User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 37

  1. #21
    Reptilian Snuggletron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    10
    Posts
    2,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I blame the few wasted teenage years with my brain on LSD, coke, meth, weed, shrooms. Doors of Perception, yo. Or perhaps being a well traveled and well rounded military brat growing up. Gives the illusion of intuition. Or maybe it's that I'm a Fi/Ne type with a dad who was desperate to make me play sports and who insisted I not come home unless I beat the shit out of neighborhood bullies.

    Seriously, I really don't know why I can see myself in different types. Or why some others can't. MBTI is a little confining. That's all I can say.
    maybe you're insane and can't be typed. Sir, may I assist you in recovering all of your malfunctioning brain pieces?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Sir, are you implying that I am a scoundrel?? Why, if you continue spreading your poxing ideas upon this fair land then I shall turn you in to the City Watch!
    I think I just copied your "sir" sentence structure to reply to Kdude. Does this mean we are both scoundrels? Sir? Sir??

    Ancient weapons and hokey religions are no match for a good blaster at your side.

  2. #22
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snuggletron View Post
    maybe you're insane and can't be typed.
    I'm not insane. I think I'm just an ISP, who believes in doing the right thing, and doesn't have Asperger's in the emotional department. I mistook it for Fi. That, or I am Fi.. but can make logical deductions, don't skip across fields with a kite, and not in the business of giving people free handjobs. Either/or.

  3. #23
    Reptilian Snuggletron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    10
    Posts
    2,233

    Default

    so you're link?

    <----

  4. #24
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    I read it, very interesting. A psychologist friend of mine who normally dismisses all the personality stuff got REALLY interested of it and found the results awesome.

    My points of interest:
    The primarly Te people had efficient brains, meaning that they didn't use parts of the brain not needed for a task.
    Calculations could be perfromed fast either with using just a few parts of the brain, or many.
    The one who was slow and got the math questions wrong used many parts of the brain, some with full activation, others with mediocre activation.

    I think that first point explains a crucial difference between me and some of the folks I've been observing. People who understand technical and mathematical subjects wrong often seem to make all kinds of connections between subject matter and real life.. they attach all kinds of humane meanings to numbers, concepts and operations where there aren't any. Seems like superior math skills don't come from letting your brain use all it's parts at a one time. It seems like the key is silencing the unneeded parts.

    I've sometimes thought of people who say "everything's connected to everything". Well. I've always thought that many things are connected to many things, but some things can be proven to be independent, i.e. they are not connected.

    Personally I feel I like to make the good connections, not all the connections. I dislike people who barely make any connections at all, though.

    The introvert's brain on idle mode.. they're using more of their brain when doing NOTHING than I'm probably using when I'm doing some technical job of mine WELL. No wonder they're irritated over almost any stimulus.

    Nice study there.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #25
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    I read it, very interesting. A psychologist friend of mine who normally dismisses all the personality stuff got REALLY interested of it and found the results awesome.
    I agree it's fascinating. Makes me wish there were more data available, and the number of subjects was high enough to be significant. Nardi says he has more data now, and is going to be writing a book in the spring (who knows when it will be published, of course).

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    My points of interest:
    The primarly Te people had efficient brains, meaning that they didn't use parts of the brain not needed for a task.
    You'll note that three sample levels of activity were given. "Fast, efficient and correct," "slow, efficient and wrong," and "fast, inefficient and correct." So, whether being efficient at thinking is good or bad remains to be seen, since it's shown for both the right and wrong answers. It raises the question if "slow, efficient and wrong" could have found an alternate route to the correct answer if that person has been less efficient and devoted more mental resources to the task.

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    Calculations could be perfromed fast either with using just a few parts of the brain, or many.
    The one who was slow and got the math questions wrong used many parts of the brain, some with full activation, others with mediocre activation.
    Actually, slow and wrong is labeled as "efficient." Plus, slow and wrong used two brain regions at a lower intensity... so whether that's net less brain activation than "fast, efficient and right" seems debatable. Based on the statement about "Two of these subjects voluntarily reported that they had 'efficient thinking.' And so they did! Even when they got tasks wrong." It sounds like the two "efficients" could both be Te doms. Still, it's unclear since Nardi doesn't spell it out.

