User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 346

  1. #41
    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
    Translation: I'm perennially pissed off at Ni doms and auxs for their ability to see things from many perspectives, and not having ever experienced Ni, I don't really know whether it's true, but I know that it bothers me when they put me down and say I'm not seeing the whole picture.

    /truth
    Actually I think the translation is more like, "It bothers me that NTJs (and really it's just NTJs here, I find that NFJs are generally not half as arrogant) presume that they see the whole picture when in reality no one sees the whole picture because no one sees every perspective."

    Of course, a lot of NTJs are smart enough to recognize the limitations on the powers of their own Ni, like say, Kalach (who I still think is one of the smartest posters on the whole forum.) Note how he doesn't run around claiming that he's good at all four NT functions--his perception is strong enough to recognize that it has blind spots (unlike yours.)

    It's just some of you that delude yourselves into believing Ni somehow magically encompasses all other functions and gives you a complete view of everything. (Your poor comprehension of Ne/Ti reveals otherwise, though.)


    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    /truth
    It's this kind of self-important bullshit that really gets on my nerves. This one word says it all, in regards to NTJ arrogance. You think you're the only one clever/perceptive enough to see "the real truth" and that everyone else has only fragmented perceptions of "the real truth" without access to Ni.

    You're gonna need to accept that Ni is not any better (or worse) than any other functional perspective in order to get over this.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #42
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Translation: I'm perennially pissed off at Ni doms and auxs for their ability to see things from many perspectives, and not having ever experienced Ni, I don't really know whether it's true, but I do know that it bothers me when they put me down and say I'm not seeing the whole picture.

    /truth
    Grrr, this is hard to accept, considering how Ne is always lending itself to see different patterns, perspectives, connections.

    Ni is inherently subjective, whereas Ne is well, it's still subjective but much less so.

    This is where I believe the root of the cause lies, the cause being Ni doms to truly believe that their perception/s of reality are the truest/realist.
    `
    '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

  3. #43
    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
    Grrr, this is hard to accept, considering how Ne is always lending itself to see different patterns, perspectives, connections.

    Ni is inherently subjective, whereas Ne is well, it's still subjective but much less so.

    This is where I believe the root of the cause lies, the cause being Ni doms to truly believe that their perception/s of reality are the truest/realist.
    +1, great post

    Ne is actually objective, because it's focused on the object, not the self. Ne's objectivity balances Ti's subjectivity, and the same goes for Te and Ni, or any combination of I+E functions.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    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?
    Everything you say here is absolutely true...from an introverted perspective. The idea is to accept that there are situations where breadth is preferable to depth, rather than always letting introversion dominate your perspective/assuming that depth is always the best approach.

    Obviously it goes both ways; if we always choose extroversion then we'll neglect depth, which is equally bad.

    The problem is that if we insist on complete depth at all times, it becomes impossible to communicate our ideas meaningfully to others because they're so inseparable from our own subjective perspectives. Balance is the goal.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    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.
    Actually it's both. Extroversion, by nature, sacrifices depth and specificity in order to achieve more practicality through broader applicability. "Accuracy of a statement depends upon the reasoning behind a statement" = introverted perspective. That's certainly true, but when we want to take an idea and apply it to a wider range of external situations, moving it outside the bounds of our own subjective interpretation requires the sacrifice of a certain degree of precision. That is the nature of extroversion, and failing to account for the value in this perspective is the #1 mistake I constantly see from all the introverts I discuss typology with on the internet.

    Read up on extroversion vs. introversion and breadth vs. depth plz, kthx.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    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.
    I'm not dismissing it. It's a valid point; it's just that it only takes one side of the coin into account. There are times when introversion's depth is clearly preferable, and other times when extroversion's breadth is.

    And uh, coming from an introverted person implies that an idea is influenced most heavily by an introverted perspective (in most cases), as the introvert's dominant perspective is, by definition, an introverted one.

    The same applies to extroverts; we have a natural tendency (at least in regards to our dominant process) to choose breadth over depth, and we have to work on the auxiliary to balance that out.

    I am referring to those criticisms as "introverted" because I feel that they fail to take into account the value of extroversion/breadth and thus continually insist that no precision can or should ever be sacrificed for the sake of broader applicability.

    The Ti+Ni ISTP from Per-C that I mentioned is largely against inductive reasoning. You can think of introversion as deductive (because it is precise, complete, and certain) and extroversion as inductive (because it sacrifices precision/completeness in favor of wider applicability.) I wrote a post about inferring the types of others based on their behaviors; he found this completely unacceptable as it required use of inductive reasoning.

    He said something to the effect of, "Guessing is not certainty." That's certainly a valid point--the problem is, it's a purely introverted perspective that doesn't take into account the relative value of breadth. The idea is to get to a point where we recognize that breadth and depth are equally important, and that which is preferable is context-dependent.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #44
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Actually I think the translation is more like, "It bothers me that NTJs (and really it's just NTJs here, I find that NFJs are generally not half as arrogant) presume that they see the whole picture when in reality no one sees the whole picture because no one sees every perspective."

    Of course, a lot of NTJs are smart enough to recognize the limitations on the powers of their own Ni, like say, Kalach (who I still think is one of the smartest posters on the whole forum.) Note how he doesn't run around claiming that he's good at all four NT functions--his perception is strong enough to recognize that it has blind spots (unlike yours.)

    It's just some of you that delude yourselves into believing Ni somehow magically encompasses all other functions and gives you a complete view of everything. (Your poor comprehension of Ne/Ti reveals otherwise, though.)




    It's this kind of self-important bullshit that really gets on my nerves. This one word says it all, in regards to NTJ arrogance. You think you're the only one clever/perceptive enough to see "the real truth" and that everyone else has only fragmented perceptions of "the real truth" without access to Ni.

