User Tag List

First 8161718192028 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 346

  1. #171
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    :yim_rolling_on_the_

    No typological bias to see here, people; keep on moving...
    I feel bad sometimes for inferior Ne. The whole "related" part is not quite so good...but of course thats the inferior...we should add an extra word to seperate the good Ne from the Bad Ne Lets not keep them together and just say that Ne "sees" relations, but it doesnt mean its actually related. It basically "sees" 2 things at once and makes a connection. But thats to simple, we need complex so we can take a single element that stands on its own and seperate it. Oh wait...that seperated part actually fits over here as well...its related. Part one is related to part 2 and part 2 is related to part 3, that means part 3 is related to part 1 In other words Ohhhh a brown cow and a black cow. Cows are related which means that black and brown are related.

    Push-poke-prod- Just feel like poking at Ne in the same manner that Se gets poked at
    Im out, its been fun

  2. #172
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    Hmm...should be pretty clear based on my earlier posts that I despise people tying Ni to superpowers/voodoo/mysticism, and I've never jumped on the 'Yay, I'm psychic' bandwagon, as I don't see myself operating in that light.

    Basically - the majority of your post went over my head, and I was confused trying to wrap my head around what in the world you were talking about. Now I may not be the brightest person in the world, but I couldn't immediately identify what you were saying, nor tie it into how I see myself. It may be that you as an outside observer see me or other dom-Ni's / dom-Ne's operating under this archetype concept, and perhaps this is in the end just a semantics issue and you're just using a different name for the exact same thing being described in the OP..I don't know..but, I guess I was just scratching my head after reading your post/description.

    I mean, I kind of said it in my first post in this thread - that the description in the OP really resonated with me. Then you come in - you, not being a dom-Ni - and basically say that the OP and what I, at least, resonate strongly with, is in fact not a great way to describe Ni.

    I mean, again it's fine if other people can grasp these other definitions/descriptions and have a better understanding of Ni as a result, I just find it ironic/fascinating/interesting that me, as a dom-Ni user, find most Ni definitions severely lacking, and find my own descriptions of what I relate to, and how I *actually operate*, dismissed. Not in so many words, and I'm not directing this at anyone in particular. I suppose the same principle could be applied to all of the other functions, however. Also similar to what Orobas was suggesting earlier -- we all filter our perceptions/ideas of each of the functions through our own lens, and to get away from that and be truly objective is difficult at best. Not impossible, no doubt.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yeah, Eric, I feel like you were kinda just Ti-ing Ni.

    Instead of big terms like "meta-perspectives" or "different angles", you want to use archetypal templates?!?!

    Basically, what you've done, is say that the words I, an Ni-dom, think are extremely useful and accurate to describe how we function, are indeed not so, or, at least, are less so than "archetypal templates", which is something I would never intuitively use to describe Ni.

    You've brought in this term "archetypal template" because it's something you've probably defined and feel comfortable with, and thus it's palatable to your Ti-dom mind.

    I, however, do not find it palatable. And I feel the other words, and other descriptions, are much more apt.
    OK, it looks like a perspective thing, as I thought. You have your understanding of your dominant function (the ego's "operating charter" Lenore Thomson has called it), and are used to seeing it that way.

    I don't know why my description of it in terms of archetypes would go over your head. I guess you do not think of the patterns as archetypes?

    It's often said with a dominant introverted function, that you might be so "used" to it, you might not identify with others' descriptions of it. That's one thing that makes it hard for those weighing between Ti and Fi dom. types (and even aux.). I had this problem reading so much about Ti "frameworks" and "categorizing".

    Ti is also described in terms of "different angles", and the definitions become ambiguous then. And meta-perspective would be a perspective about a perspective.
    For some reason, that doesn't seem to really describe much of a particular function to me. I imagine it could translate into these archetypes I am mentioning being these "meta-perspectives".

    We do need descriptions that everyone can understand, not just the type preferring the function.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  3. #173
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    "Meta-perspective" actually describes Ni rather well, when you can actually define what a "Meta-perspective" is. The one most directly related to our purposes:
    Introverted iNtuition is "transcending to a meta-perspective." It's a way of seeing things that rises above competing views....

    INFJ iNtuition

  4. #174
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I don't know why my description of it in terms of archetypes would go over your head. I guess you do not think of the patterns as archetypes.
    I'm can't speak for cascedesco, but your description didn't go over my head; it's just that it's not at all what I feel best (or even aptly) describes introverted intuition.

    Hearing it does not make me think, "Hey, now there's a description that people should be reading in order to better understand Ni."

    Introverted iNtuition is "transcending to a meta-perspective." It's a way of seeing things that rises above competing views...
    This, on the other hand, strikes me as "bingo!", and I would highly recommend anybody read it in order to gain a better understanding of Ni.

