• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Fe Fakeness

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
Ne is not an "anchoring" function, it is Pe and thus an exploring function... unless you consider it anchoring to highlight and expose the full range of possibilities in a given situation.

Then again, I could also say that Ne is connective and Ni is selective. Which is a kind of opposite flow of your pair above. Ne is finding commonality between two things, Ni is distinguishing between them.

We are in agreement.

You are using the correct Jungian terminalogy and I was using my Ni. Ni doesn't have a vocabulary, I make up words.

Connective and exploring in my mind is very similar to divergent.
Ni distinguishing means it lands on the "correct" one, it discards possibilities very quickly, hence it converges.

I'll bow out now because I see language and precision is going to continue be an issue and the a Ne/Ni and Te/Ti divide here is very strong. There isn't a single Ni, Te or Te Ni in this thread with me.

You guys are more skilled and adept at the intricacies of the theory. I can see that clearly, so me trying to pretend I'm on the same level as you is ludicrous and I won't go there.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
We are in agreement.

You are using the correct Jungian terminalogy and I was using my Ni. Ni doesn't have a vocabulary, I make up words.

Connective and exploring in my mind is very similar to divergent.
Ni distinguishing means it lands on the "correct" one, it discards possibilities very quickly, hence it converges.

I'll bow out now because I see language and precision is going to continue be an issue and the Te/Ti divide here is very strong.

You guys are more skilled and adept at the intricacies of the theory. I can see that clearly, so me trying to pretend I'm on the same level as you is ludicrous and I won't go there.

Well, to be clear: I thought we were only talking "theory" in order to have a common language to discuss your point that one particular view of the world was much better than all the others because you knew it was "right."

It wouldn't matter if we weren't using cog function language. I think a worldview that is obsessed with empiricism as the end-all, be-all is erroneous as well. So choose a language and we'll go from there.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
Well, to be clear: I thought we were only talking "theory" in order to have a common language to discuss your point that one particular view of the world was much better than all the others because you knew it was "right."

My world view is not the "best". I have never ever ever ever claimed that and it offends me that you are suggesting that. If I "act" like that, its your perception of my cognitives at work.

I am boring, nihilistic, serious, rational and probably a very bland person compared to the wondorous world view of the NFP's. I truly love the imagination for example of JK Rowling (INFP) I'm currently watching the potter movies with my gf, her Ne is incredible.

The only claim I make, and its not just me, just go see any description of an INTJ, is that the one meagre skill I do have it able to analyse and decode objective reality rather well and efficiently. If you don't want to grant me that then... Ok.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My world view is not the "best". I have never ever ever ever claimed that and it offends me that you are suggesting that. If I "act" like that, its your perception of my cognitives at work.

Hmmm. Well, there must be some sort of language malfunction then, because I'm certainly not the only one who has expressed that opinion when interacting with you. In fact, it seems to be the dominant perception. So if you don't mean it, it would still seem like it's coming out that way to people of various type perspectives.

The only claim I make, and its not just me, just go see any description of an INTJ, is that the one meagre skill I do have it able to analyse and decode objective reality rather well and efficiently. If you don't want to grant me that then... Ok.

lol. You have completely changed your attitude/tone of voice in the last half hour or so.

Yeah, I'll grant you that you have a skill that is useful -- you can analyze and explain rational process.
But you haven't been talking about it on that meager level.

Look, your skills are not my skills, but earlier in my life I went through phase where it was very important for me to "always be rational" so that no one could challenge my opinion and I would know I was always right. I remember arguing with people -- the ex, friends, acquaintances, people online -- about how as an INTP I was naturally "more objective" than they were because I thought through everything, analyzed it, understood the principles, didn't just make decisions from emotion or instinct but checked everything. It wasn't that I didn't have a point about INTP strengths, but that (1) I equated the INTP perspective with the way that EVERYONE should view and operate within the world, it was the ideal they always needed to live up to, and (2) I didn't properly recognize that my skills would not work within some key areas of life importance and that other skills would.

Later, after I had had a change of heart and a realignment of my thinking (due to uncovering some inadequacies of my view), even my INTP best friend told me I had been insufferable and he was glad I had gotten my head out of my ass. I didn't have much to say about it at that point but to apologize. I also realized that I had been doing exactly what I hated when other perspectives (like Fe) saw my Ti concerns as negligible or irrelevant across the board, because I wasn't living up to THEIR views of what they thought reality was. Despite my vaunted "objectivity," I was the embodiment of the same arrogance i despised in others.