    ****You're gonna need to accept that Ni is not any better (or worse) than any other functional perspective in order to get over this***.
    I agree wholeheartedly with the bolded statements.

    `
    '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

  5. #45
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Actually I think the translation is more like, "It bothers me that NTJs (and really it's just NTJs here, I find that NFJs are generally not half as arrogant) presume that they see the whole picture when in reality no one sees the whole picture because no one sees every perspective."

    Of course, a lot of NTJs are smart enough to recognize the limitations on the powers of their own Ni, like say, Kalach (who I still think is one of the smartest posters on the whole forum.) Note how he doesn't run around claiming that he's good at all four NT functions--his perception is strong enough to recognize that it has blind spots (unlike yours.)
    Sim, I didn't respond to your post from last night cuz Silly and I were out with friends and we woke up hungover this morning, but this little nugget is hilarious.

    It seems that the inaccuracy of your writing is only matched by the inaccuracy of your reading, cuz if you look at what I've said about my usage of Ne and Ti, I've said it's spotty at best, and shows up intermittently and largely out of my control in certain situations as my shadow ENTP.

    Keep harping on this deluded point, though.

    Whatever you need to do to feel you're right.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It's just some of you that delude yourselves into believing Ni somehow magically encompasses all other functions and gives you a complete view of everything.
    Your problem here is that you take it too far, thus setting up a straw man, which is all you can really defeat in this argument.

    See, a good Ni user (not a crackpot, bottom-of-the-barrel conspiracy theorist) has good reason for making a claim, a lesser claim, but a claim nonetheless, that resembles what you have written.

    There is a reason for it.

    It is what Ni does.

    It looks at the underlying assumptions of different perspectives, so that it understands why those perspective see things the way they do.

    Then it looks at another perspective on the same topic, and does the same thing to it.

    And another.

    And another.

    And another.

    It then synthesizes these disparate perspectives to come to a more global, encompassing view.

    Now that view is not necessarily ALL encompassing, as new information can always be presented to the Ni-user, which he/she will listen to, consider, come to understand its underlying assumptions, and, after having accomplished these tasks, incorporate into the framework.

    As such, there is a reason why Ni doms, the people whose primary and continuous process is doing exactly the above, who are making the claim that others are not seeing the issue at hand from all the necessary, important perspectives, and are thus missing out on a significant amount of the material required to properly understand the subject at hand, are perfectly sensible in saying so: more than any other function, the purpose of Ni is to look at a subject from as many possible perspectives in order to most accurately comprehend its essence.

    Now, to say that Ni-doms are all-seeing, all-knowing on all subjects is ludicrous, and it's the straw man you build up to try and tear Ni down.

    /truth

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    (Your poor comprehension of Ne/Ti reveals otherwise, though.)
    Please, provide me evidence other than your own opinion that I have a poor understanding of Ne/Ti, as, after making this claim for the 50th time, you've still never provided a single piece of evidence or argument other than "this is what simulatedworld thinks".

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It's this kind of self-important bullshit that really gets on my nerves. This one word says it all, in regards to NTJ arrogance. You think you're the only one clever/perceptive enough to see "the real truth" and that everyone else has only fragmented perceptions of "the real truth" without access to Ni.

    You're gonna need to accept that Ni is not any better (or worse) than any other functional perspective in order to get over this.

  6. #46
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    The plot thickens.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



  7. #47
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post

    Ne is actually objective, because it's focused on the object, not the self. Ne's objectivity balances Ti's subjectivity, and the same goes for Te and Ni, or any combination of I+E functions.
    Absolutely.

    Ne has no focus, no objective, the following functions Ti and, or Fi do, however, Ne itself just takes in information, processes it, and categorizes it, and integrates it into its database.

    Ne used in conjunction with F/Ti however is more focused, Ne consumes, it's an eye, it's just open to what's out there, (although a distinction should be made between Se and Ne, Ne is more presumptuous, i.e. it will see and take leaps between a to g, it is also a more nuanced lens, or rather, a lens that captures nuances, and it's receptive to "things" an Se dom might miss).

    But, as I was saying, my Ne + Fi work together to find patterns specifically with regards to human behavior and the human condition, that's my personal Fi focus/bent.

    It makes perfect sense that all subjective introverted functions need to work as anchors to their dom objective extroverted "focus-less" functions, and in turn that extroverted functions need to act as *reality checks* to their dom subjective introverted functions.

    This makes a balanced individual.

    Fi is my heart, my soul, my guide, but I wouldn't even be able to acquire my Fi model if I did not have an Ne means of extracting pertinent data.

    Someone who is all Ne with no Ti or Fi to stabilize it is a humorous, pattern processing schizo, who probably would suffer from apophenia.

    Someone who is all Ni with no Te or Fe to stabilize it would think they were God, or the messiah, or something to that effect.

    Sorry for the long post.

    `
    '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

  8. #48
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Grrr, this is hard to accept, considering how Ne is always lending itself to see different patterns, perspectives, connections.

    Ni is inherently subjective, whereas Ne is well, it's still subjective but much less so.

    This is where I believe the root of the cause lies, the cause being Ni doms to truly believe that their perception/s of reality are the truest/realist.
    See my edit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Translation: I'm perennially pissed off at Ni doms and auxs for their ability to see things from an encompassing perspective that incorporates as many disparate perspectives as possible, and not having ever experienced Ni, I don't really know whether it's true that they do this, but I do know that it bothers me when they put me down and say I'm not seeing the whole picture.

    /truth

  9. #49
    Senior Member Ace_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    TNT
    Posts
    170

    Default

    I love these threads. Full of philosophers.

  10. #50
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Absolutely.

    Ne has no focus
    This I can agree with.


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