User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 115

  1. #31
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    The introverted form of a function is by definition deeper than the extroverted version.

    On the other hand, the introverted form is by definition more narrowly focused

    Edit: whoa, how did my type get changed to INFP?

  2. #32
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    My Fi is all about depth, and my Ne is all about breadth, lateral thinking, analogous thinking.

    *

    Anyhow, I dunno.

    I do think that you are on to something here.

    But once again, I think/know/feel/believe that both my Ne and my Fi are inextricably connected.

    Well, actually, that's one of the things that I think is most interesting about this topic...

    We all need depth and breadth, and, assuming the dominant model holds true, we all essentially have it -- just in different forms, combinations and extents.


  3. #33
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Definitely true.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  4. #34
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Is Fi always kept to oneself?
    Is Ti always kept to oneself?
    Is Ni always kept to oneself?
    Is Si always kept to oneself?
    Strictly speaking, yes. It can be "expressed," but not "verbally."

    I think that I share my Ni insights and my Fi feelings all the time.
    No, you share translations of those thoughts. Actually sharing Ni would drive people bonkers. (Some INTJs actually try this on a regular basis and are quite bitter that no one understands them.)

    I'm sure there's a pretentious Latin term for what kind of logical fallacy this is.


    I dunno about this entire post...

    I feel like you're trying to make the argument for why shallow is not worse than deep by making the depth of Xi seem more fraudulent than it is, and downplaying the shallowness of Xe by stating that it's simply for public consumption.

    I think that there is a material difference between the depth of Xi and Xe functions.
    Yes, you disagree with my premise. Disagreement isn't an argument.

    Prima facie, the only difference between Xi and Xe is that Xi is introverted and Xe is extroverted, not that Xi is deep and Xe is shallow. Therefore, one should question why would people regard Xe as shallow and Xi as deep, when it's all just introversion/extroversion. Unless you just want to say "introverted == deep" and call an end to the discussion.

    I don't believe I'm saying anything that's all that difficult to understand: extroverted functions are necessarily in the public playground. Everyone can readily observe the quality of others' extroverted functions, while the introverted functions are hidden close to the chest.

    The virtue of an extroverted function, such as Te, is that while it isn't "personally" "deep", it has access to the shared knowledge of the group, which is often superior to one's own knowledge. Te can take several sets of ideas from several different sources, and compare and contrast and quickly figure out which set(s) have merit. Ti instead strives to develop one's own system of ideas, which is not directly shared with anyone else. In a way, this is "deep" in that, well, there really isn't any way to do this except build it all up in your own head. The "depth" is nothing more than saying that it is one's own personal understanding.

    So unless you have some other concept of "deep" that isn't synonymous with "introverted," you're left with a circular argument.

  5. #35
    Diabolical Kasper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    11,544

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    The introverted form of a function is by definition deeper than the extroverted version.

    On the other hand, the introverted form is by definition more narrowly focused

    Edit: whoa, how did my type get changed to INFP?
    Exactly, deeper and narrower, but not stronger.

    (left over from april fools, not gonna accuse you of having high S )

  6. #36
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Strictly speaking, yes. It can be "expressed," but not "verbally."
    Possibly not expressed directly verbally, but it can be expressed via an extroverted function, which is some form of expression nonetheless.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    No, you share translations of those thoughts. Actually sharing Ni would drive people bonkers. (Some INTJs actually try this on a regular basis and are quite bitter that no one understands them.)
    Very true.

    Same as I said above.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I'm sure there's a pretentious Latin term for what kind of logical fallacy this is.


    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Yes, you disagree with my premise. Disagreement isn't an argument.

    Prima facie, the only difference between Xi and Xe is that Xi is introverted and Xe is extroverted, not that Xi is deep and Xe is shallow. Therefore, one should question why would people regard Xe as shallow and Xi as deep, when it's all just introversion/extroversion. Unless you just want to say "introverted == deep" and call an end to the discussion.

    I don't believe I'm saying anything that's all that difficult to understand: extroverted functions are necessarily in the public playground. Everyone can readily observe the quality of others' extroverted functions, while the introverted functions are hidden close to the chest.

    The virtue of an extroverted function, such as Te, is that while it isn't "personally" "deep", it has access to the shared knowledge of the group, which is often superior to one's own knowledge. Te can take several sets of ideas from several different sources, and compare and contrast and quickly figure out which set(s) have merit. Ti instead strives to develop one's own system of ideas, which is not directly shared with anyone else. In a way, this is "deep" in that, well, there really isn't any way to do this except build it all up in your own head. The "depth" is nothing more than saying that it is one's own personal understanding.

    So unless you have some other concept of "deep" that isn't synonymous with "introverted," you're left with a circular argument.
    I liked this part. Actually, I liked this whole post.

    I certainly don't think it's circular logic, though.

    I love your example of Ti and Te, cuz, well, it's the first time I can admit about myself that a function that's important to me is indeed less "deep" than its corresponding introverted function, and, thus, demonstrate that this argument isn't simply an Ni glory fest.

