User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 216

Thread: Baffled by Fi

  1. #81
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    While I can't speak directly to proteanmix's use of the term, "SW", I think it reasonable to contextually presume that she wasn't referring to you, SolitaryWalker.

    Instead, I suspect she was referring to the other "SW": SimulatedWorld.
    That threw me off too awhile ago. SW came to mean Solitary Walker, but then he had not been posting for a while, and then Simulated became the new "SW". Making it worse, he had registered in my mind as "Film Noir" since that text in his avatar basically overtook the handle. Sometimes I just found it easier to remember him as "condom man".
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  2. #82
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    I think this is where our positions differ.

    With these terms, I don't believe that there's any real way to establish baseline "classic" scientific methodology in analysis.

    While we could certainly create and protect certain observations and hypotheses - even make some clinical-sounding predictions, I don't think we could independently introduce things like the blind experimentation or even clinical trials - there just isn't enough objectivity in our Jungian variables.

    Absent a falsifiable set of variables, I don't see this getting off the ground.
    I don't think you can do this right away. It requires building up a vast compendium of information before making any causative relationships, just like any other sort of pre-experimental science.

    What I am talking about most certainly won't be cached in Jungian terms - just like the current medical terms don't necessarily line up with those of traditional medicine. However, the understanding that came from traditional sorts of medicine, along with a desire to understand those connections in an empirical way, was the beginning of hard medical science.

    In my mind, there will be a day where psychology is obsolete, simply because we'll be able to physically observe what's going on when psychological issues arise. To get to that day, however, you have to start building based on a vast set of bases, and see which one models reality most closely.

    We may not be able to correctly model material neurology via Jungian functions; however, this isn't a failure. Instead, it's where we begin to see what the discrepancies are, and find what is true based on those discrepancies.

    The two most exciting words in science, of course, are "that's funny".

  3. #83
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    While that is all very fascinating, I would appreciate it if someone would see if that thought process is Fi or Fe or some other weird thing that is unidentifiable. Thanks
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  4. #84
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I don't think you can do this right away. It requires building up a vast compendium of information before making any causative relationships, just like any other sort of pre-experimental science.

    What I am talking about most certainly won't be cached in Jungian terms - just like the current medical terms don't necessarily line up with those of traditional medicine. However, the understanding that came from traditional sorts of medicine, along with a desire to understand those connections in an empirical way, was the beginning of hard medical science.
    Right, but are we avowing concurrent means of definition for our terminology? That is to say, something like norepinephrine has an observable, clinical standard for evaluation, whereas something like "Fi" is inherently opaque in how it is understood. Unless we can somehow solidify the definitional standard, shoring up this divide will be a subjective process.

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    In my mind, there will be a day where psychology is obsolete, simply because we'll be able to physically observe what's going on when psychological issues arise. To get to that day, however, you have to start building based on a vast set of bases, and see which one models reality most closely.

    We may not be able to correctly model material neurology via Jungian functions; however, this isn't a failure. Instead, it's where we begin to see what the discrepancies are, and find what is true based on those discrepancies.
    I agree with the first part of this statement. I'm just not sure that Jungian philosophy is the way to go to achieve this progress.

    My primary issue with Jungian philosophy is the innate lack of empirical weight. It's not a science; therefore, I have a hard time incubating it within that context - especially when extrapolating it outward, across different disciplines of thought. The premise is too blunt for it to be ideologically useful.

    There's just too much subjectivity.

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    While that is all very fascinating, I would appreciate it if someone would see if that thought process is Fi or Fe or some other weird thing that is unidentifiable. Thanks
    Comes across as Fi to me. Could this also be Te turned internally combined with Si?

    Leave it up to the NTs to discuss a topic while the actual thing is sitting in front of them. Have you ever tried screaming out "LOOK AT ME DAMN IT", kinda hard to scream that on the internet though, of course that would be Fi turned externally. The best you can do is slap em with a fish... Wondering if they are actually interested in the real world or just arguing arbitrary things.

    Sorry I am no help, but if you ever need a pen to write your thoughts down on the shower wall call me and I will bring you one. If we can mount a huge plastic sticky pad in there you would always have something to write on.
    Im out, its been fun

  6. #86
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Right, but are we avowing concurrent means of definition for our terminology? That is to say, something like norepinephrine has an observable, clinical standard for evaluation, whereas something like "Fi" is inherently opaque in how it is understood. Unless we can somehow solidify the definitional standard, shoring up this divide will be a subjective process.
    I take a rough survey to categorize people based on differences in cognitive approaches to the world. MBTI is one of many means of potentially accomplishing this. I devise a means to track their material cognitive patterns based on neurochemistry/neurophysics, to a set of questions seeking to reflect a wide range of human activities. I then see if these differentiations correlate. If they do, I keep refining it. If they do not, I revise the categorizations, and keep experimenting until I do find something.

