User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 45

  1. #21
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    I see it as a Ji-Je thing, to the Ji the inner world is predictable, safe, the rules and structure are obvious, the outer world however is chaotic, unpredictable. The Je sees it the other way around.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  2. #22
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    I'm pretty classic Pe with the "maybes", getting stuck in considering every angle & not wanting to rule anything out too fast; but there does come a point where I will make a decision or form a rather solid opinion. Because I've considered so much info & so many alternate ideas, it's hard to budge that decision simply because most any argument against has already been considered thoroughly. Even still, the decision tends to be a general preference, meaning there's still all kinds of wiggle room for how to enact it.

    I think the nature of Ji is a lot more, well, abstract than people realize. As far as Fi goes, Jung describes its valuations as amounting to significant ideas, which means they are rather basic concepts, not very specific or sharply defined. The external world is approached with Pe, so you easily see a multitude of ways to meet these basic ideals, and the problem often becomes picking just one option. The structure of the inner world is a model or framework in that sense, which is open to interpretation, adaption, and even some revision as new info comes in.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  3. #23
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Things change over time and possibilities depend on these things that change. P(Ne/Se) is about keeping the eyes open for things changing(rather than seeing static things) and N is about concentrating on the possibilities(rather than facts(S)).
    This misconception has lead to SPs mistyping as Ns. The word "possibilities", used without further description, is misleading.

    As Functianalyst writes on Personality Cafe:

    As Linda Berens and Dario Nardi claim here, "With Se, there is an emphasis on possibilities for actions to take. With Ne, there is an emphasis on possibilities to be considered for action". Naomi Quenck (author and developer of the MBTI Step II) also says based on Jung's work, one cannot consider actions and actually act on them at the same time.
    Every action is a possibility until it's done. You could think of it like conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy... the potential is the possibility, and the kinetic is the action... but the action does not immediately spring into form as an action. It's a possibility first, then acted upon.

    And as @Eric B writes here: [emphasis mine]

    A way to look at it I was recently given (as I too was confused about "possibilities" being mentioned for both, when we usually think about only Ne with that term), Se is possibilities that exist with things as they exist right now. Like a football player who sees who is in a position that he can pass the ball to.
    Se "does" or acts, but is not about changing present reality like Ne is.
    It's like Se reacts to situations already changing, while Ne looks at how to change them. Ne is inferring (that's the definitive term for N) a pattern of "possibility" from the situation, rather then just acting on it as it is.

    The following isn't directly responding to your post... but might be relevant.

    I also happened to find this post from @Retmeishka, an ISTP:

    Quote Originally Posted by Retmeishka View Post
    [...] Are you more focused on:
    what is possible
    what is actual

    How did I answer that question? I liked 'what is possible' because there are so many things that I just don't like about the real world. I am dissatisfied with many things and I wish things were different than they actually are. So ANYBODY who feels disgruntled and dissatisfied with the world as it is will say they like the idea of 'what is possible' instead of 'what is actual,' and they will be labeled an intuitive. I always have a list of 'possibilities,' or options, or different ways something could be done, but that doesn't make me an intuitive.

    In fact, I might argue that intuitives like to think about things that are IMpossible! They like logical contradictions and putting together ideas to create things that don't really exist. 'What is possible' doesn't describe that - it would be described as 'what is impossible.'

    Much of the conflict between sensors and intuitives happens when an intuitive suggests an idea that is too abstract and general to work in reality, and the sensors tell them it's impossible and they need to work out the details.

    Meanwhile, the intuitives think that they themselves are suggesting other 'possible' ways of doing things or seeing things, and that everyone else is seeing only what is already there. So the test question says 'what is possible/actual.' And the sensors would respond by saying that the intuitives' ideas are impossible, and listing a whole bunch of details to show why some idea can't be done in reality.

    The word 'possible' might mean something different to intuitives than it does to sensors. [...]
    I find that last sentence spot on.

    I consider ideas possible even if they are not possible at the present moment, e.g. if we don't have the technology to bring them to fruition yet. Another person might consider that same idea impossible, because it's not possible with the current state of the world.

    And I think this issue where people interpret the same word differently gets right to the heart of typology...

    I tend to think of very few things as impossible, perhaps if they are directly contradictory (P and not P).

    Don't know what that makes me, and it doesn't really matter... I'm just saying that even the word "possibilities" means different things to different types.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  4. #24
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    My life has become easier since I dared to make decisions. I dont think that "deciding" is so much related to p or j at all, but I think that p or j's have different preconditions for developing strength in that department.

