User Tag List

First 202829303132 Last

Results 291 to 300 of 342

  1. #291
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    "Facts and Evidence"

    LOL. I just read what I quoted to you and asked myself, "What constitutes facts and evidence again?" Looking back at the thread, all I see are a lot of convoluted explanations and different interpretations of the same thing. There is some consensus, but what a pain. The lines are too blurry and difficult/impossible to measure.

    So anyways, the bolded, what types exactly? INTJ/INFJ/INTP?
    Anything and everything constitutes evidence for the purpose of hypothesizing patterns and confirming them, then applying them back again to individuals and seeing which I fit.

    It depends on the situation. There are two threads right now about Fi and Fe users explaining how they experience their feeling functions. I read the posts, pick out things from each post that fit me or don't, and assess the person's writing style. As an example. Also I pay attention to and ask questions about the types and certain things, like whether a behavior/feeling/characteristic fits more with one type or function than another, or to see if it is indeed correlated with type. Depending on whether that thing is true of me, I can use that as a piece of "evidence" to point me to a type. 50 such things pointing to one type versus 20 things pointing to another type, and taking into account prominence of said thing in type, I can decide at any moment whether I think the "evidence" points overwhelmingly toward one type or another.

    Yes, those 3 are the consensus at the moment. INTJ does a good job of balancing the opposing dominant functions with Ni; and if I think I am more INTX than INXP, I can say that Fi and (developed) Te from INFP fit nicely into INTJ to balance the opposing T functions with the help of Ni/Ne. The INTX part of the theory isn't completely clear yet.
    ^
    l

    This is part of my Intertype Fluidity Theory, which uses CF interaction to account for type variation and ambiguity.

  2. #292
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Anything and everything constitutes evidence for the purpose of hypothesizing patterns and confirming them, then applying them back again to individuals and seeing which I fit.

    It depends on the situation. There are two threads right now about Fi and Fe users explaining how they experience their feeling functions. I read the posts, pick out things from each post that fit me or don't, and assess the person's writing style. As an example. Also I pay attention to and ask questions about the types and certain things, like whether a behavior/feeling/characteristic fits more with one type or function than another, or to see if it is indeed correlated with type. Depending on whether that thing is true of me, I can use that as a piece of "evidence" to point me to a type. 50 such things pointing to one type versus 20 things pointing to another type, and taking into account prominence of said thing in type, I can decide at any moment whether I think the "evidence" points overwhelmingly toward one type or another.

    Yes, those 3 are the consensus at the moment. INTJ does a good job of balancing the opposing dominant functions with Ni; and if I think I am more INTX than INXP, I can say that Fi and (developed) Te from INFP fit nicely into INTJ to balance the opposing T functions with the help of Ni/Ne. The INTX part of the theory isn't completely clear yet.
    ^
    l

    This is part of my Intertype Fluidity Theory, which uses CF interaction to account for type variation and ambiguity.
    The bolded functions would imply that you are INTJ.

  3. #293
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,809

    Default

    Why do people have a problem with people mistyping themselves?
    Possibly this has already been mentioned and yes this is not necessarily the point of your topic, but id have said from my own observations of forums such as these, concerning this theory that:

    People need self-confirmation and affirmation. They need it like they need air. The interesting variety within this requirement is what is most intriguing to me though.

    Some people admire the love of humanity; a sense of clear morals and connections to their neighbours, a burning passion of an arduous nature for it is both beautiful and terrible as it requires the lines of ethics to be drawn quite clearly and sometimes the clarity of an individuals morals are also it's greatest weakness.

    Then there are those who admire the cognitive abilities of humanity; they admire the heights of clear and rational thought, soaring above the lesser concerns of those who would find themselves entrentched within complacency at the cost of innovation and within emotive content at the cost of clarity.

    These are only two examples of what a person might admire. Some might say admiration is directed towards skills or attributes you do not possess, others would say the opposite. Id say it is inbetween and it is this very inbetween that this theory has hit upon so brilliantly.

    So an individual introduced to the theory cannot help but admire him or herself for the archetypes of what a type is, constructed over time by a collective of opinions and assumptions. So many take great pride in attachment to a type so much so that they come to believe that anything that type does is reflective of their own potential.

    This is a dangerous thought path to walk down, but so many do and it is equally trod by both thinkers and feelers, intuitives and sensors. But I am not innocent and I would not wish to present myself as some arrogant seer above the flaws he spots. But in noticing this I also learned to turn back from that trek and curtail such traps before I become too sucked in.

    Essentially groups then begin to emerge within the idea's of types, they centralise their conclusions, admiring and patting one another on the back at their own brilliance.

    "Im the most intelligent, the most logical"

    "Well im the most caring, possessed of a sincere emotional depth."

    "My abstraction destroys the effluent nature of your abstraction"

    "This is irrelevant because my reality is sound and cannot be shaken, I do not need your foolish abstraction, I love what is and admire it for that honesty".

    If such a person should appear of a type, but he or she deviates from the group perception....suddenly all is not well.