You have a valuable skill, and it will serve you well.
It is one valuable skill among many, and other skills will help you get an even fuller picture of the width and breadth of existence.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
And if you don't believe in objective reality. Try telling that to your child that is about to run across the road into oncoming traffic.

"Oh it's just my opinion that there are cars." "Just my perspective on reality. etc". "Nothing exists outside our minds. etc." "It can't be known conclusively that there is traffic there. etc"

I'm not saying you've gone that far, but that what's Zarathusthra was referring about the slippery slope into solliposism and absurdity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

Reality exists, whether we are alive or not. It's exceptionally arrogant for us Humans to think it even has anything to do with us from a cosmic perspective. We are but a blink of an eye on that scale. Gone forever and not a single trace of our existence will remain.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
You have completely changed your attitude/tone of voice in the last half hour or so.

Of course, I'm not self-unaware. I realized the tone or feeling channel was causing issues so I modified it slightly so as to proceed efficiently. Nothing about the logic of what I was saying has fundamentally changed at all.

I have no issues with that as long as I'm consistently presenting a truthful accurate position. I don't mind expounding on my weaknesses for pages, if it makes people feel better and helps the conversation along.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
Would an INTJ really require support from other people if the truth is on his side?

Nope not really. But not everyone is capable of knowing what is truth. Hence why you have the "delusion of crowds" eg religion.

You also get subjective and objective truth.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
The reason is I have to deal with subjective vs objective truth on a daily basis. Since I am INTJ and my GF is the polar opposite, ESFJ. So if they feel something is true, then it is subjectively true. I can't deny that.

Pointing out that objectively it may not be true, usually doesn't produce a positive result :p
 
0

011235813

Guest
Yes of course. But it just means it's true to that individual.

So given that all sorts of delusions can be subjectively true, what's the value of subjective truth at all? Should we be doing away with it?
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
Nope not really. But not everyone is capable of knowing what is truth.
Explain it to me, please. I have my own pragmatic theory of truth but would be interested to hear the arch-INTJ's conception of it as well.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
So given that all sorts of delusions can be subjectively true, what's the value of subjective truth at all? Should we be doing away with it?

Please no. I would never suggest that. The problem is one of demarcation and boundaries.

I certainly try to not make statements of authority about your domain of expertise, so I would ask the same respect in return. The world would be a much happier place if everyone:

  • Knew thyself
  • Respected the strengths and weaknesses others functions

In other words. If we talking about cars, and you know nothing about cars, then don't pretend you do (I'm also not suggesting you actually are guilty of that, just making a principle statement).

I certainly am no expert in the inner world of feelings. I'm trying to learn as much as a I can but I'm really just a toddler in that regard.
 

five

New member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
141
MBTI Type
ZZZZ
Enneagram
5w6
Explain it to me, please. I have my own pragmatic theory of truth but would be interested to hear the arch-INTJ's conception of it as well.

I've made notes over the years. But not going to post those now. Let me put a little bit of it out there that's fresh in my mind. Being typical NTJ's its scrap and fragments pieced together. Bare in mind Ni jumps a lot, I'm working quickly and not going to make it sound nice and there will be minor errors etc. Try not to get hung up on that. I also go back and re-edit posts and take out errors and improve iteratively. I may do this with this one.

If you really interested I suggest you order a copy of Seeking Wisdom. I haven't read it but I ordered a few copies for our Board of Directors as a parting gift. I skimmed it and there is agreement with my world view. It's just more efficient if I let someone else do the speaking so gifting it makes sense. I am not interested in seeking credit or pride etc.

The "NTJ platform" aside here is my personal view:

The general gist is life is an emergent phenomena. Purpose is key. Why? Why? Why? Started asking that when I was 5 years old. Breaking everything down into fundamentals. Why must I go to school mom? So you can learn. Why must I learn? So you get a job. Why do I need a job? So you can earn money. Why do you need money? So you can eat food and care for yourself. Why do i need to eat food? So that you can live. Why should I live? Thats where I stopped as a teenager. The answer to that is this. I could come up for an evolutionary reason for wanting to live but I wanted something outside the perspective of life itself.