    I came to know with age that deciding means to compromise to settle for one opinion and with that develop something progressive. So the phase of "could be, could be not" basically ended for me when I passed the age of 25. In the real world indecisiveness doesnt get you very far, if you want to achieve a responsible position in your working environment.

    Pness nowadays isnt so much about "maybe" for me no more, but about flexibility of opinion and your decisions. I go by the idea: every decision thast can be changed easily is a good one.

    I have learnt that having an opinion means actually to take on responsibility for a thing or idea and given the vast amount of ideas there are out there, one has to settle for some and try things out to at least have some sort of progress. I think this is a lesson all P's need to learn at some point in their lifes.
    Wow. This is great, thanks. I am still in the drifting, "maybe" stage. Yeah, I think one needs solid decisions in order to progress. For me, I think indecisiveness might even be a defense mechanism so I don't have to take action. Action necessarily runs the risk of failure, and I think I have a fear of failure.


    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Pe expands. our worlds are ever-expanding. unlike Pi, which reduces. both aim towards One eventually, but we are working outward towards the Whole, while they are working inwards towards the Singularity. it makes our lives harder in that we have trouble deciding, yet easier in that we are more open to change.
    Thanks. This pretty much sums up what I was trying to say, except you are much clearer lol. Pe stitches parts together to make a whole.


    Quote Originally Posted by Huxley3112 View Post
    Yes I do believe J tendencies can be learned, but the preference will always remain. That speaker moves into some training he's developed to aid that, but I have not seen it myself. I know that I organize and plan some aspects of my life (usually work) very well, but it does take tremendous effort - not natural. Not sure if tert Te development has helped this along, or just being pounded over the head for years with the undesireable consequences that come with constant perception, lol.
    I agree, J tendencies can be learned but that doesn't make one a J (functionally speaking). I also force myself to plan some things, for fear of dire consequences if I don't, and I can do it well... but like you it takes massive effort.


    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I'm pretty classic Pe with the "maybes", getting stuck in considering every angle & not wanting to rule anything out too fast; but there does come a point where I will make a decision or form a rather solid opinion. Because I've considered so much info & so many alternate ideas, it's hard to budge that decision simply because most any argument against has already been considered thoroughly. Even still, the decision tends to be a general preference, meaning there's still all kinds of wiggle room for how to enact it.
    Oh yeah, good point. When I reach decisions they are actually difficult to change -- not because I'm stuck in my ways, but because so many viewpoints have been considered already that the chance of encountering a new viewpoint is pretty low. However, that chance is not zero, so the decision is still technically tentative. lol.
    Last edited by strychnine; 12-08-2011 at 06:05 PM. Reason: I just rephrased something.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  5. #25
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    This misconception has lead to SPs mistyping as Ns. The word "possibilities", used without further description, is misleading.

    As Functianalyst writes on Personality Cafe:



    Every action is a possibility until it's done. You could think of it like conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy... the potential is the possibility, and the kinetic is the action... but the action does not immediately spring into form as an action. It's a possibility first, then acted upon.

    And as @Eric B writes here: [emphasis mine]




    The following isn't directly responding to your post... but might be relevant.

    I also happened to find this post from @Retmeishka, an ISTP:



    I find that last sentence spot on.

    I consider ideas possible even if they are not possible at the present moment, e.g. if we don't have the technology to bring them to fruition yet. Another person might consider that same idea impossible, because it's not possible with the current state of the world.

    And I think this issue where people interpret the same word differently gets right to the heart of typology...

    I tend to think of very few things as impossible, perhaps if they are directly contradictory (P and not P).

    Don't know what that makes me, and it doesn't really matter... I'm just saying that even the word "possibilities" means different things to different types.
    Its not Se that sees the possibilities for action, its the Ni of Se user.

    I know about the vision for action and vision for perception being different. Vision for action isnt Se, its Ni prerequirment for Ni. First of all, its unconscious, Se isnt, it leaves visual cortex from dorsal pathway, extraversion goes to opposite direction, towards visual cortex, not out of it(yea i know it sounds weird, but if you learn how brains work, you will understand why, also jungs idea of extraversion supports this). Ni comes from future projection area of the brains(according to dario nardi) and this is where this dorsal pathway leads to(actually this area is on the right side of the brains, Ne users seem to repress this sided dorsal pathway and use the left side(which leads to areas more involved with formation of Si.

    Jungs definition for functions are:
    S tells you that something is.
    T tells you what it is.
    F tells you what it is worth.
    N tells you where it came from and where it is going.

    I dont care about what berens, dario or especially ericb say about the function definitions, im more interested on jungs definitions and what makes sense from scientific and personal point of view. And jungs definitions make the most sense from neurological, logical and personal point of view.

