User Tag List

First 25333435363745 Last

Results 341 to 350 of 511

  1. #341
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Q, you squeezed in there too quickly. My response was intended for the poster above you.
    Leavin' now, carry on....

    PS - to try to stay on topic, I think a lot of the prejudice is in how we get a skewed understanding of intuition to infer 'intelligence' ('smarter', more 'visionary', etc).....again, how these terms are defined, the words used...

  2. #342
    Senior Member swordpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    ISTx
    Posts
    10,552

    Default

    Arguing with my INTJ co-worker is fun/annoying.

  3. #343
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Leavin' now, carry on....

    PS - to try to stay on topic, I think a lot of the prejudice is in how we get a skewed understanding of intuition to infer 'intelligence' ('smarter', more 'visionary', etc).....again, how these terms are defined, the words used...
    Don't cry! I'm just slow.

    As far as the rest of the post, I guess what I should have said is that I don't think N is really the greatest indicator of intelligence. It may be the case that the smart ones know to keep their eye on what can actually be seen. Is thinking abstractly intelligent or just a matter of being tuned out to reality? I, personally, would love to get through just one day with my mind wholly here in the present physical realm if for no other reason than to see what it's like. But that's just one goofy N's take on the whole thing...

  4. #344
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    i anticipated you would at least try to question the reasoning i did in my post, but alas...
    i hunt INXPs for bounty
    FUNCTION ORDER FOR THOSE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ENXP MEANS: Ne > Ni > Fi=Ti > *

    ...people tell me i have wildfires in my eyes

  5. #345
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    what i'm saying is that sensoring is just that: sensoring. it's not a function, it's a tool used by the other functions to determine what is and what isn't. sensing isn't opposite of intuition, because sensing isn't a function. things are just interpreted through non-intuitive functions instead.

    you have no proof anywhere of the existence of a S function anywhere else than just the observational tools you get from your 5 senses. and without proof, you can only have belief or assumption.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    i anticipated you would at least try to question the reasoning i did in my post, but alas...

    Relax buddy, Q was in tears.

    Now, as far as your commentary regarding the S function, you seem to be conflating having senses with the S function. Yes we all do have senses, but no not all of us rely on them to the same degree. Sensors seem to be tied more strongly to the concrete, while Intuitives live in the abstract. There is as much a difference between these two ways of being/thinking about the world as there is between J/P or F/T or I/E. You may not see it, but it's there. As far as proof goes, it's the same proof we have of any of the other functions, the subjective accounts provided by people who are living in and thinking about the world. There is nothing more that we can get. That's true of all of the so-called functions. If you think there's something that is unique or different about the S/N function that's your prerogative but it looks like you're just picking and choosing from this end. S is not an absence of N. If anything, it's a difference in priorities.

    If you want hard empirical data that can be objectively qualified and quantified on any of the functions, I hate to break it to you but you're going to be shit out of luck.

  6. #346
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    i don't conflate it, i just don't believe it exists.

    you still don't seem to be getting my point. worse yet, you make no logical deductions as to why i am wrong.

    i would compare intuitive people against non-intuitive people somewhat like this (an analysis of how (sensory, by the five senses) data is processed in the mind.):

    non intuitive:

    sensory data -> (functions: T, F, any undiscovered functions) -> memory -> intuition

    intuitive:

    sensory data -> intuition -> (functions) -> memory

    for non intuitive persons, the data is immediately taken up by other functions, where a semantic* will be created with a reference to the data. data deemed unnecessary by either functions will be discarded. The data is then processed further to memory, where it is stored. if for some reason memory wants to erase the given data from memory, it is first delivered to the intuition, which will remember the data subconsciously.

    for intuitive persons, data is first processed through intuition, which then selects how data is represented to other functions. by emphasizing key points for a function to associate with. in this way, functions much faster and easier understand how data operates, at the expense of leaving out some data (necessary or unnecessary). the data is then moved to memory for storage. the full data also persists subconsciously in intuition, in contrast to a non intuitive person whose intuition only stores how the data is interpreted by other functions.

    intuition in this sense can be considered a catalyst for understanding, since it picks up firstly and entirely what is going on. this may explain why intuitive people do not start at the same level as non intuitive people for understand basic everyday lives; how there is a certain naivety among certain intuits. thus, non intuits start at a higher base of understanding, but intuits learn faster and may eventually exceed the understanding of non intuits; and in the process, create a new base of understanding.