    I agree with the first part of this statement. I'm just not sure that Jungian philosophy is the way to go to achieve this progress.
    I'd agree - but then again, I think most philosophy is crap in the first place. That doesn't mean useful things can't be gleaned from it.

    My primary issue with Jungian philosophy is the innate lack of empirical weight. It's not a science; therefore, I have a hard time incubating it within that context - especially when extrapolating it outward, across different disciplines of thought. The premise is too blunt for it to be ideologically useful.
    That's the thing (and interestingly enough, sort of what the stereotypical INTJ-ENTP divide is)... I'm not trying to make it fit within the context of accepted empirical science. I'm trying to apply the tools of science to the conceptual frame work and make it into flesh. In this process, if taken to its end, I hope to find that the conclusions drawn from this creation process reveal the connections with the different disciplines of thought.

    Did anyone even comprehend that electricity and magnetism were the same until Oersted made his fateful observation?

    There's just too much subjectivity.
    All observation and theory are initially subjective. It is only through the rigor of the scientific method that we even begin to understand an objective empirical fact.

  7. #87
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poki View Post
    Comes across as Fi to me. Could this also be Te turned internally combined with Si?

    Leave it up to the NTs to discuss a topic while the actual thing is sitting in front of them. Have you ever tried screaming out "LOOK AT ME DAMN IT", kinda hard to scream that on the internet though, of course that would be Fi turned externally. The best you can do is slap em with a fish... Wondering if they are actually interested in the real world or just arguing arbitrary things.

    Sorry I am no help, but if you ever need a pen to write your thoughts down on the shower wall call me and I will bring you one. If we can mount a huge plastic sticky pad in there you would always have something to write on.
    Real World? Buddy, this is a typology forum. The thread premise is "Fi". How much more abstract do you want?

    Unless I'm mistaken (forgive me, LL), it's a cleverly disguised "What Type Am I?" thread.

  8. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Real World? Buddy, this is a typology forum. The thread premise is "Fi". How much more abstract do you want?

    Unless I'm mistaken (forgive me, LL), it's a cleverly disguised "What Type Am I?" thread.
    If you know what it is then why arent you helping type her or atleast explain why you think she is a certain type She laid her internal thoughts feelings, perception out very clearly.

    edit: also isnt typology about people, dont you have a personal thought pattern right here to analyze. A real world thought pattern.
    Im out, its been fun

  9. #89
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Real World? Buddy, this is a typology forum. The thread premise is "Fi". How much more abstract do you want?

    Unless I'm mistaken (forgive me, LL), it's a cleverly disguised "What Type Am I?" thread.
    NO! I'm trying to understand what Fi is to see if I use it, and I don't think I do. So if I don't, I want to get better at it. And if I do, I want to figure out what is wrong so I can fix it.

    Grrrrrrr.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  10. #90
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I take a rough survey to categorize people based on differences in cognitive approaches to the world. MBTI is one of many means of potentially accomplishing this. I devise a means to track their material cognitive patterns based on neurochemistry/neurophysics, to a set of questions seeking to reflect a wide range of human activities. I then see if these differentiations correlate. If they do, I keep refining it. If they do not, I revise the categorizations, and keep experimenting until I do find something.
    Ah. I like your hybridization of many theories to establish a norm. As long as Jungian philosophy is paired with a multiplicity of theorem(s) across many different platforms to arrive an an intellectual "average", I'd be comfortable buying into that particular paradigm.

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    That's the thing (and interestingly enough, sort of what the stereotypical INTJ-ENTP divide is)... I'm not trying to make it fit within the context of accepted empirical science. I'm trying to apply the tools of science to the conceptual frame work and make it into flesh. In this process, if taken to its end, I hope to find that the conclusions drawn from this creation process reveal the connections with the different disciplines of thought.

    Did anyone even comprehend that electricity and magnetism were the same until Oersted made his fateful observation?
    Haha. Good points. I was actually going to make that very (NTJ v. NTP) point in my previous post.

    That said, your defending point holds merit. All thought must have elementary footprints before it can ascend.

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    All observation and theory are initially subjective. It is only through the rigor of the scientific method that we even begin to understand an objective empirical fact.
    I remain skeptical of Jungian empiricism. Open. But skeptical.

Similar Threads

  1. Easily Disturbed By Things Going Wrong...is this Fi? or a J trait?
    By Thalassa in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-11-2009, 05:55 AM
  2. [Fi] NTJs: how does Fi manifest in your type?
    By Venom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 05:08 PM
  3. [Fi] Fi building
    By BlueScreen in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 03:09 PM
  4. [Fi] Fi -- Why does it drive you nuts?
    By CzeCze in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: 11-17-2008, 08:47 AM
  5. [Fi] Fi: You only get it if you got it
    By SillySapienne in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 649
    Last Post: 11-09-2008, 11:05 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