersonal objective. Can you see that now?
    Well, they're all subjective, but F is more 'traditionally subjective'. F deals with feelings, emotions, the actions of people. Fe is subjective in that it's based on societal values, which aren't rigorously defined, are decided by the emotions of people, and interpretations of peoples actions. Te is more objective, in that it deals with defined and easily measured things, like a college degree for instance. Either you have one or you don't. Or by if something or someone is following the defined rules, or if something is efficient, by measurable standards, like the amount of product produced per time.

    Oh, and I notice you write ExtrOvert instead of ExtrAvert. Most people make that mistake. It's a bane to the understanding of MBTI (and I know you actually care to understand). Well, both Introvert and Extravert are commonly misunderstood, since people ascribe behaviors onto the them and the functions. People are Introverting or Extraverting a process, not a behavior. zzzzz (This gripe is not with you, btw)
    Meh, I just collapse it into the spelling 'extrovert'. That's the more commonly used way, it's the way I learned, and the definition can be expanded to cover what I want without sacrificing much.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Thought this a better thread to post this here (though I can remove it if you'd like, Costrin). Since the aim is understanding not only know the functions but how they possibly work together. My insomniac esotericy spin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costrin View Post
    Nah, it's the rider. The auxiliary is the horse, slave to the whims of the driver .And tertiary is the chariot, keeping you safe, and the ground is the inferior, that you navigate, yet disdain (hence the use of chariot) and hope you don't fall and hit your head on.

    imo
    I was just reworking the whole thing as soon as I wrote the other post. This is going to be hard to explain, bear with, since I just thought it all up and can't word it to my satisfaction.

    You are not a sole function nor in full control of it (your Dom). That is why it can never be the chariot or the driver. You weren't born with control over it, you had to work it out, tailor it to your circumstantial understanding of your world until you were able enough to choose what you'd learn.

    Seeing how the functions work in tandem, they could be the horses side by side, your closest functional horses (instinctual reflexes) nearest the chariot (your brain) while your least developed ones are furthest from the whip (that is your will over them).

    The rider embodies (your) Consciousness. Your consciousness can't determine or dictate where you go. It merely is. Existence. However, your brain along for the ride, being the chariot, chooses where to go to further its understanding of the world. Your will, being the whip, adapts your functional horses, which are your reflexes, to the chariot so you can easily coordinate around the world stadium. The better you are at controlling your horses, the better you'll be able to maneuver around obstacles in your path and environment (which include other riders with their chariot of horses).

    If your brain, the chariot, isn't moving around the stadium, then you don't acquire new information and you can't acclimate yourself to any either. The whip, your will, doesn't receive instructions from your brain so it isn't instructing your reflexes to better adapt, thus your self-control becomes lax. Your functional horses, reflexes, aren't exercised enough and so they lose muscle and power and weaken. Self-control gives way to reflexes.

    Depending on how far you've gone, you may have little control so your functional horses wont move for you or become out of control should they become spooked because they can't run away from a perceived threat fast enough. When your brain, the chariot, tries to get started again, it may take some time to whip your reflexes back into shape so they can keep up with others.

    However, your two closest functional horses which were JUST in front of the chariot (your brain) were the easiest trained because they were closest to the whip (your will). So you will always trust them the most. And they will stay closest to you due to having been tamed.

    And... over a lifetime your chariot begins to decay, you don't need to force the whip as hard anymore, your horses easily obey but there begins small slips or shaky moves because the connected harness is slack or threadbare. Some horses escape, some refuse to move due to strain, some die. Until the chariot can no longer keep together and finally breaks down.

    Consciousness, the rider, steps out from the chariot. Freedom.

  5. #35
    Senior Member ColonelGadaafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    Si
    Socionics
    ESTP
    Posts
    774

    Default

    good model of definitions i say.
    "Where can you flee? What road will you use to escape us? Our horses are swift, our arrows sharp, our swords like thunderbolts, our hearts as hard as the mountains, our soldiers as numerous as the sand. Fortresses will not detain us, nor arms stop us. Your prayers to God will not avail against us. We are not moved by tears nor touched by lamentations."

  6. #36
    Senior Mugwump Apollanaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    550

    Default

    The Chariot is an apt metaphor for the relationship between the mind (Ego) and the type functions. Are you familiar with the symbolism of "The Chariot" Tarot card?



    The four creatures drawing the chariot are said to represent the four typological functions (among other things). Notice how two of them are facing forward (dominant and auxiliary?) and two sideways (tertiary and inferior?).
    INFJ 9w1 sx/sp/so

    "A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to." - Gandalf The Grey

    And if I only could,
    I'd make a deal with God,
    And I'd get him to swap our places,
    Be running up that road,
    Be running up that hill,
    With no problems.

