User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 32

  1. #21
    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 ken888 View Post
    that is surprising, because I really thought it was another way round, but now i think about it maybe you r right. i guess ill need more observation to confirm it. thanks for the info.
    NTJ comes up with new conceptual paradigms. (Ni)

    NTP consolidates them into coherent models. (Ti)

    NTJ finds new applications for the model. (Te)

    NTP improves the mechanisms of application and translates the idea into terms people understand. (Ne)

    And so the cycle goes...
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    NTJ comes up with new conceptual paradigms. (Ni)

    NTP consolidates them into coherent models. (Ti)

    NTJ finds new applications for the model. (Te)

    NTP improves the mechanisms of application and translates the idea into terms people understand. (Ne)

    And so the cycle goes...
    hey that's cool

    how about some examples on those ideas u mention above?

  3. #23
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Bill Gates (ENTJ) and Steve Jobs (ENTP.)
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #24
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I have an INTP friend majoring in math, and he says like 90% of the people he meets in that program are INTP or INTJ, with an occasional ENTP or ENTJ.

    We had an interesting discussion about that where we decided one of the things INTJs really need NTPs for is our ability to translate their ideas into palatable terms and consolidate them into a coherent and elegantly structured model--this applies especially well in math. My INTP friend's dad is an INTJ and also a math professor, and he understands a lot of the difficult abstract concepts but doesn't seem as readily able to put his ideas into words that make them click easily for other people.

    NTPs seem to have a talent for that, especially in complex subjects like higher math.
    I'm afraid I have to disagree with you a bit, here, SW. xNTPs tend to think more in terms of a single coherent system, and are very good at laying out all the rules of that single coherent system, given time. However, I do not find that Ne can be described as an "ability to translate ... ideas into palatable terms." In general, I find Ne-driven communication to be valuable, but very much unfocused. With Ti, it tends to randomly state "true things", without explicitly relating one idea to another. [CAVEAT: this is a tendency; individual skill plays a huge role.]

    I will not argue that INTJs are particularly good at it either. Though Te gives them a certain edge with respect to explaining how a particular thing "works," the Ni source is highly abstract and it takes a good deal of effort from Te to turn it into coherent output. Personally, I would describe my coherence as Te-driven, but I suspect it might not be a property of MBTI type or Jungian functions at all, but simply a trained skill.

    I would say that xNTPs have a natural tendency to be good at creating and writing about a coherent logical system of whatever kind. As long as the matter at hand can be explained by such a system, it is clear communication. xNTJs on the other hand, tend to be good at analyzing systems in terms of how they work -- a functional approach if you will -- in the problem-solving way to which I alluded before. Thus xNTJs will tend to be good at explaining how a system or entity works or applies to the real world.

    The clarity of either presentation is dependent upon skill and practice. The ability of others to comprehend the presentation will partly depend upon one's own inclination to understand things in terms of a comprehensive system or in terms of a functional approach.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  5. #25
    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 uumlau View Post
    I'm afraid I have to disagree with you a bit, here, SW. xNTPs tend to think more in terms of a single coherent system, and are very good at laying out all the rules of that single coherent system, given time. However, I do not find that Ne can be described as an "ability to translate ... ideas into palatable terms." In general, I find Ne-driven communication to be valuable, but very much unfocused. With Ti, it tends to randomly state "true things", without explicitly relating one idea to another. [CAVEAT: this is a tendency; individual skill plays a huge role.]
    Maybe this has something to do with you actually being an NTJ. In my experience NTJs are great at describing the concrete applications of systems that can be described literally and explicitly in TeSe terms. I'll give you that you guys are, in that regard, exceptionally precise.

    But when it comes to trying to explain ideas; by that I mean, the Ni-driven insights about perspective which have not yet made their way into empirical proof or a consistent system of application, and thus not yet expressible in Te terms. I guess I don't really "get" the Ni perspective, because often asking for clarification of this sort of thing gets rebuffed, because, I am told by many NTJs, that putting the idea into words would ruin its significance.

    I know you don't really believe in Ne vs. Ni, but I think you could interpret this situation in terms of the dichotomy between the two. Ni is typically described as notably having more difficulty with outward expression of its ideas than Ne, and I think we can attribute this, at least partially, to Ne's ability to recognize contextual similarities between very disparate contexts. (Yes, something Ne does better than Ni, imo! Imagine that.)

    As for Ti stating true things with no apparent relationship to each other, that's largely a result of Ne's assumption you'll intuitively grasp the relationship between them as easily as it does. There usually is some kind of relationship there; we just don't always remember to explain why. This is especially a problem with ENTPs; I find that clearly delineating the seemingly bizarre jumps in trains of thought (there is a pattern, I promise!) is a skill that's worth placing more emphasis on Ti development for, especially for ENTPs.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I will not argue that INTJs are particularly good at it either. Though Te gives them a certain edge with respect to explaining how a particular thing "works," the Ni source is highly abstract and it takes a good deal of effort from Te to turn it into coherent output. Personally, I would describe my coherence as Te-driven, but I suspect it might not be a property of MBTI type or Jungian functions at all, but simply a trained skill.
    That's possible, I guess, but I think you can probably describe it pretty well as a Te tendency. But as I was saying above, NTJs seem often unable to communicate the significance of their intuitive ideas until they can be put into Te terms, which can take a lot of time, or depending on how weird the idea might be, possibly never happen at all. Honestly it sounds like we're each just criticizing the other's situational dependency on Thinking, since as N doms we both value iNtuition more highly.

