User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 40

  1. #21
    ~dangerous curves ahead~
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    2,590

    Default

    First off, I like what Athenian has said here, in that for iNtuitive first types, it is absorption then processing. While for Thinking first types, it is the processing first, then the fact absorption.

    As an Ne Ti, I usually find myself swimming with inputs, then trying to find a structure that'd make sense of it. It means then FDG's process would only come into play when that structure is formed and the Ti is fixated though, the second stage as Xander says - i.e. I'm becoming more INTP in a sense, in the selection of facts to corroborate or destroy my structure. At this stage, usually the Ne has had enough. Hence the closure and start of fact selection.

    A second stage IP/EJ, who has already formed their structure, however, would then be seeking information to corroborate or deny their structure (engaging the Ne more). This creates the appearance of openess, to fit FDG's theory.

    But I'd hesitate to say the IP/EJ is truly open - in that, I don't feel they really accept things, but are merely looking for the variety in sample size, then selecting what is of value to prove or deny their theory. Anything which falls inbetween is usually discarded. I think they'd cling more firmly to their beliefs vs an EP/IJ - and this also means the fall is harder for them when a belief is crushed. An EP/IJ would tend to walk away easier I'd think.

    To use an example. When meeting a person for a first time, I think an EP/IJ is likely to want to find out more about them, their likes, dislikes, get a handle on their personality, their being. Then they may discover that, oh shites, this person doesn't taste so good. They then start to wonder, hmm, are any of my friends like this, or given their circumstances, is it fair for them to be like that, if so, hmm, maybe it is ok. But after a while, it galls them, and they'd get bored. "I don't like them anymore. Anything you say doesn't change it." And it ends. The death of the Ne kills the relationship.

    An IP/EJ, is likely to first wonder. Is this person interesting enough for me to want to find out more, and pique me out of my boredom. Hmm. Ok. This seems interesting. Lets find out more. And they get hooked and want to drain the person dry. When the person is dry, they're likely to shake the bones and go, what, no more? But I liked them. Surfeit of Ne kills it.

    So I'd go for EP/IJ as absorbers-reactors. IP/EJs as filters-seekers.

  2. #22
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post

    A concrete example that would be difficult. I have noted before though that I've read and replied to an IJ before (dunno who, it's a generic pattern thing) and they've come back semi berating me for missing questions or parts of the subject which were important. It often leaves me confused because I'd considered them trivialities or side point and had almost filtered them out before I'd even read them. It makes sense that a person who drinks the barrel dry and then thinks about it would find that irritating.
    I've experienced this with IP/EJs. It's something I've been accused of in the past (Jennifer? ). I'm constantly amazed at some of the posts I read in reply to questions, the incredible detail supplied or the trivialities (to me) addressed that I'd dismissed but made the original poster happy. Makes me glad to have the IP/EJs around.

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

  3. #23
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    First off, I like what Athenian has said here, in that for iNtuitive first types, it is absorption then processing. While for Thinking first types, it is the processing first, then the fact absorption.

    As an Ne Ti, I usually find myself swimming with inputs, then trying to find a structure that'd make sense of it. It means then FDG's process would only come into play when that structure is formed and the Ti is fixated though, the second stage as Xander says - i.e. I'm becoming more INTP in a sense, in the selection of facts to corroborate or destroy my structure. At this stage, usually the Ne has had enough. Hence the closure and start of fact selection.
    More INTP? Pah!!
    You wish

    I does seem to fit though. Kind of a second string pattern only barely picked up on unless you're looking directly at it.
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    A second stage IP/EJ, who has already formed their structure, however, would then be seeking information to corroborate or deny their structure (engaging the Ne more). This creates the appearance of openess, to fit FDG's theory.
    Personally I see it as a first hypothesis. I then go and see if it works. See we're innovative and individual
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    But I'd hesitate to say the IP/EJ is truly open - in that, I don't feel they really accept things, but are merely looking for the variety in sample size, then selecting what is of value to prove or deny their theory. Anything which falls inbetween is usually discarded.
    That'd be representative of the less developed amongst those types yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    I think they'd cling more firmly to their beliefs vs an EP/IJ - and this also means the fall is harder for them when a belief is crushed. An EP/IJ would tend to walk away easier I'd think.
    Yeah INTJs are soo likely to walk away. Not if you tell them it's wrong, only if they figure out that it's wrong.