So I framed it as existence only make sense if you existing, hence if you weren't existing it wouldn't make any difference what your view on existing was. Hence it's better to exist from existence's point of view. Existing as a utility function then needs to be maximised. So how do I go about increasing existence? And all goal and subgoals can be created from the ground up. And I started building ground up.

In any equation there may be 100 variables but 1 or 2 variables invariable makes the most different to the answer if its changed. I look for these and store them across all domains. I simply ignore lesser variables, while the NTP's entertain them. That's why we differ in speed and utility and that's why NTP's are more precise, produce more rigorous theory. However their Achilles heel is seeing how these models all fit together and which models are true outside themselves and which are not true, that's where an NTJ is stronger. They are good however at spotting weakness withing the model itself and improving on that.

I look for concepts everywhere, I just soak them up, for example I see Zarathustra made a comment about dog training, I skimmed BF Skinner but just take the core principles and then try apply it. The more I can collect and the faster I can apply them an link it all together the better I am able to model reality. The better I am able to model reality the more successful I will be. I appear to "always be right" to people around me, not because I am, but simply because I know my position and zone of competence and almost always stay within it. I absolutely love being proved wrong, I honestly do. I've trained myself to like the feeling and enjoy it. Because it represents a mystery or a reason why I modelled reality incorrectly. I then need to go update the model or perhaps revisit assumptions or relook at the inputs.

I combine everything into a single model of reality. I don't see it as disconnected models. Everything flows from evolutionary and emergent perspectives our behaviors, our biases, our delusions or perceptions our very existence etc.

NTJ is a convergent platform. This means that our views are shared amongst NTJ's very roughly, there will be differences but they get ironed out as the platform is objective reality and especially if the NTJ's. And that exists outside our minds. So when I pick up a book written by an INTJ, eg Munger or Tony Hsieh, Sun Tsu, Rand (if we ignore the strong childish Fi) or Nietzsche everything just clicks.

Disclaimer this is more a personal post. I'm not arguing for or against any positions. Just sharing my views as per Nicodemus request and up the reader to make of it what they will.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I absolutely love being proved wrong, I honestly do.

Then our dialogue must have been very satisfying to you.

Disclaimer this is more a personal post. I'm not arguing for or against any positions. Just sharing my views as per Nicodemus request and up the reader to make of it what they will.

Fyi, most everything you said (edit: until you added that stuff about "existence") is very in line with my view of things.

(edit: As I said before, you remind me of how I used to think in high school.

Then I went to college and got into philosophy and what not.)

That is absolute, 100%, guaranteed, honest truth.

In any equation there may be 100 variables but 1 or 2 variables invariable makes the most different to the answer if its changed. I look for these and store them across all domains. I simply ignore lesser variables, while the NTP's entertain them. That's why we differ in speed and utility and that's why NTP's are more precise, produce more rigorous theory. However their Achilles heel is seeing how these models all fit together and which models are true outside themselves and which are not true, that's where an NTJ is stronger. They are good however at spotting weakness withing the model itself and improving on that.

I'm gunna bring something up that you brought up to me in private, because I don't think you'll have a problem with it (seeing as how you've done it to me a number of times already; if you do have a problem with it, just let me know, and I'll take it out.):

In our chat yesterday, you said that you believe people rarely if ever utilize their shadow functions.

I told you I disagreed.

You (and Vala; and myself, cuz I almost mentioned it last night before I went to bed) are in fact correct that last night I was slipping into a sort of "ENTP shadow mode".

I have written about this phenomena in my blog (LINK), I told you privately that I definitely am capable of utilizing those functions even though they're not my "basal" functions (LINK), and, personally, as I have written in my blog, I believe development of your shadow is one of the three primary modes of personal development we can undertake in a Jungian typological sense (LINK).

Back to another thing you said in private: you said you believe in group balance, but you don't believe in personal balance.

I said I don't hold the same value as you on this position.

I believe in both.

In fact, if you look at my post that describes the three modes of personal development in Jungian typology: every one of them is about learning to become a more balanced individual (balanced introversion/extroversion; balanced normal functions/shadow functions [i.e., "integration of one's shadow"]; balanced Dominant-Auxiliary/Tertiary-Inferior).

