User Tag List

First 71516171819 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 258

  1. #161
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Agreed. However, look at it from the "facets of a gem" picture I used. Ne is one facet of intuition, Ni is the other. OK, I guess it's a coin. Anyway, I think some people can only see one side of the coin or the other, while others can see the whole coin, and can flip it around at will. I believe that I am in the latter category. This "sides of a coin" image is a better description of what I mean when I say "Ne and Ni are really just the same single entity, N." Another similar would be the observation that an electron and a positron are the same thing, except the positron is an electron going backwards in time. I'm not saying that the "definition of Ne" should be the same as the "definition of Ni", but rather that the definitions only reflect pieces of a greater truth w/r to N.
    Very good way to put it.

  2. #162
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    There's always the question of whether Ni+Te is simply mascarading as Ti, and, to be honest, I'm not sure whether there exists a strong counter-argument to that hypothesis: all I know is that when I look at the cognitive processes test's descriptions, that it sounds like I use Ne and Ti to almost the same extent as Ni and Te, and that I think I might actually use Ti more than Te, which would seem odd, except for the fact that it fits perfectly into my own "pet theory" (that J/P balance causes increased utilization of one's shadow functions, and that at perfect J/P balance, the two different dominant functions [in the case of an INTx, Ni and Ti] would actually both be more highly represented in an individual's functional usage than the auxiliaries of both [Te and Ne], and that, if the same individual were to also have perfectly balanced I/E, then all four "attitudinal-functions" would actually find themselves equally represented in an individual's functional usage).


    I am lately leaning toward the bolded as being true. I'm not really sure I use Ti at all (as I said somewhere recently). I think I can convince myself I really am using Te through Ni and it ends up looking like Ti.


    What I think is REALLY revealing is that all of us seem to have our Pet Function Theories and we are all Ni dom.


    As for J/P. I am very little J, as is the case with most INFJs. As Lauren Ashley has pointed out very astutely, we usually are 65%J or less. But I'm not sure I'd be Ni/Fi........I would have to ask others what they think. I do feel Fi, but I'm not sure it'd be dominant.

    It's so funny, because my theory (in part) was that people who test close on F/T and N/S, could use both preferences in the same attitude (perhaps one more comfortable than the other) on various occasions that called for each particular one, and use it automatically. So, we're all just right in there together........
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  3. #163
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    It's so funny, because my theory (in part) was that people who test close on F/T and N/S, could use both preferences in the same attitude (perhaps one more comfortable than the other) on various occasions that called for each particular one, and use it automatically. So, we're all just right in there together........
    Yeah, this is actually another part of my pet theory.

    I consider it the last part, cuz I first started thinking about I/E balance, as that is the place of my greatest balance.

    Then I started thinking about J/P balance.

    N/S and T/F balance are really the last pieces of the puzzle for me.

    :workout:

  4. #164
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    The way I described it to some friends the other day:

    Imagine you have two planks side by side (one labeled N and the other S, or one labeled T and the other F), and you put a weight at the end of each plank. You then roll a ball in a perfect vector right down the middle of the two planks:

    - If the two weights are even, the ball will roll right down the middle (i.e., the individual will basically make the choice, 50/50, about which function he wants to use: N or S, T or F).

    - If one weight is heavier than the other (which would usually be the case), the ball will roll to the side of the plank with the heavier weight at its end. The more imbalanced the two weights, the more immediately and quickly the ball will roll towards the plank with the heavier weight; the less imbalanced the two weights, the more the ball will linger and just slightly roll to the plank with the heavier weight.

    Now, with this framework in mind, even if someone's weights are not perfectly balanced, an individual could still get the ball to roll onto the plank with the lighter weight, but they'd have to use effort to intentionally push the ball in that direction, to overcome the attracting/pulling force from the plank with the heavier weight.

    This action, that of attempting to push the ball in its "unnatural direction", would be draining; and the more imbalanced the two weights, the more effort would be required, and thus the more draining it would be.

  5. #165
    Senior Member professor goodstain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7~7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    we all use Si/Ni just about even. we all know what obviously puts one ahead of the other is preference. our preference of either Si/Ni is only a bit more than the other. that's what makes defining differences in them so difficult compared to Ti/Fi, Te/Fe and Se/Ne. i'm going to go ahead and say Si and Ni dominant users have the most overlap. perhaps the differences are in how they interpreted past sensing and intuiting experiences to store for reference. lets say one of each saw a coyote take a dump in a hayfield long ago. then they see it again now. Si dom thinks *hm, best place to get more cuttings being that rodents aren't so prevalent*. Ni dom thinks *hm, never saw that on bugs bunny hour*
    everyone uses every function about evenly. take NE for example. if there are those who don't use it much, then why are there such massive amounts of people constantly flowing through Wallmart with 20 items or less?