    The difference you're picking up on is the EJ/IP would probably need to find why it doesn't work before they move on where as the EP/IJ would simply resume sucking up all that information and then try again.
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    To use an example. When meeting a person for a first time, I think an EP/IJ is likely to want to find out more about them, their likes, dislikes, get a handle on their personality, their being. Then they may discover that, oh shites, this person doesn't taste so good. They then start to wonder, hmm, are any of my friends like this, or given their circumstances, is it fair for them to be like that, if so, hmm, maybe it is ok. But after a while, it galls them, and they'd get bored. "I don't like them anymore. Anything you say doesn't change it." And it ends. The death of the Ne kills the relationship.
    EP/IJs tend to get to false assumptions though, particularly Ns, as they leap from irrelevant information to a conclusion.

    Not that EJ/IPs are immune to this but it does appear less often IME (thinking back this is).
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    An IP/EJ, is likely to first wonder. Is this person interesting enough for me to want to find out more, and pique me out of my boredom. Hmm. Ok. This seems interesting. Lets find out more. And they get hooked and want to drain the person dry. When the person is dry, they're likely to shake the bones and go, what, no more? But I liked them. Surfeit of Ne kills it.
    So cynical and yet true from a certain point of view.
    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    So I'd go for EP/IJ as absorbers-reactors. IP/EJs as filters-seekers.
    That sounds too biased. It places EP/IJ as active and EJ/IP as passive. Have you known a passive ESTJ? How about ENTJ?
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  4. #24
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    I've experienced this with IP/EJs. It's something I've been accused of in the past (Jennifer? ).
    Who, me? *innocent*

    Honestly, though, I don't remember.

    I'm constantly amazed at some of the posts I read in reply to questions, the incredible detail supplied or the trivialities (to me) addressed that I'd dismissed but made the original poster happy. Makes me glad to have the IP/EJs around.
    I do know I've been berated by "skipping things" in someone's comments that, yes, I thought to be side issues... much as I would edit and shape a paper and focus on what I thought to be important. Or perhaps I just had nothing to really say on those points. And then having them come back and ask for more explanation.

    But sometimes I know I can be very picky with my own writing. I don't know; sometimes I paint with a very broad glossy brush, like "rough sketching" the idea, and other times my ideas hinge on very particular words that have to be considered as-is, and if something is removed, the whole thing no longer works.

    As far as bias, I admit to having ideas in mind when I'm discussing... but I'm still looking for validation/refutation. I can definitely get attached to my ideas, especially if they seem to follow the patterns I've perceived (i.e., they seem very true), but I also try very hard to be willing to change or let them shift when something comes up to refute them.

    And honestly, even when I hate it, I can't help but shift my stance when new information comes to light; I wish I could just fight for an idea because I want it to be true, but if there's doubt, I can't just ignore it; weaknesses in my own stances gnaw on me.

    So yes, I usually have a "theory" that I'm trying to test, but it's constantly changing once I get more information.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #25
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    I've experienced this with IP/EJs. It's something I've been accused of in the past (Jennifer? ). I'm constantly amazed at some of the posts I read in reply to questions, the incredible detail supplied or the trivialities (to me) addressed that I'd dismissed but made the original poster happy. Makes me glad to have the IP/EJs around.
    I was thinking as I read that, that INTJs would be the worst example (or possibly the exception) to this whole EP/IJ vs EJ/IP divide.

    Mind you I think what you describe is possibly more NT related than anything.

