User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 196

Thread: Catch-22

  1. #91
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    I think I get it! Your last post if I'm not mistaken pans out because you describe Impulsivity as an aspect of extraversion as a whole, which would mean that as you use the scale to describe your Impulsivity (high or low) it corresponds with the 'graph' above the said scale, which then dictates whether you are above or below the median (6), yes?

    As well, am I correct in my interpretation (I think I understand my problem with the first question I asked):

    The two graphs that I questioned equalling the last graph which describes Extraversion as a whole were merely setting up the direction of the scale meaning that since the scales were moving left to right and down and up in intensity the scales general direction is lowest to the left of six and the highest right of six.

    Does this sound right? Or am I confusing something?
    06 07 08 09 10 11 12
    05 06 07 08 09 10 11
    04 05 06 07 08 09 10
    03 04 05 06 07 08 09
    02 03 04 05 06 07 08
    01 02 03 04 05 06 07
    00 01 02 03 04 05 06

    This is the general graph of E. So yes, you could say, E, as defined E (Extraversion) is in the right of 6. Below 6 the numbers also depict E, but below the medial point (6), so it is not defined as E as such. It is defined as I (Introversion) as such: Introverts also have E. (If you do not count the single zero point.)

    So here we do not yet have the dichotomy. I try to define the dichotomy in view of your post when I come back.

  2. #92
    Senior Member Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    272

    Default

    Why dont you do something more simple like a plan to go to another galaxy while wearing underwears & only bringing one bottle of pina colada o.o

  3. #93
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    holy crap, i've been writing and rewriting for an hour and i'm finally starting to get this

    must go to bed before my brain explodes !!!!!!!!!!

    numbers aside...
    impulsivity would seem to correlate with Se/Ne, no? ExxP, IxxP? does that match up numberwise?
    Good. I am happy for you.
    Yes. Impulsivity does correlate with EP and even IP. It is a dichotomy of E: but quantification is about straight lines in the vertical or horizontal, so the horizontal process stretches out of the boundary of E to reach I.

  4. #94
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    ReflecttcelfeR,

    Thank you. An intelligent question. You are almost there.
    There is a point I want to clarify though.
    The scales move left to right and down up for the reason you say. Granted.
    You have removed the major obstacle already.

    On the other hand.
    The two graphs you mention are not only because I want to make a point. The dichotomy is per se. The thing is itself. But it is a minor issue.

    Impulsivity is a dichotomy of Extraversion. E brings about a differentiation of P and J.
    The dichotomy of P however is E and I. The dichotomy in the dichotomy.

    25 per cent is on the other side? 50 per cent, if you look at the entirety.
    The entirety does not function.
    Why?
    It is not there.

  5. #95
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    "I am not a number, I am a free man".

    6 was well-chosen.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  6. #96
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    ReflecttcelfeR,

    Thank you. An intelligent question. You are almost there.
    There is a point I want to clarify though.
    The scales move left to right and down up for the reason you say. Granted.
    You have removed the major obstacle already.

    On the other hand.
    The two graphs you mention are not only because I want to make a point. The dichotomy is per se. The thing is itself. But it is a minor issue.

    Impulsivity is a dichotomy of Extraversion. E brings about a differentiation of P and J.
    The dichotomy of P however is E and I. The dichotomy in the dichotomy.

    25 per cent is on the other side? 50 per cent, if you look at the entirety.
    The entirety does not function.
    Why?
    It is not there.
    So, the graphs in question are only half the equation. This means that the exact opposite of this final graph 01 02 etc... is the rest of the description of E and I, but describes J instead of P. Yes?

    Another way I'm thinking about it is the first graph is only a 100% graph, while the other graph, the opposite of said graph, completes it and makes it the 100%-0%-100% graph which tests base their scales on. One direction leading towards J and the other to P. I'll make a picture reference!

