User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 19 of 19

  1. #11
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    I'm visual in that I get images in my head, but I prefer to read about something than see graphic charts and stuff...although I'm not particularly bad at either.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    And a male, right? (Let's see about Usehername's theory while we're at it!)
    Yep, I'm male...at least the last time I checked.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    508

    Default

    Well, no, I believe I am a P but I think almost exclusively in words. If I ever think visually is or when I am terribly stressed/in danger/in fear of danger or if I press myself to do so.
    Of what I understand of the type theory (not many things, yet), I fail to see the relation between thinking visually and being P (that is, having either thinking or feeling as a dominant function). I am tempted to correlate it more with the S-N axis, and I would say that an S might prefer to use words since they prefer to use more concrete stimuli as an input. A N would possibly prefer more abstract, visual or non-clearly-shaped kind of thoughts. Maybe the visual-symbolic axis could relate with a Ni-Ne-Se-Si order.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    That actually sounds like it might be symbolic rather than visual. So, do you need a certain amount of structure in your behavior, or can you just deal with anything spur of the moment? I'm a J because I need a certain amount of order and predictability, not because I'm organized. In fact, my home is usually a mess unless there's a possibility that people will come over. But I'm very particular about my grammar and spelling, and I can keep my ideas and definitions in good order. NJ's are somewhat different from SJ's in what they organize. However, whenever I make an appointment or have a deadline, I always arrive/finish early if it's at all possible.
    I enjoy many spur-of-the-moment activities such as improvized dancing.

    I try to write and express myself as correctly as possible and grammatical errors often upset me. Although. INFPs and INTPs are both known to be good writers, INTPs in particular have a tendency to be especially thorough, so I'm not sure if this is a J/P thing.

    Here's what I wrote in another thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaveri View Post
    My room is messy.
    But it bothers me. Disorder does unsettle me.
    I'm often late and tend to misplace and forget and lose things.
    But I would love to lead a systematic and organized life.
    I try many different things and am interested in a lot of stuff.
    But I wish I could stick with something, develop one of my skills to "championship" level, and have a more clearly defined and solid identity.
    I'm open-minded to new ideas and I never consider my thoughts, opinions and ideas "final".
    But I dream of knowing things for sure-- I simply think it's practical to keep my mind open because I don't believe that my thoughts could ever *be* right but since I want to keep them as close to "right" as possible, I need to be ready to develop and enhance them.
    I question myself a lot.
    But I would love to be consistent and confident.
    Some people have said that I seem to have a fear of making final decisions.
    But of course I would love to find something that is appealing enough to make it a final part of myself/my value system/my life.

    (One of my next goals is to define my principles and values clearly and then rely upon them.)

    So, for the most part, I would prefer J but I systematically act on P.
    I've had J phases, though. During them I have *felt* happy. I have focused on a few things, set goals for myself, achieved them, been productive, improved my abilities, followed to-do lists and felt optimistic and thought that life is simple. An outsider might have noted that it isn't "right" in their opinion to value oneself in terms of achievements, but it's what has genuinely made me happy, although sometimes it might have gotten a bit out of proportion, but never dangerously much.

    The problem is that so far, I've never been able to keep up a happy, structured phase for a very long time. Most of the time I've been very disorganized, constantly losing things and chronically late. I've been widely known as the absent-mided and disorganized girl who always has to borrow others' things because she has misplaced hers.

    Maybe it's just that modern life is so complicated that it's very difficult to focus on just a few things. I like it when I have a few duties and a few free-time activities per day, but when there are too many duties or free-time activities to handle, I tend to slacken.

    So, if I'm really a J who just acts like a P, then the explanation might be
    a) self-diagnosed ADD without hyperactivity (can a J have this disorder? how can it be cured?)
    b) that I'm so iNtuitive that I'm not practical enough to keep things in order (N is my strongest function)
    c) some other explanation

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lastrailway View Post
    Well, no, I believe I am a P but I think almost exclusively in words. If I ever think visually is or when I am terribly stressed/in danger/in fear of danger or if I press myself to do so.
    Of what I understand of the type theory (not many things, yet), I fail to see the relation between thinking visually and being P (that is, having either thinking or feeling as a dominant function). I am tempted to correlate it more with the S-N axis, and I would say that an S might prefer to use words since they prefer to use more concrete stimuli as an input. A N would possibly prefer more abstract, visual or non-clearly-shaped kind of thoughts. Maybe the visual-symbolic axis could relate with a Ni-Ne-Se-Si order.
    I was just thinking that visualizing would be more S and symbolizing more N; images are more detailed and particular and they can be thought of as representations of something concrete, while symbols represent a whole class of things. An example: a model of a mathematical 3D graphic can actually be built as a tangible object, while it's more difficult to make symbols concrete (unless you just draw or sculpt a symbol, but it's different... how can I explain how it's different... must think about this). Another example: an image of a clown represents the particular clown in question, whereas the word "clown" represents the class of all clowns.

