# Thread: Pi = Judger, Pe = Perceiver; why?

1. Sooooo, do you guys like jerk off to Jung, be honest.

2. I bet you masturbate more than any male on this forum. You're the one who always manages to relate everything back to that topic

3. Originally Posted by simulatedworld
I bet you masturbate more than any male on this forum. You're the one who always manages to relate everything back to that topic

I don't know what you're talking about, and neither does Z.

4. ^ Yeah, my grasp of mathematics growing up was always based on Ni and Te.

I recognized this long before I even knew what Ni and Te were.

My Ni understanding: I dunno, that one's hard to describe. But it has a character of knowing at the speed of light. Just, flash, it's there. I know it. I can't necessarily describe it like Ti would be able to, but I just understand it. Intuitively.

What I hadn't figured out intuitively, I learned best by talking out loud with the teacher or other smart math kids (i.e, Te).

5. Originally Posted by SillySapienne

I don't know what you're talking about, and neither does Z.

Originally Posted by SillySapienne
Sooooo, do you guys like jerk off to Jung, be honest.
Baby, you know what (who) I jerk off (on) to...

6. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
^ Yeah, my grasp of mathematics growing up was always based on Ni and Te.

I recognized this long before I even knew what Ni and Te were.

My Ni understanding: I dunno, that one's hard to describe. But it has a character of knowing at the speed of light. Just, flash, it's there. I know it. I can't necessarily describe it like Ti would be able to, but I just understand it. Intuitively.
I feel like Ti doesn't understand things intuitively. It has to parse out precise rules and conditions to know what relationships necessitate things working the way they do.

I think iNtuition in general is much better at just grasping systems without being able to explain how or why, than Thinking.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra
What I hadn't figured out intuitively, I learned best by talking out loud with the teacher or other smart math kids.
Could this be Te, maybe? Sharing and developing impersonal ideas/logic with others?

I would like to suggest the idea that not using Ti often doesn't necessarily cause you to miss out on any skills. Ti is just a certain way of conceptualizing information, as is every function. I don't think any skill requires regular use of any particular function to be done effectively.

7. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
What I hadn't figured out intuitively, I learned best by talking out loud with the teacher or other smart math kids.
I always taught myself math.

And, , I've always sucked at tutoring math, it's awful.

Other people's brains don't work like mine.

It could be an Ne thing, but we skip steps, and go about problems differently than others.

Growing up, math, hands down, was my easiest subject, and it was enjoyable too, yet frustrating at times, when neither my peers nor my teachers wanted to get all abstract and theoretical on it.

I do suck ass at physics, though.

Like, major ass.

Like, I'm a moron ass.

So.... yeah.

8. Originally Posted by simulatedworld
Could this be Te, maybe? Sharing and developing impersonal ideas/logic with others?
Yeah. Definitely.

See edit. I thought I'd put it in there originally...

9. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
Baby, you know what (who) I jerk off (on) to...

I really don't know what you're talking about...

10. Originally Posted by simulatedworld
I don't think any skill requires regular use of any particular function to be done effectively.
But certain functions are probably more prone to be better at certain skills, no?

I believe both claims to be true...

#### 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