User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 346

  1. #21
    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 Zarathustra View Post


    Well, I totally agree with the first two of those sentences.

    But the thing about the Te description, and descriptions of any functions as sole and independent things, is that it completely leaves out how those functions interact with other functions, and the counterbalancing effects of those interactions.

    I am by no means rigid in my plans; I like to make them, and then improvise and change them around like crazy.

    Why? Because my Ni brings flexibility to my Te rigidity.

    It's really impossible, or, more accurately, absurd to think of the functions independently and in isolation. It's a vacuum that doesn't exist.



    Yeah, and we do so for the sake of accuracy...

    Which is more important: the Ti user's model, or the truth?


    What was that you were saying about describing your dislike for the way users of each function interact with you rather than the function itself?

    The problems with my understanding of Ni are matched only by yours of Ti.

    I find it awfully ironic that an Ni dom is preaching about "the truth", though, as if such a thing actually exists independently of human perception.


    P.S.,

    Te is really, really, really imprecise and inaccurate. NTJs constantly make sloppy errors in logic. Remember, everything you find annoying about Ne overgeneralizing and sacrificing depth for the sake of broader applicability applies equally well to the way Ti users feel about Te.

    Course, you don't need to listen to me, cause Ti is inferior anyway. (But I'm sure you know that, since you rock so hard at all four NT functions.)



    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    The piece would have been better titled not "a description of Ni", but a description of Ni from an Ne-dom's perspective, or, better yet, a description of Ni from simulatedworld.
    Indeed, judging from how terrible your general understanding of Ne/Ti is, I can only imagine how annoying hearing a non-Ni type describe your dominant function must be.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    This fits. Everything after that is a non sequitur that describes how Ni might manifest in behaviors, rather than what Ni actually is. He's still anthropomorphizing the functions as if they are people, which is a strong indication that he's characterizing his experiences of those who predominately use Ni rather than talking about the functions themselves. In other words, he's stereotyping and not archetyping, which is a consequence of applied typology, and a cause of what SolitaryWalker calls "folk typology".
    Unfortunately for SolitaryWalker, well-versed in Jungian typology though he may be, he lives in a giant Ti+Si loop and displays almost no Ne whatsoever.

    He's actually quite similar to functianalyst from personalitycafe, an ISTP very heavily mired in Ti+Ni.

    My use of such examples is a manifestation of Ne: I sacrifice precision in order to make the ideas more easily accessible to others.

    That's the crux of an extroverted perspective: Breadth over depth. Choosing a perspective with a wide range of external applications necessitates that we give up some degree of perfect accuracy. When you're stuck in an I+I loop, you can't do that because you don't understand how breadth could ever be preferable to depth.

    And yet, sometimes it is. "Folk typology" as defined by SolitaryWalker is basically, "Applying typology to anything real or useful or meaningful in the real external world outside one's own head."

    Because doing so requires us to sacrifice some degree of depth and precision, to an ultra-introvert with no discernible E perspective, it's the cardinal sin.

    And by that definition, I am very much a folk typologist. I actually like to relate my ideas to things outside my own head.

    I wish there were more extroverts interested in this stuff, cause I get kinda tired of hearing the same tired introverted criticisms again and again. "BUT ZOMG WE DON'T HAVE ABSOLUTELY PERFECT 100% IMPECCABLE COMPLETE CERTAINTY!!!!!!!!! HOW CAN THIS BE USEFUL IN ANY WAY EVER AT ALL??????????" sigh.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #22
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I find it awfully ironic that an Ni dom is preaching about "the truth", though, as if such a thing actually exists independently of human perception.
    All one needs is an extroverted thinking perspective and *shazaam*, truth will exist prior to perception.

    Te is really, really, really imprecise and inaccurate. NTJs constantly make sloppy errors in logic.
    Yep. It doesn't have to be, but yep. If their perception is up to scratch, they probably still have something workable.


    It seems what people are supposed to do is own their own perspectives. It doesn't necessarily mean there'll be a whole lot of conversation between the types. There's always the weather I suppose. People can always talk about the weather.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  3. #23
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    By making a platform to express simulatedworld's definition of functions, you give him an inordinate amount of recognition and attention. A large chunk of this forum contains "definitions" of functions as people interpret them and as those functions are already defined; yet they are dim and stifled by the flow of conversation.

  4. #24
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    And yet, sometimes it is. "Folk typology" as defined by SolitaryWalker is basically, "Applying typology to anything real or useful or meaningful in the real external world outside one's own head."
    It seems as though you are attempting to use typology as a means to analyze people's behavior. Since their behavior is abnormal to you, you jump to the conclusion that their opinions are void - like you responded to highlander by thrashing NTJs. (Contrary to what you have told me - "that by understanding typology, we can better appreciate other people's perspectives". All I see is depreciation. )

    Since you are so willing to dismiss their opinions based on their performance, you evade evaluating the validity of your own statements, which is not a search for truth, but rather a search for finding ways to be critical of people.