    I think that a visualization is a representation of a structure that can be fed to a system as symbols. The system then reads the symbols and generates a visualization. The symbols are like the hidden structure behind the image, and seeing them in the image would be like peeking behind the scenes. An example about html language. A web designer that reads websites as html language would be a symbolizer, and a web designer who visualizes html language as websites would be a visualizer. Hmm. I think they can both be equally iNtuitive, though.

    Generally the range of symbols that are used in creating language is limited, while it would be more difficult to reduce an image to its parts in the first place. A limited range of options - J - countless options - P - yes, I can see a theoretical connection to J/P, although I don't know if it applies to real people.

    Note that I believe that usually a person who can read an image as symbols can also visualize the symbols as an image, and vice versa.

    EDIT. Hmm. I hope this post is not too vague.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Blackwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ERTP
    Posts
    454

    Default

    Jung says that Is need symbols to understand reality while Es need symbols to understand the world of ideas. I don't know if he's spot on there; everyone uses symbols to different extents, really.
    best collection of philosopher typings online

    http://www.celebritytypes.com/philosophers/

  7. #17
    Aspie Idealist TaylorS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    972 so/sp
    Socionics
    EII Ni
    Posts
    365

    Default

    I'm a visual thinker to an almost absurd degree. I have trouble explaining things in a concise fashion because of the difficulty in "translating" my mental images into words, thus I tend to ramble on and on, especially if the person I'm talking to is an SJ. I never forget the face of an acquaintance, but I suck at remembering names. I also remember where a place is physically relative to other place very well but suck at remembering exact addresses.

    I'll guess that NPs tend to be visual thinkers and SJs tend to be verbal/symbolic thinkers, with NJs and SPs being somewhere in between.
    Autistic INFP


  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackwater View Post
    ...Is need symbols to understand reality while Es need symbols to understand the world of ideas.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaveri View Post
    ...visualizing would be more S and symbolizing more N
    ...a model of a mathematical 3D graphic can actually be built as a tangible object, while it's more difficult to make symbols concrete
    ...I think that a visualization is a representation of a structure that can be fed to a system as symbols.
    I try to see your point, Kaveri, but I still consider symbols to be far more concrete than images. As you said, the range of symbols used is limited, and I would like to add that the perception of concepts through the symbols is limited as well. That would be the words or numerical or other symbols we use. Because I think an image or a visual representation usually carry more symbolism that the mere use of words (I hope this makes sense, I have a rather limited vocabulary in English and I don't know how to express better what I want to say). A word has a preset meaning, the concepts in which it corresponds are clearly defined and the margins for misinterpreting it are whether the sender and the receiver know the same parts of the code.
    I see in your answer that you use examples of graphics, but I believe graphics to be a very limited form of visual representation and, anyway, few people would ever show a graphic without adding words to explain it - or better to define it.
    A mental image (at least as far as I can imagine; I 've stated before that I find very difficult to think with images) is something heavily charged with emotions, states of mind, colours, concepts, interpretations, all in one single image, rarely static. It is a very condensed represantation of many different levels of though, when words are more clear, unambiguous and simplifistic, and much more static.
    That is why I think that a person with S preferences would welcome a clear and efficient tool to classify, filter and finally use the stimuli they perceive, while a person with N preferences would generate abstract thoughs in the form of images/visualisations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaveri View Post
    ...Generally the range of symbols that are used in creating language is limited, while it would be more difficult to reduce an image to its parts in the first place.
    And here we finally agree. Though I would not connect the limited range of words with the P/J. I tend to think that the P and J dichotomy refers simply to whether the individual prefers to use the external world for input (S/N, J) or the internal (T/F, P).
    And one word on the I/E thing: I think that, if I am not very mistaken when saying that the S/N axis describes the relation of the individual with the outer world and the T/F with the inner, then this statement would coincide with the opinion I expressed, that the tendency to visualise or to use symbols correlates up to an extend with the S/N preferences.
    I would like to add that I am not really familiar with most of the MBTI aspects, so I might be very mistaken in all I said. And since my English is quite poor, I might have failed to explain fully my point of view (the use of words limits me )

  9. #19

    Default

    I have a hard time learning via listening alone. I must see something being done, imagining it, or explained in written word. However, I think rather symbolically and through language. ... P type fits me best, and I come out as a low-J on humanmetrics often though.

Similar Threads

  1. I have finally arrived. You can close this part of the forum now
    By Dali in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-23-2016, 11:48 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 01:53 AM
  3. Non-Christians: parts of the Bible that still resonate with you
    By onemoretime in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-23-2010, 12:48 AM
  4. What Part Of The Team Are You?
    By Jaguar in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-11-2009, 02:44 PM
  5. 'The Bible is no longer considered part of the conversation'
    By Sniffles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 172
    Last Post: 04-17-2009, 08:36 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