    It's short, sweet, and accurate.

  5. #175
    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 SillySapienne View Post
    Sorry, just read up on some previous posts, and I gotta agree with Tater.

    In REAL LIFE, whether one is extroverted by nature or introverted by nature does not define whether or not that person will be deep or shallow.
    Nobody is making any evaluation of whether the person is deep or shallow. We are discussing which aspects of perspective focus on depth and which ones focus on breadth.

    Nobody is saying that you can't be a deep person because you're an extrovert. Calm down.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Many people want to believe that extroverts just flit about and have absolutely no ability for self-reflection, introspection, and depth.

    This is a false generalization.
    Yes it is; however, if extroverts did not have auxiliary introverted perspectives balancing us out, that is how we would be.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    For example, I have met many of introverts who are shallow, yes, shallow, as in they don't say much and they don't think much, they kinda just exist, in a bland human ficus kinda way.
    I suspect that they simply did not share many of their thoughts with you and thus you have no idea what they actually think or don't think.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    I have also met plenty of extroverts, myself included, who despite our predilection to become stimulated by external sources, utilize this stimulation, maximize it so the stimulation is not just simple stimulation, but stimulation that inspires, that facilitates growth, intellectual and personal. There are extroverts who seek what they deem to be *worthy* stimulation.
    This is all really beside the point. Nobody is saying extroverts are shallow people. We are saying that the extroverted perspective favors breadth over depth and quantity over quality.

    In practice, extroverted people also have introverted perspectives, which allow them to value depth sometimes as well.

    It sounds like you think people are attacking your depth as a person and are thus responding with a lot of hostility because you missed the point that we are talking about isolated perspectives, not complete people.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Also, I know plenty of introverts who are entirely lacking of self-awareness and any type of intellectual depth.
    Again you probably don't know what they're thinking because they probably don't feel like sharing it with you. Introverts have a tendency to do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    But, if we are gonna talk about typological functions, the only two extroverted functions that are more breadth inclined are Se and Ne, however, both of these ext. functions are anchored by an internal focus.

    Fe and Te are not about breadth at all, nor are they about depth, they are just functions that want their respective results/desires as fast and frequently as possible. These extroverted functions are not concerned with breadth, hell no, that takes too much time, they just want what they want/need asap, and hopefully will get at the very least satisfactory results.
    No, this is pretty clearly wrong. Fe and Te choose objective standards that can be applied universally to as many different external contexts as possible. They eschew the depth of their introverted counterparts because they value external applicability/ability to accomplish external goals over absolute correctness from a Feeling or Thinking perspective.

    Example: Fi wants to know exactly what feels right to the user. Fe wants to build a collective standard of morality that can be applied universally to everybody, which necessitates that we give up the depth of individuality that Fi values so highly.

    Fi wants the depth of personal individuality; Fe wants a one-size-fits-all moral standard because it has broader external applicability.


    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Fi is emotionally/psychologically deep, depending on the person who has/uses it.

    And, Ti is intellectually/logically deep, depending on the person who has/uses it.

    But, and I've witnessed it here PLENTY O' TIMES where someone seems to be all Ne, or all Fe, or all Ni, or all Ti, notice how I say *all* and I consistently find these people to be "soulless", identity-less, without a core, without an anchor, without a purpose, but that can be my Fi talking, who knows.
    This is a good point, as it illustrates why real people need a balance between introverted and extroverted perspectives.

    As I said before, all breadth and no depth and we never stick with any one idea long enough to grasp its significance.

    All depth and no breadth and we never learn to apply our ideas to anything real outside the self and thus are never really able to experience life.

    Like yin and yang, the two perspectives are equally important. The key is that extroverts will tend to understand the breadth perspective more naturally, while introverts will tend to understand the depth perspective more naturally.

    This does not mean that extroverts can't be deep people. Those with well-developed auxiliary functions ARE deep people because they have strong command of their introverted faculties.

    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #176
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Meta-perspective, above perspective, god-like, c'mon guys, just come out and say it, ya'll think your Ni gives you god-like powers of perception.
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  7. #177
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Ne inevitably leads to...

    New Neural Networks

    Nebulous nectars offer kernels of truth.

    Infinitrees abound with branches up and down connecting everything.

    Not to seek, but to see beneath the surface, to find patterns, and commonalities, to find something hidden yet so apparent.

    Ne will always want more information, will always get excited by the concept of finding something NeW!
    Very beautiful. To connect everything with everyone, with everything...not logically mind you, but holistically somehow...The world seems to be built of endless, limitless variation and endless differentation...yet under the surface is actually a part of a complete single, thing...thus we explore and push the edges of the world and our understanding searching for that ultimate truth that connects everything into one. I dunno if that is what you do, but that's me...