  6. #166
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    The way I described it to some friends the other day:

    Imagine you have two planks side by side (one labeled N and the other S, or one labeled T and the other F), and you put a weight at the end of each plank. You then roll a ball in a perfect vector right down the middle of the two planks:

    - If the two weights are even, the ball will roll right down the middle (i.e., the individual will basically make the choice, 50/50, about which function he wants to use: N or S, T or F).

    - If one weight is heavier than the other (which would usually be the case), the ball will roll to the side of the plank with the heavier weight at its end. The more imbalanced the two weights, the more immediately and quickly the ball will roll towards the plank with the heavier weight; the less imbalanced the two weights, the more the ball will linger and just slightly roll to the plank with the heavier weight.

    Now, with this framework in mind, even if someone's weights are not perfectly balanced, an individual could still get the ball to roll onto the plank with the lighter weight, but they'd have to use effort to intentionally push the ball in that direction, to overcome the attracting/pulling force from the plank with the heavier weight.

    This action, that of attempting to push the ball in its "unnatural direction", would be draining; and the more imbalanced the two weights, the more effort would be required, and thus the more draining it would be.
    Exactly the way I saw it. I was even going to where the % either/or depended on the divide. If someone tested 90% N, then they might just use Ne/Ni and not S at all. I got to thinking about this possibility from watching my children. My husband is strong S/T and I am strong N with mod F. Sometimes I think I see a mix of perceiving functions at play in my kids. Plus I understand we will all have preferences, but if we genetically inherit (and jung believed in genetic personality inheritance as well) both ways from our parents, mightn't we have some underlying ability to use both, more than someone who didn't?

    Now, however, I'm not sure, because Uumlau got me to thinking about the tertiary being oriented opposite the dominant, based on some posts. Since that's been a recurrent theme lately around here, based on new research by MBTI folks, and since Jung thought that himself, it definitely gives me pause. If that is the case, it sort-of throws Theory #1 out of sorts a bit. Not saying parts of that can't be true, for sure, but not sure what to give more weight to in my own head.

    Can I be using Te with Ni and it looks like Ti? I feel myself contemplating something externally, that's not difficult--like reading or taking in information from somewhere, of a factual nature. Then when I think on it, I think it gets difficult to crunch, and I sort-of get lazy because I feel inefficient at learning it, and maybe that's when Ni kicks in, and takes over, perceiving how the data I've just learned can fit with what I already believe and my worldview and yet still be accurate to the facts of what I just learned. It's like I'm not sure that I'm concerned with the exact "truth" of how something works, as much as I'm concerned with how it all fits into what I can create with it. which makes me think it's not really Ti at all; I'm simply taking a fact, and making it efficiently work into a neat spot that I am comfortable with, that jives with my Ni. If it doesn't, I leave it alone, and continue looking until I'm satisfied with the problem, until I give up, or until I forget about it. I also am a very slow learner accordingly. Sometimes it just takes a damn long time to understand something, and I'll give up if I don't intuit it's worth it to understand.

    If I am using Ni/Te and not Ti though, it would/should be analogous to how an intj is. So, do you see any similarities with what I've said to be true for how you use Ni/Te?

    Or is this just inferior (bad) Ti?
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  7. #167
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    If I am using Ni/Te and not Ti though, it would/should be analogous to how an intj is. So, do you see any similarities with what I've said to be true for how you use Ni/Te?

    Or is this just inferior (bad) Ti?
    To be honest, I think it sounds like tertiary Ti... (INFJ)

  8. #168
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Putting aside all actual definition of cognitive functions, of which there has been surprisingly little in this a thread o' comparison, there's a pragmatic reason for not aiming too hard at flipping, or claiming to flip, a single function's orientations. To have two orientations on one function is to disadvantage both. Literally, one would not utilise either orientation to its fullest extent, just by virtue of not putting in the time.

    Introverted intuition, for example, at its rarest and brightest and most dizzying will make that one key conceptual connection that no one ever made before. And its just not going to do that if it hasn't been labouring long and hard to seek and see into the fundamental conceptual parts of what is. If it's farting around trying to blow off some Ne scattergun net into the world, then it isn't working away joining together bundles of intuitions into the kernel of a thing that is and always was there but hasn't ever been witnessed before.

    That, and if you're sitting at home doing Ne with your eyes closed reflecting on a puzzle, you're doing Ni not Ne and are mislabelling the shit out of your cognitive processes, perhaps even enough to disadvantage them because you're not identifying, and thus refining, for yourself the efforts you CAN make.