    If you are not keen on discovering the truth of typology, I'm really not sure why anyone would want to take your typologogical theories with anything but a grain of salt.

  5. #25
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    My use of such examples is a manifestation of Ne: I sacrifice precision in order to make the ideas more easily accessible to others.
    If an idea is not precise, then would this not prevent someone from accessing the truth of it? Forget Ne. This sacrifices the quality of an idea for the quantity of it's dissemination. In doing such a thing, you let bad ideas spread like wildfire instead of refining them and sharing them with a select few. Is it not possible to refine them and then spread them? Wouldn't that make them more appealing to some?

    That's the crux of an extroverted perspective: Breadth over depth. Choosing a perspective with a wide range of external applications necessitates that we give up some degree of perfect accuracy. When you're stuck in an I+I loop, you can't do that because you don't understand how breadth could ever be preferable to depth.
    No, it's not. Extraversion entails that one prefers external criteria over internal criteria. One may still have depth in external criteria, and one may still have breadth in internal criteria. Just because someone prefers external criteria does not mean that accuracy is mitigated. Accuracy of a statement depends upon the reasoning behind a statement, rather than the typology of the person making the statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I wish there were more extroverts interested in this stuff, cause I get kinda tired of hearing the same tired introverted criticisms again and again. "BUT ZOMG WE DON'T HAVE ABSOLUTELY PERFECT 100% IMPECCABLE COMPLETE CERTAINTY!!!!!!!!! HOW CAN THIS BE USEFUL IN ANY WAY EVER AT ALL??????????" sigh.
    Why are you referring to these criticisms as introverted? A criticism is a judgement (using analysis and evaluation). Just because a criticism comes from an introverted person does not mean that it has an introverted quality about it. Nor does it mean that one should dismiss it because it makes them feel uncomfortable.

  6. #26
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    There sure are a lot of "well you can't possibly understand x because you're type y and so your z function is inferior" posts in this thread.

    Because you're all apparently getting bored of that formula, though, you sometimes switch it up with "well, you would think that way! You're y!" And for your sense of diversity, I commend you.


    Keep on truckin' guys. Truck, all of you.

  7. #27
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simuated World
    Rather than imagine different ways we could change the outside world, Ni acknowledges many different ways we could change the subjective meaning of things to ourselves by looking at them from different angles. Rather than directly confront an issue, Ni will often solve problems by simply looking at them from a different angle. Doing a bunch of community service sucks? Just think of it as an opportunity to get lots of exercise! Note that Ni doesn't think about how to change the outer world the way Ne does; it only thinks about how to change *the way we interpret* the outer world. Ni leads you to try and see "through the smoke and mirrors" to what is REALLY going on below the surface, that other people are not perceptive enough to pick up on
    This I can especially relate on many levels. I've often stated I'm more interested in pondering certain paradigms on how best to understand the world rather than necessarily go out and change it per se; cause if you have the best paradigm everything else falls into place. When Ne people say they want to change the world, I often ask them "yes but change towards what exactly?"

    ...so in its unhealthy form, it turns into conspiracy theories, a la Dale Gribble from King of the Hill.
    That probably explains why he was one of my favorite TV characters. It also explains why I sometimes have a certain empathy towards conspiracy theorists, but I often notice they rely upon half-truths and go wild with it. A wrong step in the right direction as one could say.


    On a side note: Ni appreciates definitional freedom (and thus is often annoyed by Ti) in the same way Ne appreciates freedom to change its plan of action abruptly (and thus is often annoyed by Te.) Ti users will tend to frame debates by first assigning precise definitions to terms, but Ni often objects to this by wondering: "How are we unconsciously limiting our understanding by assigning such rigid definitions in the first place?" Ni always seeks to escape the unconscious assumptions that limit its understanding of as many different conceptual viewpoints as possible."
    Yes I can relate to this too. I have nothing against Ti per se(I do use it alot), but the reliance on exact and precise definitions often irks me because alot of the subject matter under discussion are rather complex that defy that kind of definition - at least from my perspective. I also notice that Ti is more about analysis - ie breaking down concepts into smaller pieces and disecting them; while Ni tends to be more about I guess synthesis - trying to see how everything ties in together.

  8. #28
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Somebody call the Nobel committee.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    There sure are a lot of "well you can't possibly understand x because you're type y and so your z function is inferior" posts in this thread.
    You just described a charlatan extraordinaire- one skilled in selling snake oil.
    There are those who share knowledge to help others, and those who use it to push their own agenda.
    Who they are, and which camp they fall into, is painfully obvious at any given moment.

  10. #30
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    LOL, you guys and your open minds.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

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