User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 244

  1. #81
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    Yes, this is something I've noticed. I've recently taken a real interest in Se (and SPs in general) and felt the lack of "loving" descriptions to the point that I've thought about starting a thread on the function (and I rarely start threads). However, I felt discouraged by the thought that others would not reciprocate, and that it might a waste of time.

    It just seems ridiculous that certain types or functions are made to seem more "cool" than others. I just feel that if more effort was made to outline the amazing and mystical qualities of Se and Si, we wouldn't have such a heavy bias toward N.
    To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

    I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #82
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

    I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.
    I have always thought the sensing descriptions were no worse or better than the intuitive descriptions. ISTJs sound quite accomplished for examples. ISFJ descriptions seem dead on for those I know. ESTP is pretty impressive. A lot of the INTJ descriptions don't sound so flattering. INTJ - The "Scientist"? I'm no scientist. INTP - the absent minded professor? Not the ones I know.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  3. #83
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,025

    Default

    I hate the mysticism associated with functions. So much b/s, particularly surrounding Ni. While it's a fun and useful function, it's not magical. There's just a lot going on in the unconscious mind, regardless if it's a conscious use function.

    So please, please don't try to romanticise Se or Si. Se is crazy fun and impulsive. It's unbelievably useful in the pragmatic world. But it's neither magical or mystical.

  4. #84
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    ISFJ
    Please, give me a break.

    Anybody here who reads the following (or, actually, anybody who does not identify as an old lady) will be turned off by these lines alone:

    They value security and kindness, and respect traditions and laws. They tend to believe that existing systems are there because they work. Therefore, they're not likely to buy into doing things in a new way, unless they're shown in a concrete way why its better than the established method.

    ISFJs learn best by doing, rather than by reading about something in a book, or applying theory. For this reason, they are not likely to be found in fields which require a lot of conceptual analysis or theory. They value practical application. Traditional methods of higher education, which require a lot of theorizing and abstraction, are likely to be a chore for the ISFJ. The ISFJ learns a task best by being shown its practical application. Once the task is learned, and its practical importance is understood, the ISFJ will faithfully and tirelessly carry through the task to completion. The ISFJ is extremely dependable.
    It makes them sound like some old crusty lady who absolutely will not think or do anything different unless someone holds them by the hand and shows them that it's better. It also makes it seem as though they do not like learning or school. This is not my experience of ISFJs at all.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  5. #85
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I have always thought the sensing descriptions were no worse or better than the intuitive descriptions. ISTJs sound quite accomplished for examples. ISFJ descriptions seem dead on for those I know. ESTP is pretty impressive. A lot of the INTJ descriptions don't sound so flattering. INTJ - The "Scientist"? I'm no scientist. INTP - the absent minded professor? Not the ones I know.
    You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?

    From personalitypage, one of the most popular MBTI websites:


    ISTJ - The Duty Fulfillers
    ESTJ - The Guardians
    ISFJ - The Nurturers
    ESFJ - The Caregivers
    ISTP - The Mechanics
    ESTP - The Doers
    ESFP - The Performers
    ISFP - The Artists
    ENTJ - The Executives
    INTJ - The Scientists
    ENTP - The Visionaries
    INTP - The Thinkers
    ENFJ - The Givers
    INFJ - The Protectors
    ENFP - The Inspirers
    INFP - The Idealists

    Not a single. one. of the N titles is negative. The S titles are a mixed bag - I'll give you nurturers and caregivers, but "duty fulfillers"? "doers"? freaking "mechanics"?

    You really don't think it's insulting to be slapped in the face with "Ns are brilliant visionaries (oh look, ENTP) who design everything; you Ss are too dumb for that, but you can do all the grunt work of building and fixing stuff. Oh we could do that too, of course, but we don't want to anyway"?
    -end of thread-

  6. #86
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andante View Post
    So please, please don't try to romanticise Se or Si. Se is crazy fun and impulsive. It's unbelievably useful in the pragmatic world. But it's neither magical or mystical.
    Yet so, so rich too. A quick anecdote: my son is ESFP, he loves electronic music. He played one of his favorite songs for me last month, and in the build-ups and additions of layers, he outlined for me what his vision was of the song - that it chronicled a whole relationship, from beginning to end, and he told me when the male voice was arguing or pleading, and when the female voice was arguing back and crying, and when the tensions started to resolve, that their relationship was over, but it was a bittersweet end. He had this entire narrative of experience captured in 6 minutes of music.

    Impressive as heck!
    And put my imagination to shame!

    So, yes, I do hear what you are saying, but maybe what doesn't come out in descriptions is how that primary function (in his case Se) leads and intermingles with the rest of them in this sophisticated harmony too, as vibrant, maybe even moreso in ways, as anyone else's experience.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  7. #87
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?

    From personalitypage, one of the most popular MBTI websites:


    ISTJ - The Duty Fulfillers
    ESTJ - The Guardians
    ISFJ - The Nurturers
    ESFJ - The Caregivers
    ISTP - The Mechanics
    ESTP - The Doers
    ESFP - The Performers
    ISFP - The Artists
    ENTJ - The Executives
    INTJ - The Scientists
    ENTP - The Visionaries
    INTP - The Thinkers
    ENFJ - The Givers
    INFJ - The Protectors
    ENFP - The Inspirers
    INFP - The Idealists

    Not a single. one. of the N titles is negative. The S titles are a mixed bag - I'll give you nurturers and caregivers, but "duty fulfillers"? "doers"? freaking "mechanics"?