    Si, likewise. It does more than people have been saying it can do.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #169
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Putting aside all actual definition of cognitive functions, of which there has been surprisingly little in this a thread o' comparison, there's a pragmatic reason for not aiming too hard at flipping, or claiming to flip, a single function's orientations. To have two orientations on one function is to disadvantage both. Literally, one would not utilise either orientation to its fullest extent, just by virtue of not putting in the time.

    Introverted intuition, for example, at its rarest and brightest and most dizzying will make that one key conceptual connection that no one ever made before. And its just not going to do that if it hasn't been labouring long and hard to seek and see into the fundamental conceptual parts of what is. If it's farting around trying to blow off some Ne scattergun net into the world, then it isn't working away joining together bundles of intuitions into the kernel of a thing that is and always was there but hasn't ever been witnessed before.

    That, and if you're sitting at home doing Ne with your eyes closed reflecting on a puzzle, you're doing Ni not Ne and are mislabelling the shit out of your cognitive processes, perhaps even enough to disadvantage them because you're not identifying, and thus refining, for yourself the efforts you CAN make.


    Si, likewise. It does more than people have been saying it can do.
    I really understand this post of yours. Yay!!


    That's like telling a Ti dom not to think, Kalach.

    Or an Se dom to calm down.

    Or an Ne dom to relax.

    Or an Fi dom to chill out.


    Point taken, but it's just what Ni does.

    Agreed: Being too introverted with an introverted dominant function will be a time waster, and vice versa with an extraverted one. But capitalizing on one's strengths and using one's mind is a good thing.

    I definitely know I'm not that good at using T, my N (and I'm still not gelled on my use of Ne yet, saving that for later ) is what crunches most everything I do and think, I'm coming to realize. F is my m.o. for sure. But until I know whether most of us use the tert in the same or opposite position of the dominant, it will drive me crazy and I don't feel like I (we) can delve much further into function theory. Because if we don't even fucking really know what function we are using, and using well and poorly, we can't then really understand how they work in us, because we are likely to mislabel them or think this function 'x' is being recalled here, when it's really function 'y.'
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  10. #170
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    To be honest, I think it sounds like tertiary Ti... (INFJ)
    Thanks for your feedback.

    Okay, I woke up thinking about--guess what!--functions! I'm such a geek.

    If I'm looking outward for data, which is easy, and it doesn't fit with my Ni, what do I do? I throw it out, or I leave it alone--I don't really care about it. I'm collecting external data, not internal data, although it appears internal because I use my internal intuition to see if it's valuable, and if it is, I judge it worthy. This is where it gets confusing, because it makes Ni sound like a judging function, which it isn't supposed to be. I use Ni to bounce of external facts, ideas, people's feelings and desires, etc., and if each one fits with my Ni, I keep em. Simple as that. It goes round and round. F and T fill me in, Ni ponders. If I need more info, T and F gather it. So, in the end, it's almost as if Ni acts as judger, inasmuch as it helps T and F know what's important. It's almost as if T and F are collecting the external data, and the Ni is judging it as worthy if it fits into Ni's big picture.

    To reiterate: My intuition works as my judging function because it is the Mother function in me; the last stop. T and F are my perceivers.

    Jung might have decided otherwise because he was dominant Ti. So, for him, his N and S WERE the perceivers, running through his Ti, which would judge that.

    Do you see? This could mean that whether we perceive or judge with N/S and F/T just depends on our focus; which is our dominant function.

    Furthermore, I've already figured out that I use S hardly at all. But I use T and F. Someone who is F or T dom will use both N and S well, but perhaps not the other F or T preference well.



    For so long, i've grappled with the judging/perceiving lingo, feeling like my Ni is almost more my judger than T or F, not my perceiver.

    Thoughts?


    Also, another note on the tert of an intj being Fe, not Fi. I really see this in my intj son. He is able to be very Fe, when he wants to be. He is more concerned with societal mores than his own internal mores. I've noticed you guys (intjs) are all very considerate and accepting of opinions I spew, and respond accordingly. I have not hardly ever experienced an INTJ that has been disrespectul. Why is that? It's because you use Fe, not Fi. Think about it.

    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


Similar Threads

  1. Ni vs. Si comparative Ni TEST
    By musttry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 10:36 AM
  2. Ni vs. Si comparative Si TEST
    By musttry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-30-2010, 11:35 AM
  3. Ni vs Si, and more
    By Cimarron in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-19-2009, 11:58 AM
  4. Ni and Si Doms: What does the internal world look like?
    By BlueScreen in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 07-26-2009, 06:01 PM
  5. Ni and Si
    By run in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-05-2009, 11:42 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