    See, even "deeper" isn't a perfect word; I just think it's better than the word I started with originally, which was "powerful". I also think "robust" and "substantive", the two other words I've used, are helpful in pointing to what it is that I'm trying to express.

    See, I have no doubt in my mind that, when it comes to what it is that T does, Ti is more something than Te, and it's not simply more introverted.

    It's more robust, more substantive, and more powerful, all in some particular sense of those words.

    That's not to say that Te can't be more useful, or even more powerful, in certain contexts, but that, well, there's just something about Ti that is more something-other-than-simply-introversion than Te.

    And I believe the same holds for all other functions: Ni over Ne, Fi over Fe, and Si over Se.

    The Xi functions all seem to be more deep, substantive, robust, powerful, thorough, and focused than their Xe counterparts...

  7. #37
    Supreme High Commander Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,108

    Default

    If I had to insert one word into the space in the title, I think that it would be "contemplative". And if the title had asked what extroverted functions were more of, I would go for "pragmatic". Mind you, these statements are about as much use as any one word summary of a complex issue. I mean, Ne is probably more explorative than pragmatic, for a start. Se is experimental.

    Certainly, I wouldn't say that either type is intrinsically superior to another. I need my Te. Without it, I wouldn't be able to cope with the world. All my knowledge and insights would be useless, because I wouldn't have any means of sending them into the world. I's be stuck in an Ni-Fi loops, lost in world of self contemplation as I slowly gather dust and become increasingly irrelivant. In fact, I need my Se as well, for what is the value of living without experiencing life? Pitty it's so hard to get a grip on.

  8. #38
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Ne is my processing machine, Fi is my soul.

    So, I guess you can say my Fi soul is "deeper" than the Ne processing machine that fuels/facilitates it.

    My Fi is all about depth, and my Ne is all about breadth, lateral thinking, analogous thinking.

    But my Fi is something that has a base, and through life, and experience, grows, deeper, richer, and more complex, hahahaha, or simple.

    Fi has a highly nuanced depth that strives for essentials, for simplicity, for core truths.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    The Xi functions all seem to be more deep, substantive, robust, powerful, thorough, and focused than their Xe counterparts...
    you know Z for some reason this topic bugs me. In a personal way, so please forgive the potential deviation from logic. You are using very positive words above to describe Xi relative to Xe.

    It almost points towards dom Xi as always being more powerful than dom Xe-your original wording I might add. (Aux Te doesnt throw things out willy-nilly, I kinda think you really meant powerful.)

    But then the counter suggestion was made that aux Xi gives depth. But aux will never have the depth that a dom will have. No ENFP will ever have the refinement in use of Fi that an INFP will have. Thus an extrovert will always be inferior to an introvert it terms of power? You kinda see the oddness here? You dont say it directly...but yeah. In spite of the logical arguments, the tone conveys the implication.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Ne is my processing machine, Fi is my soul.

    So, I guess you can say my Fi soul is "deeper" than the Ne processing machine that fuels/facilitates it.

    My Fi is all about depth, and my Ne is all about breadth, lateral thinking, analogous thinking.

    But my Fi is something that has a base, and through life, and experience, grows, deeper, richer, and more complex, hahahaha, or simple.

    Fi has a highly nuanced depth that strives for essentials, for simplicity, for core truths.

    For me Ne is Everything. When I think of where my personality is seated, I sit on the very edge of Ne, an endless vista looking out onto everything. It endlessly connects. Ne is self defining for me. I claim it as my soul.

    When I took my mbti certification class the instructor made us draw a room decsribing out personality. I drew a massive window looking out upon an ocean, covered in vines. The picture began at the window itself, teetering on the edge of falling out.

    I "think/feel" with Ne. I suppose Fi has a set of core truths-as of late far more developed than I originally thought, albeit quite odd core truths. Te has a set of objective, external observables, a whole library of them stored away for comparison.

    By being "seated" in Ne, I can step away from Fi/Te and observe, compare, contrast, see every side of an argument, then try to perceive a perspective very different from my own base, dare I say meta cognition of some sort? I dunno...

    yeah Ne is my soul ...

  9. #39
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Holy shit. I love Ne....!!!!!!

    Where are the entps when I need them.....*sigh* sprinkles out bird seed.....

  10. #40
    Ruler of the Stars Asterion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    Holy shit. I love Ne....!!!!!!

    Where are the entps when I need them.....*sigh* sprinkles out bird seed.....
    bird seeds lure ENFPs, to get ENTPs you need high powered electromagnets I think

    Think back to the looney tunes: Road Runner vs Coyote
    5 3 9

Similar Threads

  1. Socionics questionnaire (since people are more reliable than quizzes)
    By sardonic delight in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-13-2016, 10:43 PM
  2. Replies: 57
    Last Post: 08-11-2016, 02:07 AM
  3. Intuitors are more grounded than sensors.
    By Vilku in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 144
    Last Post: 01-16-2013, 10:50 AM
  4. Values are more important than things, possibly even people.
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-28-2011, 10:03 PM
  5. Are Extroverts more Creative than Introvert?
    By Not_Me in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 07:20 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