    "This person breaks the framework"

    "You dont vibe the right way"

    "My type would not say or do it like that".

    Now we find ourselves in an odd position and the outcast is either defensive or submissive to these pressing charges.

    So in the end they either fight their corner but still end up acquiescing to the group and are absorbed by it, or they submit and are thrown into the void, hoping for acceptance in one of the other groups.

    The important point to remember is that these groups may define the heuristic evidence of this theory for themselves, they may define the definitions in agreeance, but this alone is not required to be correct. But it is that very heuristic nature which makes this so hard to avoid. Afterall if there is no collaboration then all is meaningless. It is also made difficult by the reality that not all such accusations as noted above are unfounded.

    This is why I would seek to unify the collective towards set standards, but standards that would still be somewhat subject to contextual influence, because the perculiar animal of humanity is a most contextual beast. So in the end both the objective and subjective standards need to be brought into line to stem the tide of mini-group outrage and prejudice.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  4. #294
    Senior Member The Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    2,425

    Default

    Nobody wants their special club invaded by those unworthy.

  5. #295
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Do we have reason to believe that all people of a type behave in many of the same observable ways? You could say that if they don't then they are not the type, but that's kind of circular thinking. Generally if would have to be true since inner functioning tends to manifest as outward behavior- but I just thought there was a lot more type variation. And I was under the impression that they are more about inner working than outward expression. Maybe not.
    To some degree, but you are reading far too much into this.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    It depends on the situation. There are two threads right now about Fi and Fe users explaining how they experience their feeling functions. I read the posts, pick out things from each post that fit me or don't, and assess the person's writing style. As an example. Also I pay attention to and ask questions about the types and certain things, like whether a behavior/feeling/characteristic fits more with one type or function than another, or to see if it is indeed correlated with type. Depending on whether that thing is true of me, I can use that as a piece of "evidence" to point me to a type. 50 such things pointing to one type versus 20 things pointing to another type, and taking into account prominence of said thing in type, I can decide at any moment whether I think the "evidence" points overwhelmingly toward one type or another.
    Part of your confusion may come from the fact that you are overrelying on behavior, and even on feelings, to determine type. Yes, members of a type often tend to exhibit similar behaviors - like being on time, or doing thoughtful things for others, but one cannot generalize. Yes, inner functions manifest as observable behaviors, but reliable correlations cannot be made from this. One must look to motivations, methods, and manner instead. To use copperfish's example, any type can give a hurting friend a hug, but what is their underlying motivation, and how will they do this? You see them once, but how often will they do this? What is the range of humanity they will hug in such a circumstance? Any type can feel grief at the death of a loved one, but how will they address it, or express it, or inwardly experience it? Any type can do or feel anything. We must look to why and how to glimpse the functions at work.

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    This whole odd magical beliefs thing that the OP is fascinated by seems very INTJ to me as I know that is the type most prone to Schizotypal personality disorder as well as the narcissistic, schizoid, and compulsive obsessive disorders.
    This is a good example of what I wrote above about behavior not always being a reliable indicator of type. I am an INTJ, and a pagan. My spirituality, however, is not fueled so much by odd magical beliefs as by appreciation of science. I was attracted to paganism in large part by how closely the beliefs and symbols are tied into the natural world. You can claim that paganism is as unscientific as the next religion, and I won't argue (too much). I am mentioning this only to point out that people can do the same thing, even very significant things like choose a religion, operating from different motivations, preferences and cognitive functions.
    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...

  6. #296
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Part of your confusion may come from the fact that you are overrelying on behavior, and even on feelings, to determine type. Yes, members of a type often tend to exhibit similar behaviors - like being on time, or doing thoughtful things for others, but one cannot generalize. Yes, inner functions manifest as observable behaviors, but reliable correlations cannot be made from this. One must look to motivations, methods, and manner instead. To use copperfish's example, any type can give a hurting friend a hug, but what is their underlying motivation, and how will they do this? You see them once, but how often will they do this? What is the range of humanity they will hug in such a circumstance? Any type can feel grief at the death of a loved one, but how will they address it, or express it, or inwardly experience it? Any type can do or feel anything. We must look to why and how to glimpse the functions at work.
    It may appear so from what I wrote, but this couldn't be farther from the truth. I take all of this into account as well; in fact this is more my focus than observable behavior. I just didn't want to go into all the details. And from what I've observed and theorized, there is quantitative and qualitative "evidence" in several places.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    This is a good example of what I wrote above about behavior not always being a reliable indicator of type. I am an INTJ, and a pagan. My spirituality, however, is not fueled so much by odd magical beliefs as by appreciation of science. I was attracted to paganism in large part by how closely the beliefs and symbols are tied into the natural world. You can claim that paganism is as unscientific as the next religion, and I won't argue (too much). I am mentioning this only to point out that people can do the same thing, even very significant things like choose a religion, operating from different motivations, preferences and cognitive functions.
    This is true for me as well. The magic is only part of it; if I just wanted odd magical beliefs I could be Catholic. I am pagan basically because it fits with the underlying truths I have deduced about reality. Reality to me is the natural world, and paganism is completely compatible with it.