    Ps. Im not saying that S types dont concentrate on possibilities, incase you didnt know all types have N, N types just are more conscious of N(possibility over time) than S(what is, perceivable facts) function.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #26
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    @INTP - Are you saying that an SP has to "use" Ni to scan for potential actions? The scanning is not from Se?

    I know that all types have both S and N functions. Does what you have just said suggest or imply that Ss must focus more on facts than possibilities? Or can an S-type focus more on possibilities than facts, and still be considered S?
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  7. #27
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    @INTP - Are you saying that an SP has to "use" Ni to scan for potential actions? The scanning is not from Se?

    I know that all types have both S and N functions. Does what you have just said suggest or imply that Ss must focus more on facts than possibilities? Or can an S-type focus more on possibilities than facts, and still be considered S?
    Im saying that S only tells you that something is, thats the definition for S. N tells you possibilities about where that thing came from and where its going.
    I was just trying to demonstrate to you why its not Se that does the seeking for possibilities, it goes against the very definition of Se(and the scientific data about what extraversion is on neural level). And since you propably already know(as you start to argue about this), Ni is what puts those facts together that Se delivered. Also darios work has shown that Ni uses areas P4 and T6(on 18 electrode eeg setup). P4 dario defined(based on work of other people) "weight many factors at once" and T6 "future projection"(naturally the areas arent this simple, they are just simplified to make it easier to understand). These areas are located next to visual cortex on right hemisphere(left if using radiologist terms) and where the dorsal pathway leads to from visual cortex.
    Also it should be mentioned that this isnt all just Ni usage that uses these areas. Functions arent certain areas, they are patterns of action of certain areas(also propably in certain order).
    Ne for example cant be traced on any area, its basically random activity on different areas(possibly all measured by dario, depending on situation) which leads to insight, sort of searching different possible angles to look at something from.

    Cba to write more about this, but to conclude, vision for action or possibilities is not what Se does.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #28
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    @strychnine and incase you are interested on the "map" that dario used(he didnt come up with the areas or definitions for areas himself):





    And do note again that the explanations for areas are really much simplified.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #29
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    @INTP Thanks. I found a thread discussing some of Nardi's research here http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...rsonality.html

    This is pretty interesting, I'll read up more on it.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  10. #30
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Its not Se that sees the possibilities for action, its the Ni of Se user.

    I know about the vision for action and vision for perception being different. Vision for action isnt Se, its Ni prerequirment for Ni. First of all, its unconscious, Se isnt, it leaves visual cortex from dorsal pathway, extraversion goes to opposite direction, towards visual cortex, not out of it(yea i know it sounds weird, but if you learn how brains work, you will understand why, also jungs idea of extraversion supports this). Ni comes from future projection area of the brains(according to dario nardi) and this is where this dorsal pathway leads to(actually this area is on the right side of the brains, Ne users seem to repress this sided dorsal pathway and use the left side(which leads to areas more involved with formation of Si.

    Jungs definition for functions are:
    S tells you that something is.
    T tells you what it is.
    F tells you what it is worth.
    N tells you where it came from and where it is going.

    I dont care about what berens, dario or especially ericb say about the function definitions, im more interested on jungs definitions and what makes sense from scientific and personal point of view. And jungs definitions make the most sense from neurological, logical and personal point of view.
    Se and Ni are two sides of the same coin. You can't really have one without the other (one person calls such tandems "ladies' earrings") at least somewhere in the background (hence, unconscious, or at least less conscious). So there's no contradiction.

    S, and N perception, and T and F judgment are implicit in every bit of data. It's our ego consciousness that divides it into i and e (yielding 8 function-attitudes) and focuses more on one function and attitude or the other.
    So yes, when you see "possibilities" in emergent "what is" data, then there is also a storehouse of "where it's going" data working in the background. On the other hand, if I'm focusing on emergent "where it's going" data, then a storehouse of "what is" is in the background as well. You keep disputing people, but there really is no real conflict. It's just a matter of interpretation and rephrasing of Jung's concepts (which are very dense and prone to misunderstanding as it is, so you can't blame people for trying to recast it in their own way).
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

Similar Threads

  1. Seeing the world
    By targobelle in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-11-2015, 05:23 PM
  2. Replies: 110
    Last Post: 05-03-2009, 12:49 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Do NFJs tend to be the most private types?
    By Glycerine in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-10-2009, 09:19 PM
  4. [ENFP] How ENFPs see the world (maybe?)
    By sculpting in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-04-2009, 11:01 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