User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 166

  1. #41
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Ummm...so in your OP you say

    But you don't explain what these languages are, or why there would be such a divide. I have lots of N friends, and I don't overhear them talking to each other in some mystical language that is forbidden to my kind.


    What does that even mean? Can you provide an example of S speak and N speak? Please tell me it's not "gee the sky is blue today" vs "blah blah blah metaphysics string theory existentialism blah blah"


    So you're talking about conversational topics now, not "style" or "language".(?) Your interchanging use of non-synonymous words is confusing.

    If I'm interpreting your ideas correctly (???????) I think your premise is incorrect (that sensors talk about only things they can immediately see and touch) so any theory based on that would be flawed. I also think you're making another flawed assumption: that sensors and intuitives start from vastly different places (relative to all the other differences that might exist between people: gender, race, age, class, etc etc etc). A third premise that makes no sense to me is that one person must "accommodate" the other, rather than it being a mutual effort towards understanding.
    Yeah, exactly. It's like we're just supposed to assume that there's such a thing as "N speak" or "S speak."

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Often it's just as hard to communicate with other intuitives.

    Two people have to be on the same wavelength as far as subject matter. Often it's not function as much as focus.
    +1000000

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    Sorry to be annoying but I am compelled to point out the irony of the above statements in relation to the subject being discussed.

    Apologies, continue.
    Fufufufu.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  2. #42
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post

    It seems like you've extrapolated some things from that quote that are not textually supported. For instance, how does being "concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real" lead to not speaking about impressions, meaning, or patterns? You can easily see patterns with your eyes. Impressions are sensory. Meaning is okay as long as it's REAL meaning. Something that is actual, instead of pure speculation or theory built on top of theory. You see? It's not a behavior as much as it is a view of the world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post

    [edit:]


    Maybe I'm confused by what Orangey meant here, but it seems to me like s/he is actually demonstrating the very point s/he is trying to negate. (This may or may not be the same point Southern Cross was trying to make.)
    No, she's saying that functions are just thought processes. An S theorizes based on facts. We understand theory and "N stuff", but not theory based on theory. And S develops theory through existing facts. An N develops facts through theory. Either way, you can't deny one for the other.

    I don't think there's much to accommodate here. There's nothing more profound or misunderstood about one process or another.

    (Edit: Well, obviously human minds are much more complicated than the above, but these differences alone still shouldn't cause a huge communication barrier.)
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  3. #43
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    i feel like there are so many things that make it hard to communicate with someone that have more of an impact than N/S preference that it's practically a moot point, if it's not a moot point already. for example: language, dialect, cultural background, ethnic background, socioeconomic background, family background, general worldview, time period, location, intention, tone of voice, projection, misinterpretation, body language, even vocalization itself... people always have to mutually accommodate one another to communicate.

    beyond that... i don't really see why it would. language itself is technically an abstract - substituting amalgamations of sounds to stand for senses, objects, conceptualizations. and i think we both have plenty of practice in one anothers' worlds.

  4. #44
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Don't we all have to accommodate? It's not primarily because of S/N though. We take this stuff too seriously. MBTI/enneagram is just pseudo psychology that is fun to to toy with.

  5. #45
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Maybe I'm confused by what Orangey meant here, but it seems to me like s/he is actually demonstrating the very point s/he is trying to negate. (This may or may not be the same point Southern Cross was trying to make.)
    Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. EW took being "concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real" to mean that "S speak" would not consist of impressions, patterns, or meaning (which, if you think about it, would mean that S style communication would consist of no more than things like "look, a tree.") I said that this was an unwarranted conclusion to be drawn from the paragraph that she quoted about "what it is to be a Sensor."

    Why is it unwarranted? Because one may just as easily speak of impressions, patterns, and meaning if they are "concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real" (ugh...redundant) as one would if they were concerned with "new things and what might be possible." And that's because:

    1. Someone who concerns themselves with what is actual or real has impressions, sees patterns, and detects meaning. They're just impressions, patterns, and meanings that they see as having immediate relevance, or as being concretely demonstrable. Being an S or N does not cut one off from certain modalities of thought; it's just the content and focus of those thoughts that are different.