    I appreciate you confirming that spirituality is not automatically tied to type.

  7. #297
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    Possibly this has already been mentioned and yes this is not necessarily the point of your topic, but id have said from my own observations of forums such as these, concerning this theory that:

    People need self-confirmation and affirmation. They need it like they need air. The interesting variety within this requirement is what is most intriguing to me though.

    Some people admire the love of humanity; a sense of clear morals and connections to their neighbours, a burning passion of an arduous nature for it is both beautiful and terrible as it requires the lines of ethics to be drawn quite clearly and sometimes the clarity of an individuals morals are also it's greatest weakness.

    Then there are those who admire the cognitive abilities of humanity; they admire the heights of clear and rational thought, soaring above the lesser concerns of those who would find themselves entrentched within complacency at the cost of innovation and within emotive content at the cost of clarity.

    These are only two examples of what a person might admire. Some might say admiration is directed towards skills or attributes you do not possess, others would say the opposite. Id say it is inbetween and it is this very inbetween that this theory has hit upon so brilliantly.

    So an individual introduced to the theory cannot help but admire him or herself for the archetypes of what a type is, constructed over time by a collective of opinions and assumptions. So many take great pride in attachment to a type so much so that they come to believe that anything that type does is reflective of their own potential.

    This is a dangerous thought path to walk down, but so many do and it is equally trod by both thinkers and feelers, intuitives and sensors. But I am not innocent and I would not wish to present myself as some arrogant seer above the flaws he spots. But in noticing this I also learned to turn back from that trek and curtail such traps before I become too sucked in.

    Essentially groups then begin to emerge within the idea's of types, they centralise their conclusions, admiring and patting one another on the back at their own brilliance.

    "Im the most intelligent, the most logical"

    "Well im the most caring, possessed of a sincere emotional depth."

    "My abstraction destroys the effluent nature of your abstraction"

    "This is irrelevant because my reality is sound and cannot be shaken, I do not need your foolish abstraction, I love what is and admire it for that honesty".

    If such a person should appear of a type, but he or she deviates from the group perception....suddenly all is not well.

    "This person breaks the framework"

    "You dont vibe the right way"

    "My type would not say or do it like that".

    Now we find ourselves in an odd position and the outcast is either defensive or submissive to these pressing charges.

    So in the end they either fight their corner but still end up acquiescing to the group and are absorbed by it, or they submit and are thrown into the void, hoping for acceptance in one of the other groups.

    The important point to remember is that these groups may define the heuristic evidence of this theory for themselves, they may define the definitions in agreeance, but this alone is not required to be correct. But it is that very heuristic nature which makes this so hard to avoid. Afterall if there is no collaboration then all is meaningless. It is also made difficult by the reality that not all such accusations as noted above are unfounded.

    This is why I would seek to unify the collective towards set standards, but standards that would still be somewhat subject to contextual influence, because the perculiar animal of humanity is a most contextual beast. So in the end both the objective and subjective standards need to be brought into line to stem the tide of mini-group outrage and prejudice.
    Very good way of looking at it.

  8. #298
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Some people use feeling judgement to determine type and can end up typing as who they value as opposed to who they are.

    Others can over-analyze and get into a limbo because its so easy to see things from different angles which can cause you to match up as more then one type. MBTI personalities dont seem to fully align when it comes to external vs internal self.
    Im out, its been fun

  9. #299
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    The bolded functions would imply that you are INTJ.
    So it would seem. It's a strong possibility, as it uses Fi and Ni. One could even theorize than INXJ is like a combination of INXP, depending on which judging function is "preferred," when the two types integrate for a purpose.

    I'm thinking that the "internal logical framework" I think I have is more INTJ. Everything I've said so far points to it. My thoughts aren't linear; they are a three dimensional figure made up of symbols and a hierarchy of categories, all interconnected. (But all the interconnections seem Ne as well...) This logical framework is so complex that any attempts to communicate it often get jumbled up and confused because of the abstract nature of the figure (and Ni + Fi). I can extract linear trains of thought from it, it just takes time and work. It just seems that I do the activities in the description of the Ti function rather obsessively, so I would be INTJ with developed shadow Ti, or INTX.

    Edit: But it all comes down to this!
    Yin-Yang.jpg
    Just sayin.

  10. #300
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,809

    Default

    Im going to post this because it is somewhat relevant, plus I find it amusing...because im going to be a hypocrite here and say even I dont think this lady is an INTJ:



    In fact some of the comments on that video are brilliant examples of people mistyping or at least misconcepting.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] why do people with introverted intuition....?
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-03-2016, 01:49 PM
  2. Why do people need identification with types?
    By hacbad macbar in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 09:55 AM
  3. why do I keep becoming friends with manipulative people?
    By prplchknz in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 09:56 AM

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