User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 32

  1. #11
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    I wouldn't consider ISTP men to be linear thinkers, but they are certainly masculine. In the same sense, many ESFJ women seem ver feminine, while not being "web-like" in their thought process at all. Gender differences go beyond MBTI to the most basic level.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

  2. #12
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by durentu View Post

    that's the general concept.
    Well, that mostly seems like a general concept you made up, starting by your own fantasy / originally conceived scenario.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  3. #13
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    I don't know about all that, all this talk of dopamine and hormones, etc; It's all very speculative. I believe in science, but let's remember that what we know about the world is dwarfed by what we have yet to discover...humans are very complex systems, and not given to easy analysis.
    As for myself, I'm a non-linear thinker, and a man. rather, I am both linear and non-linear, as are most people. I don't want to be otherwise...

  4. #14
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    I don't know about all that, all this talk of dopamine and hormones, etc; It's all very speculative. I believe in science, but let's remember that what we know about the world is dwarfed by what we have yet to discover...humans are very complex systems, and not given to easy analysis.
    As for myself, I'm a non-linear thinker, and a man. rather, I am both linear and non-linear, as are most people. I don't want to be otherwise...
    Actually, they've done tests and research on this. Helen Fisher, the person I referenced, is an anthropologist who took part in setting up the experiments and tests. They did find that those hormones have a serious impact as to how your brain (and in part your personality) forms. A higher amount of one hormone doesn't exclude the presence of another (though serotonine does bring down dopamine a bit, so they can influence each other), and she suggested that you would especially see traits of the two primary hormones present in your system in your personality, whatever your gender.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  5. #15
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Actually, they've done tests and research on this. Helen Fisher, the person I referenced, is an anthropologist who took part in setting up the experiments and tests. They did find that those hormones have a serious impact as to how your brain (and in part your personality) forms. A higher amount of one hormone doesn't exclude the presence of another (though serotonine does bring down dopamine a bit, so they can influence each other), and she suggested that you would especially see traits of the two primary hormones present in your system in your personality, whatever your gender.
    This is tautological. It seems that humans have other feedback mechanisms in an attempt to reach homeostasis, one's that take place past gestation. That’s one of the shortcomings of laboratory experimentation. Mice are not perfect analogues.

  6. #16
    Senior Member durentu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    INTp
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Well, that mostly seems like a general concept you made up, starting by your own fantasy / originally conceived scenario.
    the chemical perspective isn't the only one. The hormones you describe are implicated in tons of stuff. from love, hate, diseases, mental disorders, personality disorder, weight loss, hair loss you name it. Therefore, while there may be good work and evidence from the chemical perspective, the are structural/evolutionary perspectives to consider.

    The truth is more likely that the chemical elements are co-evolutionary with the structural elements because the human body is NOT COMPLICATED; it is COMPLEX. (see cynefin)

    The chemistry is valid, but it's incomplete to answer the OP's question.

    Also, injecting hormones and showing the "affirming result" is a logical fallacy in causality. The cause in human evolution is not the injection of hormones. It is the environmental factor that causes the human body to change in order to supply these different hormones in the current chemistry we have today.
    "People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But the self is not something one finds; it is something one creates." - Thomas Szasz

  7. #17
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    This is tautological. It seems that humans have other feedback mechanisms in an attempt to reach homeostasis, one's that take place past gestation. That’s one of the shortcomings of laboratory experimentation. Mice are not perfect analogues.
    Point taken. If it matters, in this specific case, the experiments were done specifically on humans, with MRI's, while specifically activating areas of the brain with questions or thoughts.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  8. #18
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    Evolutionarily speaking, there seems to have been a tendency for men to think "linearly" and for women to think "web-like". I guess, I'd characterize it, in the context of time, as men thinking from "second to minute to hour to day to week....etc etc" and women thinking in terms of "day/night or summer/fall/winter/spring". As such, a linear thinker will have trouble understanding the way something can be both one thing and another, depending, within a context, depending on which context is being referred to. And similarly, a web thinker will be hard pressed to accept the validity of universalizing a context and ignoring the discrepencies that may or may not be apparent.

    Assuming the truth of the both, my question is about those men and women who fall outside that trend.

    Percentage of men who are web thinkers, primarily? Percentage of females who are linear thinkers, primary?

    Is there an "evolutionary tendency" going on today that more or less forces each person to develop both thinking styles suffeciently?

    Examples of women linear thinkers and men web thinkers?

    Perhaps tie it to typology?
    There are significant numbers of men and women who fall outside these expectations. In fact, I'm not sure how strong the gender correlation is at all. I would expect someone's thinking style to mirror their MBTI type far more than their gender. That being said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Estrogen has been linked to webthinking, intuition and imagination, while Testosteron is linked to linear thinking, thinking in objectives and using logic to get to their goal. Women therefore are more likely to focus on webthinking and men on linear thinking. Apparently, when a fetus' brain is exposed to predominantly estrogen in the womb (and later in puberty), they create more links between the further apart regions of the brain than others, causing a myriad of options and the ability to hold two different views in their head and agreeing with both of them without going insane. Those that are exposed to predominantly testosteron very much link nearby regions together, making for a cohesive, consistent and decisive, but more limited view on things .
    Might these chemical differences be responsible for the observed gender disparity in types? On the other hand, this disparity is mainly in T vs. F, which would seem less related to linear vs. web thinking than N vs. S. Moreover, based on the highlighted, one would expect NTs to be most balanced with respect to estrogen and testosterone, but most NT types tend to be considered masculine.

    Quote Originally Posted by durentu View Post
    The chemistry is valid, but it's incomplete to answer the OP's question.
    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Though gender does seem to play a big part, it doesn't have to. Charles Darwin was capable of having faith in Science, and his world famous theory, while being a strong believer in God and the Church, reportedly, which at the time were very much linear opposites. He supposedly was a webthinker. (source: Helen Fisher 'Why him, why her')
    These observations seem reasonable. The hormonal distributions described seem far more uniform than the actual behavior of real men and women, so clearly other significant influences are involved, some of which have already been discussed.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  9. #19
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    I have no problem seeing the worth of something in another context. I don't know why that'd be feminine or masculine. I'm just not a big purist. I don't define things to the point that they are positive or negative in and of themselves. There are only a few things I might be able to do that with, but I'm not even sure what atm. Typology wise, it's probably typical of percievers in general.

  10. #20
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    @Coriolis In her book, Helen Fisher makes a difference between 4 personalities, each of them driven by a hormone

    * The Explorers (Dopamine) (she even refers to MBTI briefly, touches upon the fact that these differences in personality have already been noted before)
    * The Builders (Serotonine)
    * The Directors (Testosterone)
    * The Negotiators (Estrogen)

    She also touches upon the fact that the primary is often coupled with a secondary, giving slight differences in personality. As such, it is possible to be a Negotiator in the primary, as estrogen is most present in your body, but you have as a secondary a Director-streak, due to a quite high amount of testosterone influencing your behavior as well. I'd wager many male NFs fit that bill.


    From what I can tell, most SJs would be Builders and serotonine driven in their primary, and most SPs would be dopamine-driven as Explorers. NF seems to correspond with estrogen, and NT with testosterone. This is very generally speaking.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

Similar Threads

  1. Ladies!! Or men who wear make up.
    By ThatGirl in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 07-29-2011, 01:37 PM
  2. Men who wear make-up
    By substitute in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-21-2007, 11:20 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