User Tag List

First 26343536373846 Last

Results 351 to 360 of 511

  1. #351
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    ...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.
    if it has been scientifically proven then why is MBTI not scientifically accepted? plus, you list no sources as to whether a sensing function truly exist. without merit, i'm inclined to disbelieve you.
    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

  2. #352
    Senior Member Saslou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    4,915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beat View Post
    Arguing with my INTJ co-worker is fun/annoying.
    +1.

    Note to oneself - Don't discuss/argue with a fellow co-worker INTJ at work about the death sentence. Lmao.
    “I made you take time to look at what I saw and when you took time to really notice my flower, you hung all your associations with flowers on my flower and you write about my flower as if I think and see what you think and see—and I don't.”
    ― Georgia O'Keeffe

  3. #353
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    if it has been scientifically proven then why is MBTI not scientifically accepted?
    The answer to this is obvious. Because acknowledging that sensation partly operates at a cognitive level does not require one to then accept the entire MBTI. That concept is only one tiny piece of all the theories that comprise the MBTI, and it is not unique to nor created by the MBTI.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    plus, you list no sources as to whether a sensing function truly exist. without merit, i'm inclined to disbelieve you.
    There is no one place to point you. All you need to do is look up cognitive psychology (and I think it would be helpful to look at neuropsychology as well) and specifically look for their thoughts on sensation. I'm not pointing you to an exact source because this stuff is in my college text book. I assure you that you will find it with little investigation.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


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

  4. #354
    Is Willard in Footloose!! CJ99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    582

    Default

    Its cause typology has a huge number of relatively rare types (Ns basically) so as Ss have control everywhere else we feel the need to control our one domian. TYPOLOGY CENTRAL - THE FORTRESS OF Ns AND SLAYERS OF ESTJs!
    "I'd never die for my beliefs, I might be wrong"

    "Is it not enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe there are fairys at the bottom of it too"

    "Intelligence is being able to hold too opposing views in the mind at the one time without going crazy" - Now all I need to figure out is if I'm intelligent or crazy!

  5. #355
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    The answer to this is obvious. Because acknowledging that sensation partly operates at a cognitive level does not require one to then accept the entire MBTI. That concept is only one tiny piece of all the theories that comprise the MBTI, and it is not unique to nor created by the MBTI.



    There is no one place to point you. All you need to do is look up cognitive psychology (and I think it would be helpful to look at neuropsychology as well) and specifically look for their thoughts on sensation. I'm not pointing you to an exact source because this stuff is in my college text book. I assure you that you will find it with little investigation.
    if you can't be bothered to find the proof for your own claim, why should i? i would very much like to see proof for a sensory part of the brain that is functioning as more than just observing, but the burden of proof rests upon the plaintiff.
    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

  6. #356
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    if you can't be bothered to find the proof for your own claim, why should i? i would very much like to see proof for a sensory part of the brain that is functioning as more than just observing, but the burden of proof rests upon the plaintiff.
    First of all, you're the plaintiff. You've brought "the claim" that sensory perception is nothing but observation. Magic would be the defendant standing by what has been accepted by cognitive scientists. That puts the burden on you.

    Second, here's a place to start (pay attention to the third and fourth lines):
    About ?(Perception and Cognition Lab)?

    As Magic pointed out this is very basic material found in just about every intro-level psychology textbook. If you want to remain committed to the notion that sensors are just failed intuitives that's your choice. Just know that it's an erroneous assumption. Sensing is not just passive, mindless uptake of sense data and sensors are as cognitively active as intuitives. It's a feet on the ground/head in the clouds distinction.

  7. #357
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    First of all, you're the plaintiff. You've brought "the claim" that sensory perception is nothing but observation. Magic would be the defendant standing by what has been accepted by cognitive scientists. That puts the burden on you.
    how can i be the plaintiff if it hasn't been proven in the first place? which, given that the only evidence is empiric, cannot ever be true? a general statement cannot be created from this.

    although i will need to read up on that site to see what it is about.
    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

  8. #358
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    how can i be the plaintiff if it hasn't been proven in the first place? which, given that the only evidence is empiric, cannot ever be true for a general statement?

    although i will need to read up on that site to see what it is about.
    Because it has been proven, empirically, and you choose to deny it. In essence, you're the plaintiff because it's you that's making the claim against what has already been known/accepted. Empirical proof is proof, it's inductive proof. Inductive proof is built from observations about things we come to know through our senses (this is why things like p-values are so important). Deductive proofs rely on logical necessity. Both are proof. Things that are known through the senses can only be proven empirically so, again, you've been offered proof.

    MBTI has not empirically proven because of it's low reliability (and the fact that we can't falsify its hypotheses in any clear way). We're all well aware there are issues with the reliability of MBTI. The various studies that have been done regarding the specific dimensions are not all sitting on the same shaky ground, however. The problem here is that you haven't been claiming that MBTI is not empirically valid, you've been claiming that S is an absence of N. So while you may be correct about the validity of MBTI in general, there are many things have been empirically proven about sensory perception and cognition.

  9. #359
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Because it has been proven, empirically, and you choose to deny it. In essence, you're the plaintiff because it's you that's making the claim against what has already been known/accepted. Empirical proof is proof, it's inductive proof. Inductive proof is built from observations about things we come to know through our senses (this is why things like p-values are so important). Deductive proofs rely on logical necessity. Both are proof. Things that are known through the senses can only be proven empirically so, again, you've been offered proof.

    MBTI has not empirically proven because of it's low reliability (and the fact that we can't falsify its hypotheses in any clear way). We're all well aware there are issues with the reliability of MBTI. The various studies that have been done regarding the specific dimensions are not all sitting on the same shaky ground, however. The problem here is that you haven't been claiming that MBTI is not empirically valid, you've been claiming that S is an absence of N. So while you may be correct about the validity of MBTI in general, there are many things have been empirically proven about sensory perception and cognition.
    on other hand, what makes you so sure that it isn't a combination of memory and logic and emotional states that bring forth experiences in a different light? the human mind is hardly objective, which is another reason why i would associate such things with either thinking or feeling.

    i'm not saying that experiences are nonexistent or that people aren't sensory, but i think those attributes belong to functions such as feeling and thinking. i don't believe in a sensory function because i fail to see the reason for its existence. it does nothing that emotion, logic, intuition or just memory won't do.
    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

  10. #360
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    on other hand, what makes you so sure that it isn't a combination of memory and logic and emotional states that bring forth experiences in a different light? the human mind is hardly objective, which is another reason why i would associate such things with either thinking or feeling.

    i'm not saying that experiences are nonexistent or that people aren't sensory, but i think those attributes belong to functions such as feeling and thinking. i don't believe in a sensory function because i fail to see the reason for its existence. it does nothing that emotion, logic, intuition or just memory won't do.
    I am currently not wearing pants. I no longer believe in them. Frankly, pants do nothing that good old fashioned sensual skin and waxy goat grease won't do.

    And ENFPs don't, generally speaking, consciously attend to sensory functions, so it's only to be expected that they frown upon, you know, those people, sensory perceivers

    If only they could be lifted up a little higher. I grant you, they're good in the fields, and we can keep their children as pets, but wouldn't have them in the house if I were you. They can't be trusted.



    ENFPs, that is.

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