Now, maybe it's because I'm a Libra (that was a joking reference to astrology, in case you didn't get it), but I believe in personal balance.

Always have, always will.

The place where you err is that you think, because I believe in personal balance, and have thus learned to balance out my personality rather successfully on all three of these various modes (the amount of data that demonstrates this is significant: people who have met me know my i/e is pretty balanced; Jaguar and ThatGirl have joked that sometimes my Fi is so prominent that it seems like I'm an Fi-dom; my girlfriend made an entire thread about my "excessive" usage of Se; and you just spent last night trying to show that I'm an ENTP), that this means I'm not an INTJ.

This is where your thinking falls off the right path.

Just because I'm a more balanced INTJ than you, does not mean I'm not an INTJ.
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
I've made notes over the years. But not going to post those now. Let me put a little bit of it out there that's fresh in my mind. Being typical NTJ's its scrap and fragments pieced together. Bare in mind Ni jumps a lot, I'm working quickly and not going to make it sound nice and there will be minor errors etc. Try not to get hung up on that. I also go back and re-edit posts and take out errors and improve iteratively. I may do this with this one.

If you really interested I suggest you order a copy of Seeking Wisdom. I haven't read it but I ordered a few copies for our Board of Directors as a parting gift. I skimmed it and there is agreement with my world view. It's just more efficient if I let someone else do the speaking so gifting it makes sense. I am not interested in seeking credit or pride etc.

The "NTJ platform" aside here is my personal view:

The general gist is life is an emergent phenomena. Purpose is key. Why? Why? Why? Started asking that when I was 5 years old. Breaking everything down into fundamentals. Why must I go to school mom? So you can learn. Why must I learn? So you get a job. Why do I need a job? So you can earn money. Why do you need money? So you can eat food and care for yourself. Why do i need to eat food? So that you can live. Why should I live? Thats where I stopped as a teenager. The answer to that is this. I could come up for an evolutionary reason for wanting to live but I wanted something outside the perspective of life itself.

So I framed it as existence only make sense if you existing, hence if you weren't existing it wouldn't make any difference what your view on existing was. Hence it's better to exist from existence's point of view. Existing as a utility function then needs to be maximised. So how do I go about increasing existence? And all goal and subgoals can be created from the ground up. And I started building ground up.

In any equation there may be 100 variables but 1 or 2 variables invariable makes the most different to the answer if its changed. I look for these and store them across all domains. I simply ignore lesser variables, while the NTP's entertain them. That's why we differ in speed and utility and that's why NTP's are more precise, produce more rigorous theory. However their Achilles heel is seeing how these models all fit together and which models are true outside themselves and which are not true, that's where an NTJ is stronger. They are good however at spotting weakness withing the model itself and improving on that.

I look for concepts everywhere, I just soak them up, for example I see Zarathustra made a comment about dog training, I skimmed BF Skinner but just take the core principles and then try apply it. The more I can collect and the faster I can apply them an link it all together the better I am able to model reality. The better I am able to model reality the more successful I will be. I appear to "always be right" to people around me, not because I am, but simply because I know my position and zone of competence and almost always stay within it. I absolutely love being proved wrong, I honestly do. I've trained myself to like the feeling and enjoy it. Because it represents a mystery or a reason why I modelled reality incorrectly. I then need to go update the model or perhaps revisit assumptions or relook at the inputs.

I combine everything into a single model of reality. I don't see it as disconnected models. Everything flows from evolutionary and emergent perspectives our behaviors, our biases, our delusions or perceptions our very existence etc.

NTJ is a convergent platform. This means that our views are shared amongst NTJ's very roughly, there will be differences but they get ironed out as the platform is objective reality and especially if the NTJ's. And that exists outside our minds. So when I pick up a book written by an INTJ, eg Munger or Tony Hsieh, Sun Tsu, Rand (if we ignore the strong childish Fi) or Nietzsche everything just clicks.

Disclaimer this is more a personal post. I'm not arguing for or against any positions. Just sharing my views as per Nicodemus request and up the reader to make of it what they will.
You spent 774 words to explain your conception of truth yet none of these 774 words is 'truth'. In the end, you did not explain it at all. Frankly, this does not strike me as particularly efficient.
 
Top