User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 74

  1. #21
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    yeah, for instance, as a teacher, i struggle to come up with relevant examples on the spot for my students. all my meanings are marked to be slightly different than the general usages, because i have my own belief constructs that are creating strange and fluid concepts. and i have enormous difficulty at times starting from simplified contexts and concrete objects to begin building something from the ground up.

    i think, when you combine those differences with Te, which trusts empirical data, facts, specific test results, well, it makes it more difficult even to bridge the gap because someone is consistently using different forms of information than your own relevant pieces of knowledge. and Te really really wants to regulate the argument and build the infrastructure for how the argument will unfold. i'm still trying to figure out how Te works for Ni types. i've noticed 5w6 types seem to be the most skeptical of all, and 1w9s are extremely pragmatic and want empirical verifiability and immediate application all the damn time.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Owfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    yeah, for instance, as a teacher, i struggle to come up with relevant examples on the spot for my students. all my meanings are marked to be slightly different than the general usages, because i have my own belief constructs that are creating strange and fluid concepts. and i have enormous difficulty at times starting from simplified contexts and concrete objects to begin building something from the ground up.
    The problem with your way of solving it, is that Si doesn't really start from contexts at all. It starts with objects to build up contexts. The issue is that each individual Si user is going to make their own meanings from their internalized information, and so they would see your contexts you give them as spoon-feeding them, even if it was never meant to come across that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    i think, when you combine those differences with Te, which trusts empirical data, facts, specific test results, well, it makes it more difficult even to bridge the gap because someone is consistently using different forms of information than your own relevant pieces of knowledge. and Te really really wants to regulate the argument and build the infrastructure for how the argument will unfold. i'm still trying to figure out how Te works for Ni types. i've noticed 5w6 types seem to be the most skeptical of all, and 1w9s are extremely pragmatic and want empirical verifiability and immediate application all the damn time.
    And Te doesn't trust internal judgement as being an accurate way of determining truth. It would see the most reliable and true source of information as a completely external and objective entity, which it would call "reality".
    I don't see any invisible treasure chests.

    • MBTI? ISTJ
    • Enneagram? 6 with a strong 7 wing
    • Brony? Yes
    • Stereotypes?

  3. #23
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    hmm, is this attitude also related to e6 as well?

    i'm trying to think through what you are saying, but i do admit that i am struggling to think outside my own assumptions. what would work for you? how would you prefer to learn in a classroom? do you agree that ultimately it is important to be able to critically relate contexts as well as objects in order to understand how complex problems fit together?

    i think we agree regarding Te's tendencies. but i also think we are demonstrating that as far as knowing objectively what is "out there" in external reality, we are only guessing, as Te is a function designed to make predictions and refine itself as a prediction framework. how would you respond to this?

  4. #24
    Senior Member Owfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    hmm, is this attitude also related to e6 as well?

    i'm trying to think through what you are saying, but i do admit that i am struggling to think outside my own assumptions. what would work for you? how would you prefer to learn in a classroom? do you agree that ultimately it is important to be able to critically relate contexts as well as objects in order to understand how complex problems fit together?
    It really depends on the class it is for. Some styles really are much better suited for some classes than others. My favorite style that I have experienced is in a literature class, where we read part of a book every night, and our teacher would write a provocative discussion question on the board. After about 5-10 minutes of quiet brainstorming, we would have a discussion with no hand raising and little to no teacher input. On grammar days, our teacher dug really deep into the whys and would let us ask "unrelated" questions that fueled curiosty. Sometimes he would start the day on a tangent loosly related to the subject.

    But if you teach, say, the hard sciences, that would not be a very good approach. I think that it is good to mix it up a bit. I generally prefer relating objects, but it can add a lot of interest to relate the fundamental structures of things to one another. I think that you should do explain mostly in the way you can best explain in, and most students will understand what you are doing. Trying to explain in a way that feels jarring will probably confuse people. I found that if I was a bit confused about how a teacher explained something, it was really helpful to visit them while they were on their break and ask them for help.

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    i think we agree regarding Te's tendencies. but i also think we are demonstrating that as far as knowing objectively what is "out there" in external reality, we are only guessing, as Te is a function designed to make predictions and refine itself as a prediction framework. how would you respond to this?
    I see Te as a function designed to thwack an introverted percieving function with proof or disproof from something outside of the individual's own little world. It brings some reality into the equation and forces the individual to do something other than ferment in their own mind, completely disconnected from the world.
    I don't see any invisible treasure chests.

    • MBTI? ISTJ
    • Enneagram? 6 with a strong 7 wing
    • Brony? Yes
    • Stereotypes?

  5. #25
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    This is only an example that I came up with on the fly.

