P's advantages?

[Lauren Ashley]

I would take it to mean 'fall to pieces'... not that my definition matters

In that case...negative.

 

[NewEra]

I really don't think that crumbling when your plans don't follow through thing is a characteristic of J's. Maybe some J's, but I wouldn't say it's true for J's in general.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Define crumble

Exactly.

In regards to the NJ thing, Amargith had to drill it in my head that NJs just make more....general plans. That's why they seem to be more adaptive. They still crumble when their plans crumble, though. I just make detailed plans, and they make general plans. We go about it in different ways and the world needs both of us.

As you probably already know I disagree. Which is because I don't believe in idea of defeat. However I am strong J (and N).

Towards my life philosophy there is a very small number of situations you can actaully call defeat. First, if you fail at something in most cases you can simply try again.


The other reason is that this reality comes down to action/reaction priciple.
Which mean that if you fail at something your progress will be slowed down but that also means you got new options which were not available before and they would not have become in the case you have succeded.
This does not happen always but it happens often.


I will be scientist one day and one of the most interesting ideas I have encountered in my life is Chaos theory. For people who don't know what that theory says I try explain it to them.



The the main consequences of this theory is that things in this reality are so complicated that it hard to put it in words. They are so complicated that just saying they are complicated you are giving the wrong picture since there are general rules as well.

Imagine this I am watching a fridge in the store in which there is one coke and one package od orange juice. Which one will I buy if I have money just for one of them ?


Lets say I will take the orange juice instead of coke.
But what are the consequences of that ?
The consequences are that they guy after me can choose only coke unless they refill that fridge. The package of orange juice is much larger what means that it will be enough to kill my need for liquid a couple of times instead of once.

But if I drink too much juice I will have to go the toilet sooner what means that I can miss the call from some guy (or girl) which wanted to hang out tonight. But when I get the chance to call them back they will already call someone else. What means that you have lost a good evening just because you have taken the juice. While coke while would not have the volume needed to force you to go to the closest toilet.
Plus you can only speculate what will happen to a guy that will take the coke. Especially since he will just take the coke which is because he is not facing dilemma coke/juice. Which means he will make a choice alot faster then in the case you didn't bought that juice. Since he will exit from the store sooner and he will be sonner hit the road. Which means that at a certain street light he will now be 3 in the row instead of 1 and in the another group of cars. So the lady that "should" have been third is now fourth in the line. What means that her position on some other street light will be different as wll. What will effect drivers around her.


Not to mention that you can be sure he will buy that coke. Maybe he will leave it to someone else.



This is very simplificied example of chaos theory. But if you carefuly look around you will see that everything around you functions on this way.
So every time you make a choice you make a choice that changes the lifes of everybody on the planet and lifes of everyone that haven't been born jet. Which is because every choice causes the redistribution of everything on this world. Simply because of action-reaction nature of reality.

If someone want more datailed explanatons I am willing to give them more.


So the bottom line is that understanding how reality in which we live in works greatly reduces the everyday neuroticism. This is why I have said that I am the most calm person around. Which is a sidefect of knowing how things are going in this reality and what I can expect.


I think that I simply control too little to be bothered by bad results. I agree that this is a overationalization but this is how things are and I don't see the reason to reject this away of thinking.

When you think on this way you will also get one other thing, which is that you will notice a huge number of possible outcomes even of you oversimplify everything. Which means that I will constantly making choices to adjust everything. Which means that as long as I am making choices I am in the game. Which is the main thing my J wants- choices and options to kill.



This is one of the ways how strong J can also be a very calm and relaxed person.

 

[Queen Kat]

If we didn't have any P's in this world, we would all be dead. Or we would still be living up in the trees.

 

[Virtual ghost]

If we didn't have any P's in this world, we would all be dead. Or we would still be living up in the trees.

Would you care to explain your claim in more detail ?

 

[Queen Kat]

P's are usually more creative than J's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a P who invented fire or the wheel or some other things that became very important for our development. And I think it could have be a P who was the first who said: "Dude, I'm getting tired of sitting up here all the time, let's go down and see what we can find there!"

 

[BlackCat]

P's are usually more creative than J's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a P who invented fire or the wheel or some other things that became very important for our development. And I think it could have be a P who was the first who said: "Dude, I'm getting tired of sitting up here all the time, let's go down and see what we can find there!"