    Dunno.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  6. #26
    ~dangerous curves ahead~
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    2,590

    Default

    More INTP? Pah!!
    You wish
    I'm using my Ti and ignoring that. *wills Xander to keep his damn tongue where it belongs*

    I does seem to fit though. Kind of a second string pattern only barely picked up on unless you're looking directly at it.

    Personally I see it as a first hypothesis. I then go and see if it works. See we're innovative and individual

    That'd be representative of the less developed amongst those types yes.
    The difference lies then in the stage of maturity of the IP/EJ, isn't it? But the process does not change.

    One who is more developed would move to the Ne more quickly. A lesser developed one would just stay fixated on forming the structure. The same with the EP/IJ. Level of development will denote how well they can engage the auxilliary. I'd surmise for e.g. yourself, Jennifer and FDG are further in the scale of development, demonstrated by your willingness to accept the dross from lower mortals

    Yeah INTJs are soo likely to walk away. Not if you tell them it's wrong, only if they figure out that it's wrong.
    This is the stage of development, isn't it.

    Fixation comes from Ne or Ti? As an INTJ, if the Ne has been closed off, the walking away is less likely, isn't it.

    The difference you're picking up on is the EJ/IP would probably need to find why it doesn't work before they move on where as the EP/IJ would simply resume sucking up all that information and then try again.
    i.e. the EJ/IP sucks one selected victim dry in one breath, then moves on to another after certifying the first one dead.

    While the EP/IJ takes a nibble, stops for a breath and selects another, then continues with the first victim while holding on to the second.

    The latter just hasn't closed the Ne yet. While the former has activated his Ne to the max.

    EP/IJs tend to get to false assumptions though, particularly Ns, as they leap from irrelevant information to a conclusion.
    That's why they need to develop to engage the Ti. . Less developed ENTPs are frustrating. Soome would argue developed ENTPs are even worse. Because besides being highly intuitive, they are starting to think!

    Not that EJ/IPs are immune to this but it does appear less often IME (thinking back this is).
    Yes, they are protected because they think first.

    So cynical and yet true from a certain point of view.


    That sounds too biased. It places EP/IJ as active and EJ/IP as passive. Have you known a passive ESTJ? How about ENTJ?
    Semantics? I meant the EP/IJ is more passive - they absorb and react - these are both passive processes. The IP/EJ is the active one, in filtering and seeking ??

  7. #27
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    i.e. the EJ/IP sucks one selected victim dry in one breath, then moves on to another after certifying the first one dead.
    As an intellectual vampire, I think it is only right and proper to give my victim contributor my full attention. (Dracula has morals too!)

    No dilettante promiscuity from me, nosirree.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #28
    ~dangerous curves ahead~
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    2,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    As an intellectual vampire, I think it is only right and proper to give my victim contributor my full attention. (Dracula has morals too!)

    No dilettante promiscuity from me, nosirree.
    The absence of dilettante promiscuity just makes Dracula a serial monogamist, isn't it.

    Edit: mwahhahaa Holly Jolly Dolly?! Dracula with mistletoe is in da house.

  9. #29
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Who, me? *innocent*

    Honestly, though, I don't remember.
    Months and months ago, in relation to a post with a laundry list of questions / thoughts of which only one is addressed. Mighta been a PM? :confused:

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

  10. #30
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    I was thinking as I read that, that INTJs would be the worst example (or possibly the exception) to this whole EP/IJ vs EJ/IP divide.
    My vote is for worst

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Why are IJs Pi-dom and IPs Ji-dom?
    By decrescendo in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 05-18-2013, 06:39 PM
  2. Are there many IJ's or EP's?
    By lukin4intellect in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-29-2009, 07:50 AM
  3. [MBTItm] EJs and IPs
    By Jeremy in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-23-2009, 06:20 PM
  4. Do IP's enjoy urinating more than EJ's?
    By Jeffster in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-22-2009, 12:02 PM
  5. If IP is EJ then is IP IP or can it be IJ?
    By Xander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-02-2008, 09:47 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