User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 346

  1. #71
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace_ View Post
    I love these threads. Full of huge retards.
    fixed

  2. #72
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Taken from here...

    Introverted Intuition



    ^See, I get this feeling too, a lot, I dunno if it's because of my Fi, or that I also have quite a bit of Ni.

    But the fact remains, as humans we are fallible.

    It is true in that it is possible for someone to have some capacity to know things despite having proof, or knowing why they know.

    Interestingly enough, the aforementioned description of Ni is something I can identify with a lot, however, I will hold the belief in my head, or often vocalize it, and whaddya know, what I just knew, was actually right.

    Let it be known that this "power" or "gift" of mine works best with people, I am and have always been a ridiculously good judge of a person's character, from a brief encounter I can and do conjure a lot of information about this person, I think there is something to it though, perhaps I have an exceptionally good processor/decoder when it comes to non-verbal human communication.

    This also happens in other situations, where I just know something before I have "real" evidence for knowing it.

    If one studies intuition outside of typological/MBTI definitions this makes a lot of sense.

    But, I do believe that there is a transcendent reality that no one has the capacity to completely know and understand.

    Also, I have been wrong about people before, very wrong, (whenever this happens I become fascinated with the subject, they are "special" and need extra attention, they don't fit any of my preconceived molds/models of human behavior, I love when this happens ) though, I'd say over 90% of the time I tend to be right about someone, i.e. I know when someone is a shit bag, when they are lying, when they are sincere, when they are intelligent, when they are sensitive, etc.

    God, I lost my train of thought.

    Anyhow, sometimes one just knows, and sometimes one is wrong.

    When I was with my ISTP it took forever until he finally conceded that I had this gift, he needed evidence, and finally I turned a hardcore skeptic into a believer, (as in, he believed I was "exceptionally talented" in this arena).

    But, it was comforting and agitating at the same time to have to prove my "irrational" beliefs to a Ti dom, it definitely made my head explode on occasion, but it certainly sharpened my ability to explain what I once thought was the unexplainable.

    Sorry, I forgot where I was going with this.

    ^Written at 12:49pm Pacific time

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    I just found something pretty fucking rad, for all you NFs out there.



    Intuitive abilities were quantitatively tested at Yale University in the 1970s. While studying nonverbal communication, researchers noted that some subjects were able to read nonverbal facial cues before reinforcement occurred.[20] In employing a similar design, they noted that highly intuitive subjects made decisions quickly but could not identify their rationale. Their level of accuracy, however, did not differ from that of nonintuitive subjects.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(knowledge)

    (I swear on everything I value that I did not come across this tidbit of information prior to making my previous posts.)

    ^ Found around 2:15 pm.

    `
    '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. #73
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Bologna, never seen you much before, and as hilarious as I thought your comment about Sim's "awards" was, since then, based on all of your posts I've seen, you've come to seem like someone who's just disgruntled.

  4. #74
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    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.
    You just told me that what I said was true, meaning that breadth can be found in introversion and depth can be found in extraversion. Yet you persist in your previous stance prior to that because you hold my statement captive as though you can't accept it.

    The fact is that having depth means that you plunge the innards or deepness of a thing, which is quite possible in referring to external input (which is what extraversion is). Having breadth means that you can examine a broader range of input, which is also quite possible when you are referring to a more intrinsic or internal input.




    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.
    What a crock of shit.

    The accuracy of a statement is entirely contingent upon reasoning, whether you're referring to internal or external data.

    What do you mean by "precision"? Certainly, one can formulate an idea in one's head until it is pristine and then communicate it with perfect clarity. The subjective bounds of another's' interpretation is what prevents that clarity from having an identical effect in their own psyche.

    Note that undervaluing a perspective may not be the cause of introversion, but it may just be that's your perspective isn't correct.

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


    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.
    I've already addressed the reasoning you have here. All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.

  5. #75
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    You just told me that what I said was true, meaning that breadth can be found in introversion and depth can be found in extraversion. Yet you persist in your previous stance prior to that because you hold my statement captive as though you can't accept it.

    The fact is that having depth means that you plunge the innards or deepness of a thing, which is quite possible in referring to external input (which is what extraversion is). Having breadth means that you can examine a broader range of input, which is also quite possible when you are referring to a more intrinsic or internal input.






    What a crock of shit.

    The accuracy of a statement is entirely contingent upon reasoning, whether you're referring to internal or external data.

    What do you mean by "precision"? Certainly, one can formulate an idea in one's head until it is pristine and then communicate it with perfect clarity. The subjective bounds of another's' interpretation is what prevents that clarity from having an identical effect in their own psyche.

    Note that undervaluation a perspective may not be the cause of introversion, but it may just be that's your perspective isn't correct.



    Cute.




    I've already addressed the reasoning you have here. All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
    Damn good post.



    My brain is starting to hurt, but daaaayum good post.

    I wonder what sim is gonna have to say to your valid points.

    I'm excited, I love intellectual drama!!!

    `
    '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

  6. #76
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Highlander!

    You started this!!!


  7. #77
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Note that undervaluing a perspective may not be the cause of introversion, but it may just be that's your perspective isn't correct.

