User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 84

  1. #51
    Senior Member Engler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ?
    Enneagram
    N/A
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    114

    Default

    It is true, Julia, that humans are biologically inclined towards social interaction; that is, we are inherently social creatures. Despite this, some people experience a loss of energy while directly interacting with people, while others experience the opposite effect.

    Typology theory classifies the first group as "introverts", and the second group as "extroverts" (or extraverts, as Jung preferred to call them).

    Also, it seems unlikely to me that there could even exist a society comprised exclusively of introverts, as both groups appear to serve a purpose. However, I believe that, in the event that such a society existed, many people would begin to function like extroverts, in order to fulfill the necessary societal roles.

    And thank you for chiming in!
    http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u56/EnglerMeister/hehh.jpg

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Click on my profile and look in the "Biography" field.

    I was just talking to a forum buddy of mine about this last night.
    I do not identify with most of the ENTJs in this forum.
    For lack of a better word, I "resonate" better with INTJs.
    I could say more, but then I would be stirring up a hornets nest.

    I actually prefer to be called XNTJ. It fits me perfectly.
    It's not that I can't decide-- that's bullshit.
    It's that I know damn well that I can use Ni and Te with agility.

    You may, or may not have, noticed but there are a few young INTJs, leading with Te.
    You can tell by their obsessive clinging to demanding "evidence" for everything.
    It's as if Ni is completely foreign to them.
    I have noticed and commented before that I start to appear more ESTP around people I am comfortable with.

  3. #53
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Jaguar's posts make total sense...if you're Jaguar and have access to his internal monologue.

    Unfortunately the people in the set "Not Jaguar" vastly outnumber the people in the set "Jaguar", so nobody knows what the hell he's talking about.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #54
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,407

    Default

    I apologize, as I haven't read this whole thread, but I read the first and second pages and I really don't see what the big issue is here. E/I is defined by which function is used the most, is it not?

  5. #55
    Senior Member Engler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ?
    Enneagram
    N/A
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    I apologize, as I haven't read this whole thread, but I read the first and second pages and I really don't see what the big issue is here. E/I is defined by which function is used the most, is it not?
    The "big issue" is whether or not the primary use of an extroverted or introverted function has any relation to the extroversion or introversion of the user.

    Basically, I'm questioning the validity of the accepted definition.
    http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u56/EnglerMeister/hehh.jpg

  6. #56
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,407

    Default

    Oh okay. I was a little confused at first because you seemed to relate these to being social.

  7. #57
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I guess I'm not surprised that you didn't notice the other ~250 or so words in my post.

    I am not the first, nor the last, to bring up how tired they are of people using the word FAIL in this forum, when they can't make a valid argument.
    It reflects poorly on you, rather than who you are posting to.
    If you had put that immature bullshit at the bottom of your post, it would have served you better.

    Give it a rest.
    Your predictability is becoming boring.

  8. #58
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    I am not the first, nor the last, to bring up how tired they are of people using the word FAIL in this forum, when they can't make a valid argument.
    It reflects poorly on you, rather than who you are posting to.
    If you had put that immature bullshit at the bottom of your post, it would have served you better.

    Give it a rest.
    Your predictability is becoming boring.
    Right, but, the word "FAIL" doesn't really matter when the rest of the post provides obviously relevant content.

    It's like ad hominem--it's fundamentally invalid, but adds some nice stylistic flair when you've already made other, relevant points.

    Do you think you could try and focus on the other 250 words instead of the .1% of my post that consisted of the word "FAIL"?

    I thought ENTJs were supposed to see the big picture.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #59
    Junior Member Julia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Engler View Post
    The "big issue" is whether or not the primary use of an extroverted or introverted function has any relation to the extroversion or introversion of the user.

    Basically, I'm questioning the validity of the accepted definition.
    Thanks again, Engler, for nailing so precisely down the question that I myself was not able to define.

    As I have read through this thread, I haven't seen anyone directly adressing to your question and relating their answers to that.

    (But I might have overlooked something.)


  10. #60
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    I am not the first, nor the last, to bring up how tired they are of people using the word FAIL in this forum, when they can't make a valid argument.
    It reflects poorly on you, rather than who you are posting to.
    If you had put that immature bullshit at the bottom of your post, it would have served you better.

    Give it a rest.
    Your predictability is becoming boring.
    You know, you don't win by claiming you're right - you win by demonstrating you're right.

    Let's take some examples:

    If I handed you a brown paper bag filled with candy,
    and the first couple pieces you pulled out were purple,
    you'd probably claim ALL THE CANDY, was purple.
    You'd agree that this is a pretty good point to theorize that there's a decent possibility that all the candy is purple, wouldn't you? It would certainly need further testing to prove, but at that point, it's a legitimate hypothesis, isn't it?

    That's why the scientific method is so beautiful - P theorizes and J tests.

    Well, I see I struck a nerve of insecurity within you.
    Ever been asked the question:
    "If you could be anyone, who would you be?"

    Unlike many who named other people, I always answered: "Me."
    Not because I'm so great, or any other type of nonsense.
    I always answer, "me" since I am that comfortable in my own skin.
    It's that simple.
    If you cannot grasp any of that, you have a problem with your own self-esteem.
    Most ENTPs would answer the same way, if they interpreted it in the context that you did. That being said, it's also not the point of the question - the point is if you, that is, the very personality that comprises how you interact with the world, were in someone else's social position, whose would you be in?

    Look for the implications, not just the plain text.

    I can see I'm going to have to start a thread on personas.
    Jung: "TYPE CANNOT BE OBSERVED."
    Just because Jung said so, doesn't make it correct. You can't prove a negative - you have to disprove that type CAN be observed. Appealing to authority doesn't count, either.

    The persona is a mask created to hide the true self.
    The persona is not type.
    The persona is what you see when you meet someone.
    The persona is what you see in a video.
    Isn't it possible that personae are dependent on type; that is, it would be very difficult for people of a certain type to affect certain personae?

    Do I think this will stop the incompetent bullshit? No.
    Jungian psychology is ignored on a daily basis in this forum.
    People observe and "type" personas.
    They fail to type the true self.
    Don't you recognize that everything Jung wrote was analogical at its very essence? It's an allegorical framework of structural and chemical processes that occur within a human brain. His views are no more empirical than any we have.

    The only people who will be able to make these sorts of hard claims about psychology are the ones who can directly tie things to neurology. Until then, it's all observational analogies.

    Apparently you can't think for yourself so you stole Edgar's crazy-assed, sarcastic theory about ENTJs, from the ESTP/ENTJ thread.
    I've never "emulated" anyone in my life, nor would I ever.

    There's no purpose in being anyone other than who you are.
    You're approximately iteration 10 billion of the genetic code generally known as Homo sapiens. How do you think you learned how to talk? The capacity for language is innate, but the languages themselves obviously not.

    ESTP uses Ti not Te.
    So you wouldn't have ranted at me for my "deductive reasoning," if you thought I was an SP.
    But here we are again, and I find myself asking what is the point?
    Is there one?
    Se deals with tangible things; i.e. evidence. Coming to logical conclusions based on evidence is the very definition of deductive reasoning.


    Just my $.02

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] New Function Orientation: Generalizing and Non-Generalizing
    By wobbuffet222 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-2016, 01:27 PM
  2. Is Fi a person-oriented function?
    By skylights in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-18-2010, 03:33 AM
  3. Jung and functions, primary, auxiliary and inferior functions plus typology
    By slowriot in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-29-2010, 07:35 PM
  4. Orienting by the Tertiary Function
    By VagrantFarce in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-30-2009, 05:56 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