    I think of Government as a system, and I think of Democracy/Socialism/Communism/Monarchy/etc as a model for a system of government. Within the Democratic System (the Democratic Model is also a system,) there are also smaller chains of Democratic Models (yes... the U.S. Democratic Model isn't the only form there is,) and ad infinitum. Then again, that's what I get when I think of a system and a model. A chain of lines all spawning from a dot, within that line, there are more dots. When we look at those individual dots, we see more lines.

    If government is a system, then yes, the models (say Democracy as an example) should be changed to a new model, or at least fixed, if it isn't working for the system (government.) If the Democratic System is not working, then yes, the Democratic Model should be adjusted.

    By what you are saying, a Si user would say:
    No, the Democratic Model isn't the problem, the Democratic System is the problem.

    By what you are saying for a Ni user, the Ni user would say:
    No, the Democratic System is working, it is the Democratic Model that needs fixing.



    But I think, here is the catch, it depends on whether the person sees an idea as a System or a Model at the given moment.

  6. #26
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    I think it's a great observation.

    Ni deals with subtraction from conceptual data according to an internalized ________*, and Si deals with subtraction from tangible data according to an internal ______*.

    Though I could see where "models" can be ambiguous and cross over to other things, including products of iNtuition. For one, the reason why words were left out, is that "models" is what I would generally use there, for both S and N, and even T and F. It's actually most often used for Ti, in fact!
    "Model" most often refers to any internal set of blueprints used to subtract what is irrelevant from data of all four functions.

    Then, in the above post, it looks like "models" is being used as another term for concept, which is basically an N product. "Models" of political systems would be concepts, not any tangible or "concrete" element. (Hence, politics being another one of those "abstract" subjects, like religion, which typical SJ society conventions says should not be discussed in public).
    And actually, when I think of "systems"; I tend to think of the actual outworking. The "system" is the actual tangible or "concrete" thing that is working, and the "model" is the conceptual or "abstract" idea of it.

    What I think the term "model" used for Si was intended to convey was a practical application of the system, with "description" being the key word indicating "concrete language". So The actual running of the government, or making actual changes to the way it is run would be the actual S "model" that could be "described". But that could still be called a "system" too, as what is being described is also "a set of interacting or interdependent components forming an integrated whole".
    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

  7. #27
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    @Owfin, I am bothered by your construction.

    I have been thinking about it for a few weeks, and my original conviction about it has not changed.

    Your construction seems to imply that ISTJs wish to force their model on reality, while INTJs wish to understand reality as it is.

    I'm not saying that this is not the case, as, aside from the weak terminology of "model vs system", I think it's somewhat accurate.

    My father is an ISTJ, so I have a lifetime of evidence about this, and your construction makes ISTJs that much more bothersome to me.

  8. #28
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    I would think that both impose equal force on reality but develop their understanding of reality in different ways. The way they impose force is different as well as their motivations are different.

    I would think that IXFJs are softer, exploring imagination and developing understanding. Yeah, sure, they're supposedly directive, which suggests a greater force of will. But... Hmmm...

    *gets lost in thought and eats Chef Boyardee*

  9. #29
    Senior Member Owfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    @Owfin, I am bothered by your construction... Your construction seems to imply that ISTJs wish to force their model on reality, while INTJs wish to understand reality as it is.
    Really? I felt like I had put it the other way around. Also, I constantly change my theory a bit, so sometimes I can disagree with my own posts.

    I feel like it is impossible for me to be able to be aware that I am perceiving something without it being colored by my own perception. As a person with your own perspective, perceiving reality purely as it is would be impossible. Even the act of thinking about something means that you are thinking about what you comprehend it as.
    I don't see any invisible treasure chests.

    • MBTI? ISTJ
    • Enneagram? 6 with a strong 7 wing
    • Brony? Yes
    • Stereotypes?

  10. #30
    Senior Member animenagai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    NeFi
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Posts
    1,573

    Default

    This is intriguing. Do you think this idea stretches out all the way to our tertiary and last functions? In other words, I'm Si last, do you think I have more faith in models over systems? This gets a bit tricky imo, I've never bought into the standard view of functions. My Ni is stronger than my Si.

    edit: After thinking about it, I think I would change the system, not the model. Hmm interesting, the traditional functional order at least has functional uses.
    Chimera of Filth

    A gruesome beast with dripping flesh
    Clings to me as a sick fixture
    My throbbing heart it gnawed apart
    It stalks and hunts me through mirrors

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Si vs Ni
    By cogdecree in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-20-2010, 06:42 AM
  2. Quick thought about Ne/Si vs Ni/Se
    By sciski in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-12-2010, 01:02 PM
  3. Ni vs. Si comparative Ni TEST
    By musttry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 10:36 AM
  4. Explanation for SJs dislike of change [Si vs Ne/Ni/Se]
    By Snow Turtle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 06:37 AM
  5. Si vs Ni
    By labyrinthine in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 11-14-2007, 10:19 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