    All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
    These were my exact two sentiments when I read his response to your post.


  8. #78
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Bologna, never seen you much before, and as hilarious as I thought your comment about Sim's "awards" was, since then, based on all of your posts I've seen, you've come to seem like someone who's just disgruntled.
    You're right; you've rightfully called out on one of my blind spots with respect to this thread, which was fueled by frustration. My comment was uncalled for. It was a pretty harsh judgment. And, yeah, for that I totally apologize.

    I'm not about to get personal about my own motivations here, but it's just sad that many, many posts are simply talking past one another.


    The sentiments that I'm inclined to agree with are those like these:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    There are those who share knowledge to help others, and those who use it to push their own agenda.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
    And, because of that, I really want to understand what we're all actually trying to do in these discussions. Share or spread our own views? Come to a better understanding of typology systems? Share information in a meaningful way? Popcorn-level discussion? Nothing in particular (which, well, is also fine)?

    If we're looking to develop a good, solid foundation for all of this typology stuff, I think we'd all be well-served to try to figure out where exactly it is that we as individuals are coming from. I think that, sort of ironically, we'd also fare better if we left others' individual types out of the discussion, because they're majorly clouding things up. Everyone is completely responsible for evaluating their own perspective.

  9. #79
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas
    Is This because he is using his Ti system to describe Ni....which would be easier for you to innately understand given your tert Ti? (please assume no insult at all!!!! I just think of this comparison as I find INTJs much easier to understand due to my tert Te than INTPs for instance, and I will find their descriptions resonate more strongly as being closer to my perception of a situation)
    Maybe; I'm not sure. I'll let you be the judge of that. I just know the description resonated.

    (I'm really not a big fan, at all, of breaking things down into functions though; I find the process tedious and often-times counterproductive in the end, for various reasons I don't want to derail about in here. Sorry. ]

    Quote Originally Posted by SillySapienne View Post
    Taken from here...

    Introverted Intuition Ni is a way of knowing (or at least thinking you know) that bypasses reason, facts, evidence, the expected or intended interpretations of signs, or anything you can point to, simply giving you an awareness or belief that seems indisputably true to you, period. You can't tell by introspection how you got this idea. There is no thought process. There is only tuning into this form of awareness and just knowing.
    In contrast, I find these sorts of definitions of Ni retarded. No offense. I mean, I don't know if the creator of said definition is trying to isolate Ni and only Ni (presumably so? And failing to really get at what it IS.. or perhaps it as an Ni definition is more applicable/pertinent as a tertiary function or beyond?), but it's not like I utilize Ni is some sort of vacuum where I'm just going off of hunches 24/7. That's dumb. I was trying to describe this to, I think Eric B once in another thread a long while ago, and I think the big FAIL when it comes to resorting to this sort of definition is that it then leaves people thinking dom-Ni's are having unexplainable visions their entire lives, and frankly that makes no sense as a dominant process. These thoughts are derived somehow, and the user can undoubtably, if he so desired, describe the [lengthy] process as to how he arrived at said conclusion (even if in his mind it isn't necessarily 'lengthy', as much could happen simultaneously, it's just there are so many strands/threads that would need to be explained that it would become lengthy). Typically though that would take so much time so as to be considered tiresome by said dom-Ni (It would take effort, and the elements leaned upon to draw conclusion, or at very least the weight put into said elements, might seem screwy to others, depending), thus the resultant statements appear more nebulous because he isn't also outlining the paragraphs or pages or books of other information/ideas/concepts/patterns in his brain used to derive that conclusion.

    ------------
    In the end, though, this is why mbti theory is rather nebulous as a system - certain descriptions resonate with some, others not at all. I happened to really relate to the description in the OP, and find Ni descriptions such as the one SillySapienne posted utterly lacking; but presumably there are Ni-doms who do relate to such things.
    "...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

  10. #80
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    You're right; you've rightfully called out on one of my blind spots with respect to this thread, which was fueled by frustration. My comment was uncalled for. It was a pretty harsh judgment. And, yeah, for that I totally apologize.

    I'm not about to get personal about my own motivations here, but it's just sad that many, many posts are simply talking past one another.

    The sentiments that I'm inclined to agree with are those like these:

    And, because of that, I really want to understand what we're all actually trying to do in these discussions. Share or spread our own views? Come to a better understanding of typology systems? Share information in a meaningful way? Popcorn-level discussion? Nothing in particular (which, well, is also fine)?

    If we're looking to develop a good, solid foundation for all of this typology stuff, I think we'd all be well-served to try to figure out where exactly it is that we as individuals are coming from. I think that, sort of ironically, we'd also fare better if we left others' individual types out of the discussion, because they're majorly clouding things up. Everyone is completely responsible for evaluating their own perspective.
    Thank you for the thoughtful post.

    While I agree with much of what you said and with the sentiments in the posts you quoted, I think it's important to keep in mind that people share and learn in different ways; for some people, including myself, Silly, and probably many others, that discussion was thoroughly enjoyable.

    That's why we engage in those type of discussions.

    It might not be quite your cup of tea, but it might be others'.


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