    2. Moreover, being S or N does not cut one off from certain modalities of speech.

    As for Southern Cross's "point" about my comment being ironic, I thought that the irony she was pointing out came from the fact that I, an S, was criticizing EW, an N, for extrapolating meaning beyond the details of the text while at the same time protesting the stated differences between N and S (which I wasn't. I was protesting something much more specific. But I could see how one might not think too hard about it if they just wanted an opportunity to be pithy. Or at least attempt to be pithy, as the case may be.) I'm not seeing the irony in the sentence that you bolded, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    No, she's saying that functions are just thought processes. An S theorizes based on facts. We understand theory and "N stuff", but not theory based on theory. And S develops theory through existing facts. An N develops facts through theory. Either way, you can't deny one for the other.

    I don't think there's much to accommodate here. There's nothing more profound or misunderstood about one process or another.

    (Edit: Well, obviously human minds are much more complicated than the above, but these differences alone still shouldn't cause a huge communication barrier.)
    Yeah, exactly.

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    i feel like there are so many things that make it hard to communicate with someone that have more of an impact than N/S preference that it's practically a moot point, if it's not a moot point already. for example: language, dialect, cultural background, ethnic background, socioeconomic background, family background, general worldview, time period, location, intention, tone of voice, projection, misinterpretation, body language, even vocalization itself... people always have to mutually accommodate one another to communicate.

    beyond that... i don't really see why it would. language itself is technically an abstract - substituting amalgamations of sounds to stand for senses, objects, conceptualizations. and i think we both have plenty of practice in one anothers' worlds.
    +10000

    Quote Originally Posted by Pitseleh View Post
    Don't we all have to accommodate? It's not primarily because of S/N though. We take this stuff too seriously literally.
    Fixed.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  6. #46
    Carerra Lu IZthe411's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    How about 2 S types that talk to each other and leave the experience like

    I'd hate to see someone who is totally S or totally N. I don't think they'd make it back from a morning jog alive.

    I think life calls for a measure of each sensing and intution. What makes people different are preferences and comfort in using the functions. So I think your theory would work on the non-well rounded S types (as you asserted). And it would equally work on an elitist N type who looks down on others if they perceive that people can't keep up with them. But the majority of the people who are middle of the road with S and N, regardless of preference, understand the give and takes of communication.

    And I still feel that there are a lot of N types who fail to understand the sensing functions. I think that a lot of Ns take their earlier experiences and extrapolate that into a worldview without taking a moment to realize that most children have some kind of communication and understanding gap with their family and other authority figures, especially when you factor in things like religion and tradition. There are also N types who aren't tolerant of differences as well.

  7. #47
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    When I first read about the differences between S and N, I was skeptical if they were valid. I figured that everyone was an S. Who doesn't accept facts and data first before trying to draw meaning and theory? I think a lot of self reported N's on this site confused "focus on facts" for "not understanding meaning." Secondly, are probably typing people in their lives who talk about the meaning behind the data to be N's. Someone presenting/accepting data before it's connections is an S. In my opinion, theory without established data is useless theory. Someone presenting meaning and filling it with facts (or creating facts) is an N (in my opinion.) N's can have brilliant "aha" moments by skipping the data and thinking about things that aren't seen. Or they can be completely useless, developing meanings for things that have no meanings. Backing up their meanings with inaccurate data, (or any other flaw that can result from being so focused on theories and patterns) N's that deny that "s language" and "s thinking" are "boring" to them do not understand what an S is.

    (Edit: I'm also thinking of raw N vs. raw S.. as IZ said, there is a spectrum. There's functions, there's other factors. When you mix the two thought processes together, you have a bunch of people who are essentially the same.)
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  8. #48
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IZthe411 View Post
    How about 2 S types that talk to each other and leave the experience like

    I'd hate to see someone who is totally S or totally N. I don't think they'd make it back from a morning jog alive.