Right. >_>

 

[NewEra]

And I think it could have be a P who was the first who said: "Dude, I'm getting tired of sitting up here all the time, let's go down and see what we can find there!"

In grunt language of course.

 

[Asterion]

P's are usually more creative than J's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a P who invented fire or the wheel or some other things that became very important for our development. And I think it could have be a P who was the first who said: "Dude, I'm getting tired of sitting up here all the time, let's go down and see what we can find there!"

Living in trees sounds pretty creative to me
The elves did it, and they were pretty smart...

I think it would have been an XNTP that developed most of those things , but it would have been an ESTP that actually bothered getting out of these trees that we once supposedly lived in

 

[Chloe]

He was P for sure!

 

[Lauren Ashley]

P's are usually more creative than J's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a P who invented fire or the wheel or some other things that became very important for our development. And I think it could have be a P who was the first who said: "Dude, I'm getting tired of sitting up here all the time, let's go down and see what we can find there!"

Such a broad generalization; NJs are plenty creative. Inventiveness has to do with N(e), not perceiving.

 

[garbage]

Such a broad generalization; NJs are plenty creative. Inventiveness has to do with N(e), not perceiving.

It's not exactly a broad generalization when terms such as "wouldn't be surprised" and "could have" are used.

You're gonna have some S's in here debating that they can be inventive and creative, too (and rightly so). And then what?

 

[Lauren Ashley]

It's not exactly a broad generalization when terms such as "wouldn't be surprised" and "could have" are used.

Whoops, got lazy there and didn't parse the paragraph. I was addressing only this sentence:

P's are usually more creative than J's

You're gonna have some S's in here debating that they can be inventive and creative, too (and rightly so). And then what?

Then I'll tell them to look at their function order and see that everyone uses intuition.

 

[raz]

blah blah blah

So, you're willing to say that as a J, you're not dependent on your plans? If your entire plan fails, you don't have to completely redo your approach? That's what I meant by crumbling.

 

[Virtual ghost]

So, you're willing to say that as a J, you're not dependent on your plans? If your entire plan fails, you don't have to completely redo your approach? That's what I meant by crumbling.

In that case I will have to start all over again of course. I have just wanted to show you why I am not particulary bothered by this. Nothing more.

 

[raz]

In that case I will have to start all over again of course. I have just wanted to show you why I am not particulary bothered by this. Nothing more.

It more of depends on the plan and what it was affecting. If a plan fails, I'm more of hurt by the time needed to be spent to redo it and time lost on the old plan. I guess I'm just not ïntuitive enough to see that a failed plan and time spent on a new plan can still be considered part of another bigger plan.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It more of depends on the plan and what it was affecting. If a plan fails, I'm more of hurt by the time needed to be spent to redo it and time lost on the old plan. I guess I'm just not ïntuitive enough to see that a failed plan and time spent on a new plan can still be considered part of another bigger plan.

Being annoyed like that is perfectly normal thing.
The entire N thing actually comes down to how good you are in manipulating scenarios, outcomes and facts when they don't fits you.


In my vocabulary you don't have a problem as long as you are not going from unsuccess to unsuccess. In that case you trully have a problem.


Over the years I have developed a standard about when something can be considered unsuccessful and when that is not the case. Which measures how much adjusting I will have to do to repair the damadge and how much flexibility I have.





I don't know about US but over here there is a saying that say : Mistakes are roots of wisdom. So what can look as a failed attempt can be considered as an interesing learning experiances. Even if the entire thing was a "complete waste of time"


Or course this greatly dependes what you are doing for a living. If you are into business (or something similar) then failed ideas can have a extremly high cost.

However if you are into science then you can allow yourself more unconventional approach.
I would even dare to say that my field is especially vague. But even here things can have a extremly high cost (in litteral sense) however no one expects you to get it right from the first try.


Since most of things you do, you do on asumptions and oversimplifications.
Facts is somthing you don't have most of the time. Which is because you are the one that is looking for facts.
As one of my proffesors said " When you get to the exam your job will be to find logical solution not correct solution".




I am sorry if I sound like a smartass since that is not my intention.