    I like that you added the concept of multidimensionality to the Ne process.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    This is why I try to use analogies and stories to describe how Ni "works," in order to lead others through something resembling the thought process. Most descriptions of Ni pretend that it's "mysterious." It really isn't: it's just well-practiced pattern-matching/spotting. The Ne users pattern match/spot among the things they observe in the external world. The Ni users pattern match/spot within themselves. In most instances, the pattern matching/spotting is utterly trivial and not even worth discussing. In exceptional instances, the Ne extrapolation leads to new truths by understanding how a pattern repeats itself everywhere in unforeseen ways, while the Ni "interpolation" takes all sorts of observations from different perspectives (which don't necessarily make sense together) and synthesizes them into a new truth that explains all of the different perspectives with a singular simple explanation.
    Silly-U above suggests that Ne relies upon observation...once you see an observation, how long before you have Ne linked past the initial observation and are in a whole new sphere of thought? how many Ne layers do you go before you return to the object that initiated the Ne? I find sometimes my Ne will spark off an object but then Ne jumps inside my head....

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    So a dom/tert loop might be only slightly problematic and never cause enough of an issue to be diagnosed, or in a more extreme case might manifest itself as full blown psychosis.

    Sure, to some degree. I do exhibit symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, especially when I am in Ne+Fe mode. The solution is to develop Ti.

    Again it's not black and white; it's a spectrum. Everyone exhibits some minor form of some personality disorder or another; the question is simply whether it's extreme enough to block out normal life functioning.

    I don't think my NPD symptoms are severe enough to constitute a real NPD diagnosis from a psychological professional, but nonetheless they are there. This leads to my conclusion that most personality disorders are simply extreme preference for one or two types of cognition, to the exclusion of those that would balance them out.
    .
    How would you distinguish between a PD and natural maturity? From another perspective, what ENTP under 20 isnt somewhat NPD like at times? Also, how do you "develop Ti"? How would other aux functions be developed in other types to prevent full blown PDs?

  8. #178
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    "Meta-perspective" actually describes Ni rather well, when you can actually define what a "Meta-perspective" is. The one most directly related to our purposes:
    hmmmm I may use Ni all the time then...

    Actually are you sure "meta perspective" isnt just a description of "the watcher" as taken from buddhist meditation? It is the ability to step away from our ego and watch our own behaviors form an almost third person perspective to gain perspective...

    I have seen some very unself observant Ni doms though...who used massive amounts of Ni...

  9. #179
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    That seems to pretty much match what I'm trying to say, in terms of "archetypes". Analogies and stories are examples of that, and they form these patterns referenced from within ones self.
    (Though sometimes in analogies used to understand Ni, the meanings get lost, and you don't realize you're talking about a simple model of something used as a pattern).
    The below only applies to N doms/auxes

    The "mysterious" part of Ni I would guess is its tapping into the "collective unconscious," compared to Si's tapping into the "personal unconscious". My guess is that we share the archetypes of the collective unconscious because they're instinctual response systems to certain environmental stimuli (which is why you can't have a high-functioning Ni without good Se information, that is, the "personal conscious" as I see it, I know it's not the same as Jung).

    In much the same way, Ne (the "collective conscious") systematizes and universalizes its own experiences (Si), though often this is unnoticed by the person. It's less assured than its Ni counterpart, because it's trying to create a description of universal truth that it is unsure of, rather than instinctively flowing with the universal truth encoded within our DNA.

    This is a pretty heavy leap, and YMMV, but it makes sense to me.

  10. #180
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Ti is also described in terms of "different angles", and the definitions become ambiguous then.
    I can see why this would trip you up; it's very understandable.

    Perhaps you should try to figure out how Ti and Ni differ in this regard.

    The first place I would start is your next few sentences:

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    And meta-perspective would be a perspective about a perspective.

    For some reason, that doesn't seem to really describe much of a particular function to me.
    Well, it does.

    And until you understand it, you won't understand Ni.

    If you are incapable of understanding "meta-perspectivizing" and/or are incapable of understanding how it could be a function, then you are incapable of understanding Ni.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I imagine it could translate into these archetypes I am mentioning being these "meta-perspectives".
    And a square can be fitted into a round whole.

    Why don't you try to understand it for what it is, instead of trying to shift it into your definitions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    We do need descriptions that everyone can understand, not just the type preferring the function.
    I agree (to an extent).

    We also need accurate ones.

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] intjs how good is your vizualitation skills
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2017, 12:55 PM
  2. How important is a good teacher?
    By yama in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-15-2015, 07:08 PM
  3. I just remembered how good Animal Collective is
    By gmanyo in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-08-2012, 09:27 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-29-2010, 04:34 PM
  5. [NT] How good is your sensing?
    By BrokenSword in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-19-2010, 12:08 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