    You really don't think it's insulting to be slapped in the face with "Ns are brilliant visionaries (oh look, ENTP) who design everything; you Ss are too dumb for that, but you can do all the grunt work of building and fixing stuff. Oh we could do that too, of course, but we don't want to anyway"?
    I hear you - ha, us INFP's don't do anything though apparently, we just sit around being ideal or something ... my point only is, we can all likely kvetch at some aspect of the descriptions that we feel is inadequate or just plain wrong.

    But I think I hear your point and I agree you're right - it's that imprecision where the system starts to break down, trying to capture something too finite for words to do justice to.

    My ESTJ hubs likes being a "guardian", my ISTJ sis-in-law identifies fully with the "duty-fulfiller" and is darn proud of it.

    It'll be a point of personal reference for each individual no doubt and where they fall within their preference strength too - perhaps you being close in score between S and N gives you more awareness that neither fits you quite right.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  8. #88
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?
    Yes - I do admit that ISTP is the one type where I have had a problem with some of the descriptions. I almost said that in the last post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Please, give me a break.

    Anybody here who reads the following (or, actually, anybody who does not identify as an old lady) will be turned off by these lines alone:

    They value security and kindness, and respect traditions and laws. They tend to believe that existing systems are there because they work. Therefore, they're not likely to buy into doing things in a new way, unless they're shown in a concrete way why its better than the established method.

    ISFJs learn best by doing, rather than by reading about something in a book, or applying theory. For this reason, they are not likely to be found in fields which require a lot of conceptual analysis or theory. They value practical application. Traditional methods of higher education, which require a lot of theorizing and abstraction, are likely to be a chore for the ISFJ. The ISFJ learns a task best by being shown its practical application. Once the task is learned, and its practical importance is understood, the ISFJ will faithfully and tirelessly carry through the task to completion. The ISFJ is extremely dependable.
    It makes them sound like some old crusty lady who absolutely will not think or do anything different unless someone holds them by the hand and shows them that it's better. It also makes it seem as though they do not like learning or school. This is not my experience of ISFJs at all.
    I really don't see anything wrong with that description and in fact for the ISFJs I know, those things are all true. It doesn't say they don't like learning or school. It doesn't say they aren't intelligent. They don't like studying theory. They are about practical application and prefer to do things they know how to do and to do them well vs. theorizing about application of abstract concepts or having the stress of having to learn and do new things all the time. They are dependable.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  9. #89
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Yet so, so rich too. A quick anecdote: my son is ESFP, he loves electronic music. He played one of his favorite songs for me last month, and in the build-ups and additions of layers, he outlined for me what his vision was of the song - that it chronicled a whole relationship, from beginning to end, and he told me when the male voice was arguing or pleading, and when the female voice was arguing back and crying, and when the tensions started to resolve, that their relationship was over, but it was a bittersweet end. He had this entire narrative of experience captured in 6 minutes of music.

    Impressive as heck!
    And put my imagination to shame!

    So, yes, I do hear what you are saying, but maybe what doesn't come out in descriptions is how that primary function (in his case Se) leads and intermingles with the rest of them in this sophisticated harmony too, as vibrant, maybe even moreso in ways, as anyone else's experience.
    I hear you. Now this would be more apt than trying to infuse magic and mysticism.

    But overall, should any descriptions be written to 'sell'? Rather than fluffing up the descriptions to make them appealing (which I blame on Kiersey and his book selling needs), wish they were all written 'as is'. I sincerely find the ENTJ descriptions to be repulsive and somewhat inaccurate. Caricatures.

  10. #90
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andante View Post
    I hear you. Now this would be more apt than trying to infuse magic and mysticism.

    But overall, should any descriptions be written to 'sell'? Rather than fluffing up the descriptions to make them appealing (which I blame on Kiersey and his book selling needs), wish they were all written 'as is'. I sincerely find the ENTJ descriptions to be repulsive and somewhat inaccurate. Caricatures.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Yes - I do admit that ISTP is the one type where I have had a problem with some of the descriptions. I almost said that in the last post.

    I really don't see anything wrong with that description and in fact for the ISFJs I know, those things are all true. It doesn't say they don't like learning or school. It doesn't say they aren't intelligent. They don't like studying theory. They are about practical application and prefer to do things they know how to do and to do them well vs. theorizing about application of abstract concepts or having the stress of having to learn and do new things all the time. They are dependable.
    ISFJs like to learn new things all the time, just like anybody with any ounce of curiosity about the world.

    I see there is no point in arguing with you, though, as you will simply deny that there is anything wrong with the descriptions because, for whatever reason, you are motivated to do so.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

Similar Threads

  1. A warm hello from a new forum user of MBTI Central here
    By bandit in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-18-2016, 11:38 PM
  2. Forum Statistics - % Of MBTI Types
    By highlander in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 207
    Last Post: 09-23-2013, 11:44 AM
  3. [Enne] Forum Statistics - % of Enneagram Types
    By highlander in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 03-18-2013, 09:57 AM
  4. 3 Different Kinds of MBTI Types?
    By amerellis in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 08-29-2011, 06:35 PM
  5. Anywhere to find photos of MBTI types?
    By Addict_Inquiry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-10-2008, 11:17 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