    but i digress. i have enough of this to write my own theory, which i aim to do as soon as i get enough merit to do so.

    my point here is that, as you can see from the model, is no sensing function. there is sensory perception, which as a tool is used by either functions directly or the intuition buffer. in my head, this constitutes enough proof that a sensory function does not exist.


    footnote:
    * by semantic i mean the "meaning" of the object; how the given function remembers what the object is.
    i hunt INXPs for bounty
    FUNCTION ORDER FOR THOSE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ENXP MEANS: Ne > Ni > Fi=Ti > *

    ...people tell me i have wildfires in my eyes

  7. #347
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    i don't conflate it, i just don't believe it exists.

    you still don't seem to be getting my point. worse yet, you make no logical deductions as to why i am wrong.

    i would compare intuitive people against non-intuitive people somewhat like this (an analysis of how (sensory, by the five senses) data is processed in the mind.):

    non intuitive:

    sensory data -> (functions: T, F, any undiscovered functions) -> memory -> intuition

    intuitive:

    sensory data -> intuition -> (functions) -> memory

    for non intuitive persons, the data is immediately taken up by other functions, where a semantic* will be created with a reference to the data. data deemed unnecessary by either functions will be discarded. The data is then processed further to memory, where it is stored. if for some reason memory wants to erase the given data from memory, it is first delivered to the intuition, which will remember the data subconsciously.

    for intuitive persons, data is first processed through intuition, which then selects how data is represented to other functions. by emphasizing key points for a function to associate with. in this way, functions much faster and easier understand how data operates, at the expense of leaving out some data (necessary or unnecessary). the data is then moved to memory for storage. the full data also persists subconsciously in intuition, in contrast to a non intuitive person whose intuition only stores how the data is interpreted by other functions.

    intuition in this sense can be considered a catalyst for understanding, since it picks up firstly and entirely what is going on. this may explain why intuitive people do not start at the same level as non intuitive people for understand basic everyday lives; how there is a certain naivety among certain intuits. thus, non intuits start at a higher base of understanding, but intuits learn faster and may eventually exceed the understanding of non intuits; and in the process, create a new base of understanding.

    but i digress. i have enough of this to write my own theory, which i aim to do as soon as i get enough merit to do so.

    my point here is that, as you can see from the model, is no sensing function. there is sensory perception, which as a tool is used by either functions directly or the intuition buffer. in my head, this constitutes enough proof that a sensory function does not exist.


    footnote:
    * by semantic i mean the "meaning" of the object; how the given function remembers what the object is.

    Well, you've certainly got yourself a nifty little theory there. As for the logical deductions you seek, there are none to be made here as there are no necessary truths in anything you've presented. Deduction is, therefore, not an option. I've already given you the inductive evidence we have available but, alas, induction is induction. Lovely, useful, practical, and generally all we've got... but never certain and never deductive. I'm going to bow out and wish you the best in your endeavor on that note, as I do not wish to fuel the fire in the great T/F war by clobbering you with your own weapon (logic). Thank you for the interesting take (twist?) on the functions.

  8. #348
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Individuals who prefer sensing are more likely to trust information that is in the present, tangible and concrete: that is, information that can be understood by the five senses. They tend to distrust hunches that seem to come out of nowhere. They prefer to look for details and facts. For them, the meaning is in the data.
    Distrust hunches?
    Perish the thought.

  9. #349
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    ...Sensation is a cognitive process beyond the mere physical act of receiving the source of sensory information. This is scientifically proven. If it's proven that Senses exist in a cognitive manner, I hardly see room for debate here about whether or not Sense exists as a cognitive function.

    Also... being perception does not mean something is not a function. Perception consitutes half of all functions. Intuition is perception too. They quaify as such because they are both subconscious receivers and generators of information.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  10. #350
    IRL is not real Cimarron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    3,424

    Default

    I do think, as a Sensor, I'm more prone to the "I'll believe it when I see it" line of thought. By that, I mean it is my default mode, and only over the years of trying other approaches do I rely less on that, but I think it is still at the foundation.
    You can't spell "justice" without ISTJ.

Similar Threads

  1. TypeC biased against sensors?
    By Oaky in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 03-28-2010, 12:52 AM
  2. [NT] The NT Prejudice Against Feeling
    By Synarch in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 05-03-2009, 03:42 AM
  3. [MBTItm] Question for sensors?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 03-12-2009, 03:30 AM
  4. [ISTJ] Famous dead Sensors
    By labyrinthine in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-11-2008, 01:10 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