    I know that subjectively I sometimes get frustrated with my ESTJ relatives, because just getting them to step back and reconsider can be a major hurdle. I wonder if they are so "efficient" that they discount things before truly evaluating them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    I think that first point explains a crucial difference between me and some of the folks I've been observing. People who understand technical and mathematical subjects wrong often seem to make all kinds of connections between subject matter and real life.. they attach all kinds of humane meanings to numbers, concepts and operations where there aren't any. Seems like superior math skills don't come from letting your brain use all it's parts at a one time. It seems like the key is silencing the unneeded parts.
    I would say it's more like engaging the correct parts or using alternate means successfully. You'll note that the "inefficient" fast and right math answerer engaged many parts of the brain, but was still fast and right. Seems like the inefficient (but fast and correct) person didn't engage p3 (elsewhere labeled as "identify objects") like the efficient and correct person did, and instead used a host of other brain regions to get the correct answer. Again, not enough information too do more than make wild conjectures.

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    The introvert's brain on idle mode.. they're using more of their brain when doing NOTHING than I'm probably using when I'm doing some technical job of mine WELL. No wonder they're irritated over almost any stimulus.
    Well, it's long been known that introverts require less external input to perform well on tasks. For example, I cannot do anything requiring real concentration with music (especially music with lyrics) or the TV on. However, I know extraverts that absolutely need background music or the TV on in order to stay stimulated enough to focus on their current task. Conversely, an introvert will hit a point of overstimulation long before an extravert. Whether one is "better" or not is debatable... partially depends on the individual managing his or her environment for optimal performance.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Lily flower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    2
    Posts
    931

    Default

    •Te-doms and Ti-doms were more "mentally efficient." That is, there brains were minimally activated much of the time, unless interesting analysis was called for.

    Well, when my brain is turned off, I don't call it "mentally efficient," and I don't think that is what I would call it for other people either.

  7. #27
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    The very first task every subject does is a series of simple exercises to achieve a ‘blank’EEG:
    -“Close your eyes, relax, breath, clear your mind.” Works well, my mind is more concentrated on breathing.
    -“Pick a point ahead of you in your field of view and stare it for as long as you can.” Works pretty good too. My mind is concentrated on that one point.
    -“Draw one circle repetitively over and over.” This one annoys me since the pen/pencil makes noise...since I'm drawing it repeatedly... good way to take anger out though.
    -“Close your eyes, pick a simple word and repeat it to yourself for as long as you can.” This one is kind of annoying also. It is like telling yourself that you aren't going to get mad, but you get mad anyways.
    Something like an XXXP?

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Well, it's long been known that introverts require less external input to perform well on tasks. For example, I cannot do anything requiring real concentration with music (especially music with lyrics) or the TV on. However, I know extraverts that absolutely need background music or the TV on in order to stay stimulated enough to focus on their current task. Conversely, an introvert will hit a point of overstimulation long before an extravert. Whether one is "better" or not is debatable... partially depends on the individual managing his or her environment for optimal performance.
    It is probably why I HATE having a clock that makes any type of ticking noise in my room. It makes it really hard for me to fall asleep because my mind is on that annoying ticking sound.

    I do notice that music tends to quiet my mind (it has to be "slow" though) so that I do not think of anything in particular. However, like you, I tend to turn off music when it is counter-productive and I need to concentrate on something.

    Would be better with more of the other types to test.

  8. #28
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lily flower View Post
    •Te-doms and Ti-doms were more "mentally efficient." That is, there brains were minimally activated much of the time, unless interesting analysis was called for.

    Well, when my brain is turned off, I don't call it "mentally efficient," and I don't think that is what I would call it for other people either.
    That's how it's technically defined in physics (i.e. a lower amount of energy will be expended in order to perform the same task), though, so what you personally think cannot be considered terribly relevant in a scientific study.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  9. #29
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,896

    Default

    Ni associated activities seem to be in the wrong place according to Lenore (she says on left side. Nardi says right side

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  10. #30
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Ni associated activities seem to be in the wrong place according to Lenore (she says on left side. Nardi says right side
    I'm with Nardi on that one...

    Btw, his cognitive processes test on that website is the best I've ever taken...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-23-2013, 07:04 AM
  2. [INFJ] INFJs: What Is Your Read On This?
    By Lenian in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-02-2011, 11:34 AM
  3. Why is your country of type X?
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-02-2009, 04:20 AM
  4. [SJ] SJs, what is your take on Twilight?
    By FallaciaSonata in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 09-20-2009, 07:14 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