User Tag List

First 9171819202129 Last

Results 181 to 190 of 471

  1. #181
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

    Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

    Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

    If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

    There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

    But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and affect the final product.

    Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can look at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can taste the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. But to un-bake it would be to defeat the process of creation, this multivariate expression that combines ad-infinitum beyond your grasp.

    By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.
    tl;dr

  2. #182
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default


  3. #183
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    ^ Z's a clear example of what a lack of Fe looks like anyway. *re-rails thread*
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  4. #184
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    ^ Z's a clear example of what a lack of Fe looks like anyway. *re-rails thread*
    That's for damn sure!

    And God bless us, every one!


  5. #185
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

    Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

    Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

    If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

    There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

    But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and influence the final product.

    Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can "look" at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can "taste" the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. This multivariate expression of creation combines ad-infinitum beyond anyone's grasp.

    It's presumptuous to think you could truly predict behaviour based solely on functions. There's so much more to it than that.


    By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.
    ...which was:

    the world is an objective, observable place, and even so, introverted functions remain a mostly hidden source of personality content, so there, nasty box creator!

    Jung would be so proud.





    A world without Fe... half the population would be without external constraint of any kind other than other people being obstinate. They would perhaps be barely even human, running off only Ti as a judgment source and counting the world only as a source of information.

    Perhaps one means a world without a constraints system that differs from ones own. A world in which there were not priorities that count as immediately irrelevant, indeed counterproductive, under ones own constraint system.

    The trains would run on time.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  6. #186
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Sorry folks, I'm curious...

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    tl;dr
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    See, I wouldve, if I'd not known Z a bit, taken the tl;dr seriously, if he hadn't posted the smiley afterwards. Maybe I'm a bit slow on this, but it's an interesting problem I've had with....*drumroll please* Fe-users, as they usually do not add the second post ime

    As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  7. #187
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    And yes, protean and I are saying essentially the same thing; that's quite transparent, is it not?
    My hope is that it is transparent.

    The point being that, by some 'absolute miracle,' a 'Fe user' and a 'Fi user' (again, presumably you.. hopefully) actually agree on something pretty fundamental. Both see the limitations of using just functional theory to perfectly describe others, and both recognize the merit of looking at other factors in order to describe individuals.

    So, miraculously, the use of particular functions doesn't dictate whether or not one reaches those conclusions.

    (I place '[function] user' in quotes because I pretty much loathe the term, but I recognize that it's a way to get the idea across)

  8. #188
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Satine View Post
    As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?
    I don't what know "social rules" you are referring to as far as inside jokes are concerned. You want me to explain what an inside joke is? I've already stated that I was joking about the stereotypical Fe herd mentality. Yes, I think the lack of body language and tone of voice would have made my comment more indicative of a joke.

    But once again it's interesting. Look at what she says. I know she didn't address me specifically, but I think Oro and I have had the most intensive discussion. I'll add smilies for when I'm being a bit cheeky.

    My idea was incorrect and overgeneralized and was flawed.
    Agree. But it's OK, it was thrown out there and people can disagree right? I think this thread has been more respectful than how these usually go, but maybe some people don't think so. Conversely, what was "supposed" to happen? Everyone agree and say " you're so right!"
    It was rude of me to have put forth an idea that might have implied how another person thinks or feels.
    Putting words into my mouth. Have I (I only can speak for me) stated that it was rude to imply how another person thinks or feels? I do that all the time! But I don't base it purely upon MBTI.

    I respect that I am projecting my own problem onto other people.
    I'm leaning towards agreeing with that.

    Each person is an isolated beautiful individual, and thus to imply they follow a pattern is incorrect.
    Totally not what I've said at all...that people don't follow patterns.
    There is not truth to the patterns discussed within this thread.
    Not so, and I gave reasons why these patterns may exist. I have never said you don't see patterns. I do think your attribution to why these patterns exist is narrowly focused.

    Please accept my apologies for the disruption of the thread flow.
    It's OK, I won't hold it against you. All I care about is that you drank the kool-aid.

    I will assume responsibility for the fact that all burdens of communication are mine to carry,
    Overdramatic, melodramatic, and not at all what I have said. Now your spirit is broken and your soul is crushed. Who is the culprit?

    and that my own flaws have prevented my clear understanding of the scenario at hand.
    That is the case with all of us, thus making it seem like you have been unfairly and unduly attacked for not shouldering a burden you never had to carry.

    If I can merge and flow with the group more in a more adequate fashion, then I shall have no problems in communication moving forward.
    It's the "shall"...it was just icing on the cake. I couldn't resist dipping my finger into the frosting.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  9. #189
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

    Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

    Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

    If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

    There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

    But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and influence the final product.

    Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can "look" at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can "taste" the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. This multivariate expression of creation combines ad-infinitum beyond anyone's grasp.

    It's presumptuous to think you could truly predict behaviour based solely on functions. There's so much more to it than that.


    By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.

    -----

    And yes, protean and I are saying essentially the same thing; that's quite transparent, is it not?
    Looks can be decieving, sometimes the cake has to be tasted If not all you have is a false perception based on what the person wants you to see

    edit: the real question is who shaped how you look on the outside. Was it how the ingredients mixed naturally that caused the image or was it "shaped/designed" externally by a chef.
    Im out, its been fun

  10. #190
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Satine View Post
    As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?
    This isn't exactly on-topic, but thought I'd share my responses/impressions to both Orobas' final post in here and protean's response to it: When I read Orobas' post, I honestly suspected she was being totally facetious, and basically ripping on / condescending of Fe - as she seemed to be adding all of the supposedly-obligatory-and-stereotypical-Fe-'approaches', without really buying into it- it just seemed like a robotic response, saying what she perceives she's 'supposed' to be saying to be Fe-ish - and it just seemed blatantly over the top and I actually thought SHE was being tongue-in-cheek. Thus I thought protean's tongue-in-cheek response/joke was of the same vein.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...Gd5N3NZZE52QjQ

Similar Threads

  1. What would the world be like without religion?
    By RandomINTP in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 06-30-2017, 11:06 AM
  2. How would the world be without Ni?
    By Lightyear in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-08-2015, 07:37 PM
  3. What Would the World Do Without Fi?
    By Glycerine in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 08-23-2010, 03:23 AM
  4. How would the world be without Ti?
    By Robopop in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-21-2010, 11:10 AM
  5. What would the world be without Sensors/Intuitives?
    By VanillaCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-30-2008, 06:00 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