    The classic ENTP/INTJ debate. I have this with my brother like every month.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I would say that xNTPs have a natural tendency to be good at creating and writing about a coherent logical system of whatever kind. As long as the matter at hand can be explained by such a system, it is clear communication. xNTJs on the other hand, tend to be good at analyzing systems in terms of how they work -- a functional approach if you will -- in the problem-solving way to which I alluded before. Thus xNTJs will tend to be good at explaining how a system or entity works or applies to the real world.
    True--we need a Ti grasp to express ideas clearly in the same way you need a Te one. The difference being NTJs tend to end up better at application and NTPs better at theoretical explanation, once each has had time to apply Thinking to those raw intuitions.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The clarity of either presentation is dependent upon skill and practice. The ability of others to comprehend the presentation will partly depend upon one's own inclination to understand things in terms of a comprehensive system or in terms of a functional approach.
    Of course, you're correct that learned skill plays a big part in this. These are just some trends I've noticed between types that seem supported by the general differentiations between Ne and Ni, which I think are pretty evident in observing NTPs vs. NTJs. Some are skilled in both application and theoretical explanation, but I think their different approaches to construction of systems tend to lead each more naturally in one direction than the other.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #26
    Senior Member Chloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,204

    Default

    80% NTs - equally between E/I, possibly more Ps.
    19% NFs - same as above.
    1% Ss.

    that's what I've seen, among very talented folks.

  7. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edcoaching View Post
    I'm actually finishing up an extensive study of how type impacts our approach to learning math. Most of you will say "duh" when I report that math instruction in the US doesn't meet the needs of all types. Things that happen produce math anxiety, overwhelmingly in Feeling types, although many Feeling types excel at math.

    Since math involves numbers, not data and things, it's true that more T's pursue it professionally. But as well stated in several posts on this thread, it isn't all about type and there will be people of all types with innate love and strengths in math.

    What's fascinating is that countries like Japan, Korea, China report NO math anxiety. There, instead of thinking people are or aren't good at math, the belief is that anyone can get good at math if they just work at it. Gladwell summarizes this well in a chapter in Outliers.

    In the US, one of our big problems in schools is parents who actually say, "I wasn't good at math, so I don't expect my child to do well either. I tell him it's okay, he has other strengths." As one math teacher put it, the whole country believes in math phobia. "I can go out with a group of teachers and no one says, "let's let the language arts teacher read the menu to us." But they expect me to figure out the bill because I"m the math teacher..."

    I'd agree that statistically you'll find tons of INTPs but also a good representation of ISTPs who've found practical applications and want to perfect the math. INTJs as well with a different style. A smattering of other T's and F's, but often they pursue math to further some other goal. Maybe an ENTP pursues it to do groundbreaking research in a chosen field, etc. I've been told, though, that getting a PhD in math is about the hardest discipline because of the general desire for original theory in the dissertation...and many are almost at defense when someone else publishes what they were working on...it takes real willingness to go very deep for a long time, more characteristic of I's.

    I think its a good thing that aleast someone is willing to look into the possible flaws of the system instead of blaming all on incapabilities of students. I agree that anxiety is one big issue, but I think another main reason is that people were simply not interested in learning math.

    Actually real math involves very little of numbers compared to high school or engineering or accounting math where you work mostly with formulas and equations. One can be really good at solving equations but failed badly in higher pure math since the reasoning and concept involves are very much different.

    One thing people often overlooked is that most student has a habit of applying without understanding. Students who do well in school exams may not be the ones who really understood the subject matter as well as we expected. Exams, at least in math, do not require students to explain their workings, so very much of the time one can find them solving problems without actually understading why the method works. To them, its like a cook book recipe and as long as you do the right thing in the right sequence you get the answer.

    anyway thanks for sharing, very informative.

  8. #28
    Guerilla Urbanist Brendan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    911

    Default

    I'm not the most... excellent mathematician, but I love math. It makes me happy And I'll be an architecture student in the fall.
    There is no such thing as separation from God.

  9. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brendan View Post
    I'm not the most... excellent mathematician, but I love math. It makes me happy And I'll be an architecture student in the fall.
    Good luck on your path to becoming an architect

  10. #30
    One day and the next Rainne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    899

    Default

    NTs for the most part.

Similar Threads

  1. Which type is poor at typing others accurately?
    By Raffaella in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-16-2014, 10:48 PM
  2. Which type is the least accurate at typing others?
    By LaconicSesquipedalia in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-02-2014, 09:17 PM
  3. I'm good at following instructions.. guess which type I am? :P
    By JennaSayQuoi in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-08-2014, 09:11 AM
  4. [MBTItm] Which type is the best at reading people?
    By finalcount in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09-09-2012, 01:25 PM
  5. [MBTItm] Which type is good at guessing type?
    By INTJMom in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-02-2007, 07:06 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