    - Kate Bush

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apollanaut
    The Chariot is an apt metaphor for the relationship between the mind (Ego) and the type functions. Are you familiar with the symbolism of "The Chariot" Tarot card?
    Interesting. And here I thought my sudden burst of insomniac inspiration stood alone, when perhaps I tapped into the Collective. Or... maybe my own subconscious punched me. I used to be very familiar with The Tarot when I was a bit younger but it's been a few years now since I've let my interest wane.

    The four creatures drawing the chariot are said to represent the four typological functions.
    I've never come across this before, thanks. I've tried looking but have yet to come across anything relating them. Do you have any links?

    Notice how two of them are facing forward (dominant and auxiliary?) and two sideways (tertiary and inferior?).
    Yes, I can see that. It's what I meant about the (functional) horses closest (Dom and Aux) to the chariot being the easiest to direct whereas the ones further are the least easy. Although I erred in trying to fit the Shadow functions (and thus an extra set of horses lol). Relating only the top four makes more sense.

    "He is fueled by contradictory impulses, represented by the black and white sphinxes that pull his chariot." Relates well to the Dom and Aux. As for the Tertiary and Inferior, it's powerful to think of the symbolism behind the horse and lion. One years to run wild (Tertiary), the other yearns to dominate (Inferior). Or maybe it's the reverse, hmm.

    Even the sphinxes (Dom and Aux) which represent IIRC wisdom and knowledge. But then I think, "What happens should you fail to answer them correctly?" The sphinxes devours you. So you turn to that wild horse first but when it runs free you have no choice but to face that lion...

    All four of them "A union of opposites".

    How inspiring.
    Last edited by zarc; 03-15-2009 at 02:28 AM.

  8. #38
    Senior Mugwump Apollanaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    Interesting. And here I thought my sudden burst of insomniac inspiration stood alone, when perhaps I tapped into the Collective. Or... maybe my own subconscious punched me. I used to be very familiar with The Tarot when I was a bit younger but it's been a few years now since I've let my interest wane.
    That's the beauty of this stuff; it does indeed lurk in the collective unconscious, ready to reveal itself to all who look in the right place.

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    I've never come across this before, thanks. I've tried looking but have yet to come across anything relating them. Do you have any links?
    Check out this link, which I came across while researching my post about The Chariot:

    The Tarot Journey

    It also has a really interesting take on the correspondances between the 16 court cards and the MBTI types - something I have been working on for years, but not spotted this version. I'm inclined to agree with it - I've always identified most with the King of Wands card.

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    Yes, I can see that. It's what I meant about the (functional) horses closest (Dom and Aux) to the chariot being the easiest to direct whereas the ones further are the least easy. Although I erred in trying to fit the Shadow functions (and thus an extra set of horses lol). Relating only the top four makes more sense.
    You did not err. Take a closer look at the sphinxes - the top halves do not match the bottom halves, they are jumbled up. For example, the man-headed sphinx (representing Thinking) has eagle claws (representing Feeling). In my view, the top halves are the consciuos functions and the bottom halves are the Shadow functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    "He is fueled by contradictory impulses, represented by the black and white sphinxes that pull his chariot." Relates well to the Dom and Aux. As for the Tertiary and Inferior, it's powerful to think of the symbolism behind the horse and lion. One years to run wild (Tertiary), the other yearns to dominate (Inferior). Or maybe it's the reverse, hmm.

    Even the sphinxes (Dom and Aux) which represent IIRC wisdom and knowledge. But then I think, "What happens should you fail to answer them correctly?" The sphinxes devours you. So you turn to that wild horse first but when it runs free you have no choice but to face that lion...

    All four of them "A union of opposites".

    How inspiring.
    Yes, you've seen it too! Although there are many alternate explanations of this card (sometimes the 4 pillars are linked to the 4 functions instead of the sphinxes) they differ only in detail, not in the overall meaning.

    What this means, of course, (he says, taking a HUGE Ni inductive leap) is that ancient civilisations and people clearly understood the concepts of the psyche postulated by Jung and others - they just used different symbolism to illustrate their insights. Of course, this is some of the source material Jung himself used to help formulate his theories.
    INFJ 9w1 sx/sp/so

    "A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to." - Gandalf The Grey

    And if I only could,
    I'd make a deal with God,
    And I'd get him to swap our places,
    Be running up that road,
    Be running up that hill,
    With no problems.

    - Kate Bush

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    Zzzz
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costrin
    Yeah, I understand what you meant more now. Although, I might ask you to do a similiar analysis for Te also.
    Fire when ready. It just might take some time to hit me.

    Well, they're all subjective, but F is more 'traditionally subjective'. F deals with feelings, emotions, the actions of people. Fe is subjective in that it's based on societal values, which aren't rigorously defined, are decided by the emotions of people, and interpretations of peoples actions. Te is more objective, in that it deals with defined and easily measured things, like a college degree for instance. Either you have one or you don't. Or by if something or someone is following the defined rules, or if something is efficient, by measurable standards, like the amount of product produced per time.
    When you are dealing with someone elseís emotions are you not viewing them objectively? It's only when you let your feelings get in the way for what's better suited to them that it's your Fi at work.