    06 07 08 09 10 11 12
    05 06 07 08 09 10 11
    04 05 06 07 08 09 10
    03 04 05 06 07 08 09
    02 03 04 05 06 07 08
    01 02 03 04 05 06 07
    00 01 02 03 04 05 06

    +


    06 05 04 03 02 01 00
    07 06 05 04 03 02 01
    08 07 06 05 04 03 02
    09 08 07 06 05 04 03
    10 09 08 07 06 05 04
    11 10 09 08 07 06 05
    12 11 10 09 08 07 06

    =

    This would complete the single dichotomy of the aspect of E and I, but this second scale would measure J instead of P. The dichotomy within a dichotomy. Would this be correct?

  7. #97
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Good. I am happy for you.
    Yes. Impulsivity does correlate with EP and even IP. It is a dichotomy of E: but quantification is about straight lines in the vertical or horizontal, so the horizontal process stretches out of the boundary of E to reach I.
    of course, that makes sense. haha i DO get it

    i understand this better in patterns than in pure numbers. that is what i should have looked at from the get-go. i love your number reasoning. it's neat to see these systems in mathematical language.

  8. #98
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    of course, that makes sense. haha i DO get it

    i understand this better in patterns than in pure numbers. that is what i should have looked at from the get-go. i love your number reasoning. it's neat to see these systems in mathematical language.
    Good! You are on the right path; the numbers displays the pattern, and the pattern displays the numbers.

    I zero the irrelevant loci in the thing

    0XX0XX0
    X0X0X0X
    XX000XX
    000O000
    000O000
    000O000
    000O000

    X depicts the MBTI loci

    I loci: 3
    E loci: 9

    In a quantification process 25 per cent of the loci inevitably falls on the other side:
    check: 9 + 3 = 12
    9 + 3 = 12 equals 3 + 1 = 4 in the order

    reduction check

    4(5 X 5) model:

    0X0X0
    X000X
    00O00
    00O00
    00O00

    I loci: 1
    E loci: 3

  9. #99
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    So, the graphs in question are only half the equation. This means that the exact opposite of this final graph 01 02 etc... is the rest of the description of E and I, but describes J instead of P. Yes?

    Another way I'm thinking about it is the first graph is only a 100% graph, while the other graph, the opposite of said graph, completes it and makes it the 100%-0%-100% graph which tests base their scales on. One direction leading towards J and the other to P. I'll make a picture reference!

    06 07 08 09 10 11 12
    05 06 07 08 09 10 11
    04 05 06 07 08 09 10
    03 04 05 06 07 08 09
    02 03 04 05 06 07 08
    01 02 03 04 05 06 07
    00 01 02 03 04 05 06

    +


    06 05 04 03 02 01 00
    07 06 05 04 03 02 01
    08 07 06 05 04 03 02
    09 08 07 06 05 04 03
    10 09 08 07 06 05 04
    11 10 09 08 07 06 05
    12 11 10 09 08 07 06

    =

    This would complete the single dichotomy of the aspect of E and I, but this second scale would measure J instead of P. The dichotomy within a dichotomy. Would this be correct?
    I shall try to illustrate the dichotomy in several posts! Your number pattern is correct as such: E = - I and vice versa. But there is confusion in your verbal statements. Never mind, we work it out.

  10. #100
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    I shall try to illustrate the dichotomy in several posts! Your number pattern is correct as such: E = - I and vice versa. But there is confusion in your verbal statements. Never mind, we work it out.
    Alright! I appreciate your patience.

Similar Threads

  1. Joseph Hellers Catch 22
    By Will2911 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-28-2010, 10:21 AM
  2. What threads catches your eye?
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-16-2009, 09:48 AM
  3. Did anyone catch Obama's speech on race?
    By JuilinThiefTaker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 03-24-2008, 09:23 AM
  4. Bond 22 title announced...
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-12-2008, 12:49 AM
  5. Who invented catch? Dog or human?
    By Mort Belfry in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-20-2008, 11:09 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