    I think life calls for a measure of each sensing and intution. What makes people different are preferences and comfort in using the functions. So I think your theory would work on the non-well rounded S types (as you asserted). And it would equally work on an elitist N type who looks down on others if they perceive that people can't keep up with them. But the majority of the people who are middle of the road with S and N, regardless of preference, understand the give and takes of communication.

    And I still feel that there are a lot of N types who fail to understand the sensing functions. I think that a lot of Ns take their earlier experiences and extrapolate that into a worldview without taking a moment to realize that most children have some kind of communication and understanding gap with their family and other authority figures, especially when you factor in things like religion and tradition. There are also N types who aren't tolerant of differences as well.
    Yea, good example of a poorly developed N developing meaning and then filling it with facts.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  9. #49
    Professional Trickster Esoteric Wench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfboy View Post
    a few points
    2) the idea that school is easier for N types is SUCH a myth (in response to a previous comment somewhere on this thread that I'm too lazy to find) most of school is:
    - go to class
    - read this
    - memorize this
    - do this
    the only edge Ns have is on tests and the little abstract material covered in the course
    I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, Elfboy. There is a huge difference between K-12 education and a classical liberal arts college education. It is well-known that K-12 education tends to be of an S orientation... just like you said about reading and memorizing. (And I've read articles @ how the vast majority of K-12 teachers are Ss.) Whereas a university education at a liberal arts college is primarily N oriented. (And the vast majority of PhD holding liberal arts college professors are N.) Pick your subject... even physics or mathematics for example. When you study these on the university level, you are studying the theory buttressing the rotely memorized calculations you learned in high school. It was when I first entered university that I felt like I was finally around people (viz., professors) that spoke my language. And, this was long before I learned about Jung and typology. So I say unequivocally that a liberal arts university education is strongly N-oriented. And, this is a great place for Ss to strengthen their N functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfboy View Post
    3) it also depends on the environment. in upper class society for instance, it's often the Ss that need to accomodate the Ns
    - you have to be able to hold an intelligent conversation
    - most jobs or occupations that earn large amounts of money require a lot of strategy and abstract thought
    - the upper class usually has more time reflect and take up more abstract interests (the working and middle class are usually busy all day and simply don't have time to do these things)
    Egad, Elfboy! Karl Marx would be turning over in his grave to read this... class struggles and all this statement implies. I don't know exactly what you're referring to here, because I don't think being S or N is reflected in socio-economic class whatsoever. I'm guessing that what you're referring to is that most people born into the highest socio-economic classes have the benefit of a university education. (See point above.)

    I imagine you envision erudite conversations in the East Hamptons where people are sipping on liqueurs after formal dinner parties and speaking in William F. Buckley kind of accents. Here again, I proffer that this N-kind of banter is not a function of class but more a function of mucho higher learning... which admittedly is stressed more in higher socio-economic classes. But only 20% of the rich are Ns... just like 20% of the poor.

    (As an aside, I met a homeless, African-American INFJ a few months back. He could talk to me about philosophy and politics for days on end. It was fascinating to speak with him while standing outside his homeless shelter.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfboy View Post
    PS: more than Ns accomodating Ss, I think a far more prominent and less subtle trend is Ps having to accomodate Js
    I'm not gonna disagree with you here. Those darn Js. If they had their way, if a party was said to start at 7:00 pm, we would all be there at 6:59 pm sharp. Ha ha!