    Fe doesnít deal with the subjective feelings of the individual, Fi does. Fe doesnít belong to the self, it belongs to others. Fe deals with the collective, therefore it exists outside the self. Rules already exist that Fe didnít make up to suit the individual self. An individual can objectively choose to discard them but not on the basis of having their feelings hurt but because it didnít suit them. Fe suits itself to the rules. K. Letís try this.

    You have two parents and three siblings. That is an objective fact, right? Yet the fact is relational to you. Fe. You canít objectively deny that they arenít your family. But Fi can. Fi can say, ďI donít like them and just because weíre related by blood or circumstance doesnít mean I have to agree theyíre my family.Ē Thatís a subjective opinion based on the selfís feelings. Fe would objectively regard, despite internal disputes between the family, that they are still the family. And I donít mean to say that Fe will stick by the family either. But that it wonít deny the existence of the family. Piece Fe and Fi together within a person who is dealing with dispute within their family and both opinions can be recognised.

    Btw. Ti is subjective. It deals with the subjective opinions of the person. Yet still rational. Same with Fi.

    And Apollanaut made the case earlier in the thread too. Fe Te Se Ne objective. Ti Fi Si Ni subjective. Fe Te Fi Ti rational. Se Ne Ni Si irrational.

    Meh, I just collapse it into the spelling 'extrovert'. That's the more commonly used way, it's the way I learned, and the definition can be expanded to cover what I want without sacrificing much.
    Common doesnít mean correct, though. Jung was specific in making it Extravert to distinguish it from Extrovert and Myers Briggs mother-daughter duo tried to maintain that. I tried finding but have yet to find info aside from the preference for Ďaí. My guess was Jung wanted it that way due to the common understanding of what Extrovert is. Loud, outgoing, lively, better social skills etc.

    Iím guessing Introvert wasnít changed because it can still apply to the process of Introversion because going within the self is similar to the common use of Introvert preferring to being alone with themselves. Iunno. Less certainty.

    As for Extrovert, it assumes one is going outside to interact with others. And I don't think that's what Extraverting a process is about. Itís still within the individual self, however the objective is directed outside the self. I think confusion stems about extraverting towards an Ďobjectí having to mean that itís directly with the object. Itís not or itís not always the case. Itís directed towards the object, not with. So an Se Dom doesnít have to talk or touch a person, they observe physical behaviors and mannerisms of a person without ever having to come in contact and they also unconsciously Ďtake it all iní so they may notice without realising (Fi/Ti will help with realising). Don't get me wrong, Se is about touching and all that jazz but that's just one facet of it.

    Both I or E processing can deal directly with people. And yes, Extraverts orient themselves in the outer world easier than Introverts, but I don't think it necessarily makes them gregarious or loud or more social. Iím thinking it could be incidental to culture (that we are aware of) because there are more of them in North America and so itís easy to spread themselves around - I chose NA b/c we're both from there. It's different elsewhere. Look at various cultures of the past, some had clearly Introverted vibes to them. The Introverts of those cultures could readily cultivate the environment to their needs, whereas the Extraverts had to adapt to them. So if you want to find a place more suited to your Introverted way of being, I suggest you find your red heels and get to clicking elsewhere. Iíve got examples of cultures and places in mind but just canít word it yet. Shall I try?

    Some random tidbit. ENPs can be antisocial. ENFPs can be agoraphobic. Iíd guess ENTPs less so because Ti would dismiss the people within vicinity whereas Fi for an ENFP might cause them to feel vulnerably exposed. ESFPs might be shy growing up. Se is so potent for them that people have more a presence to them than other kids who a lower preference of Se. Fi not having been developed so early is probably why they're shy because they're not sure how they feel about people in their physical space and it's scary. ESTPs, same as ENTPs, wouldn't be as affected due to Ti. But they may dominate spaces more, instead, because they want to experience and test it out.

    So I don't think the commonly understood explanation for Extrovert or Introvert applies to MBTI. Because we can ALL be both outgoing or quiet or loud or reserved. It's just a matter of our comfort of when, why, what for, how, and for whom we choose to display ourselves as being in those moments. Our E/I processes are cultivated by them in how they're expressed, they're not due to them.

  10. #40
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zarc View Post
    Fire when ready. It just might take some time to hit me.
    That was me asking, in my own highly indirect way.

    I'll respond to the rest when I'm feeling less sick.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

Similar Threads

  1. Let's Try Function Definitions again: "Relationships" of Objects
    By Eric B in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-20-2014, 09:05 AM
  2. Another crack at root function definitions
    By Eric B in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-15-2011, 11:01 PM
  3. The Search for Better, More Elemental Definitions of the Functions, Esp. Judging
    By Eric B in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-10-2011, 02:44 PM
  4. Evan's function definitions
    By Evan in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 09-29-2009, 09:05 PM
  5. Costrin and BlackCat's super duper typology overview (of doom)
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 10:39 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