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Regarding the grad school, I think that a lot of this is native to S. Collecting facts first, and secondly pulling them together and drawing conclusions. That is the S process. As long as the theory has application to the world, and starts with facts first, it is not a problem to think in those terms. I think that N's would have a better time in classes such as philosophy, (since there is a lot of guesswork there. And to me, it is a subject where facts are irrelevant, and theory comes first.) There are plenty of programs that would be very applicable to the S thought process.
    Shortnsweet, I wrote my above answer to Elfboy before reading your response. I completely agree with you and this is something I hadn't thought of before you wrote this. Research in many fields taught in college with its emphasis on collecting data would very much be in the realm of S-ness. Thanks for pointing this out. I also agree with you that many subjects... and varying approaches within subjects are going to focus on a theory first orientation. This would be of much more interest to Ns.
    ENFP with kick*ss Te | 7w8 so | ♀

  10. #50
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Esoteric Wench View Post
    I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you here, Elfboy. There is a huge difference between K-12 education and a classical liberal arts college education. It is well-known that K-12 education tends to be of an S orientation... just like you said about reading and memorizing. (And I've read articles @ how the vast majority of K-12 teachers are Ss.) Whereas a university education at a liberal arts college is primarily N oriented. (And the vast majority of PhD holding liberal arts college professors are N.) Pick your subject... even physics or mathematics for example. When you study these on the university level, you are studying the theory buttressing the rotely memorized calculations you learned in high school. It was when I first entered university that I felt like I was finally around people (viz., professors) that spoke my language. And, this was long before I learned about Jung and typology. So I say unequivocally that a liberal arts university education is strongly N-oriented. And, this is a great place for Ss to strengthen their N functions.



    Egad, Elfboy! Karl Marx would be turning over in his grave to read this... class struggles and all this statement implies. I don't know exactly what you're referring to here, because I don't think being S or N is reflected in socio-economic class whatsoever. I'm guessing that what you're referring to is that most people born into the highest socio-economic classes have the benefit of a university education. (See point above.)

    I imagine you envision erudite conversations in the East Hamptons where people are sipping on liqueurs after formal dinner parties and speaking in William F. Buckley kind of accents. Here again, I proffer that this N-kind of banter is not a function of class but more a function of mucho higher learning... which admittedly is stressed more in higher socio-economic classes. But only 20% of the rich are Ns... just like 20% of the poor.

    (As an aside, I met a homeless, African-American INFJ a few months back. He could talk to me about philosophy and politics for days on end. It was fascinating to speak with him while standing outside his homeless shelter.)



    I'm not gonna disagree with you here. Those darn Js. If they had their way, if a party was said to start at 7:00 pm, we would all be there at 6:59 pm sharp. Ha ha!



    Shortnsweet, I wrote my above answer to Elfboy before reading your response. I completely agree with you and this is something I hadn't thought of before you wrote this. Research in many fields taught in college with its emphasis on collecting data would very much be in the realm of S-ness. Thanks for pointing this out. I also agree with you that many subjects... and varying approaches within subjects are going to focus on a theory first orientation. This would be of much more interest to Ns.

    (Thank you. Also, your William F Buckley/high class statement made me laugh.)

    Though, I think few would argue that the K through 12 education "speaks their language" academically. I found most of those years boring and useless. The even more boring and useless side of it was that I was spending time skipping grades in classes that were never going to be applicable to my life anyways. I don't think that going to University necessarily implied that everyone around you suddenly had to "speak N." For me, college level courses have always been more interesting because low and behold, they apply to my job and things that I need to know. (And I'm an S, so.. that makes sense.) There are still a ton of facts behind the conclusions that I draw at school and on the job. I still don't have to rely on guesswork. Facts are necessary before indulging in any kind of theory or hunch. Higher education is simply more interesting and applicable than the primary years (and early college.) That's why you liked it.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

Similar Threads

  1. Does this site attract more than the average ASD poster?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-03-2017, 06:01 PM
  2. [INTP] Does he like me as a friend or more than a friend?
    By meg11 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-15-2015, 02:33 PM
  3. Does ESFPs generally have more Fe than ENFPs?
    By Elemental Chaos in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2010, 10:25 AM
  4. Do sensors enjoy music more than the intuitive?
    By swordpath in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 03-10-2009, 02:44 PM
  5. Which Stephen King books are worth reading more than once?
    By Totenkindly in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 01-26-2008, 07:15 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