User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 59

  1. #41
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Yeah, I think you're wrong. I would say Te's emphasis on algorithm or procedure necessarily precludes more steps in reasoning, compared to Ti's focus on structure (and to me, "structure" is "getting to the point"). Whether one is more correct or not though is up for grabs. Ti types (at least STP, but probably ENTP too) can be hasty.
    Hmm...I guess I was referring to the speaking styles that I normally see* in INTP's versus TJ types. I can see how STP types and ENTP's could be different.

    *Obviously this is not everyone.

  2. #42
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    Also, re: the bolded, I don't know about other ESTJs, but the way I use my Ne can lend itself to something similar, for example with DIY projects. I find useless things around my house, or in garage sales, or in the trash, and I think "how can I make this into something useful?" and then my Ne seizes control of the Si memory-bank and throws possible ideas to Te, which decides on the final DIY project based on various criteria (e.g. difficulty, budget, available tools/work space, attractiveness of final product).
    You know, Ne is always something of the dark horse of the ESTJ functional stack. Gives such an unexpected tang to ya'lls cognitive processes that I think people neglect at their own peril.
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth

  3. #43
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    Hmm...I guess I was referring to the speaking styles that I normally see* in INTP's versus TJ types. I can see how STP types and ENTP's could be different.

    *Obviously this is not everyone.
    I don't know any INTPs in real life (I think. Unless I'm one myself), but I was hesitant to include them because some like to write walls of texts here, online. It'd be even worse if they spoke like that.

  4. #44
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Yeah, I think you're wrong. I would say Te's emphasis on algorithm or procedure necessarily precludes more steps in reasoning, compared to Ti's focus on structure (and to me, "structure" is "getting to the point"). Whether one is more correct or not though is up for grabs. Ti types (at least STP, but probably ENTP too) can be hasty.
    Generally, when people are talking about "getting to the point" they're talking about the big picture, which is typically more about external coherence (Te) than internal (Ti). When someone's asking you to get to the point, they're basically asking you to relate what you're describing to their interest, and answer why should they care about what you're talking about. Some Ti users do that better than others. Te users are always concerned about broader significance. Not just that something works, but why should it matter that it works.
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth

  5. #45
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    Generally, when people are talking about "getting to the point" they're talking about the big picture, which is typically more about external coherence (Te) than internal (Ti). When someone's asking you to get to the point, they're basically asking you to relate what you're describing to their interest, and answer why should they care about what you're talking about. Some Ti users do that better than others. Te users are always concerned about broader significance. Not just that something works, but why should it matter that it works.
    I was thinking about this along the lines of Ti seeing the whole in the parts. My habit of figuring out the object of a game or activity, for example, just takes a cursory glance or a quick run through with it. I get the "point" of it fairly easily. The "whole" is often implicitly inferred. I was under the impression that Te wants things explicitly stated (which, in my view, would lead to not getting to the point as quickly. It's more thorough).

  6. #46
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I was thinking about this along the lines of Ti seeing the whole in the parts. My habit of figuring out the object of a game or activity, for example, just takes a cursory glance or a quick run through with it. I get the "point" of it fairly easily. The "whole" is often implicitly inferred. I was under the impression that Te wants things explicitly stated (which, in my view, would lead to not getting to the point as quickly. It's more thorough).
    First, I think Te is capable reverse engineering exercises like the one that you're describing. We just think about it a little differently. I think you put it very aptly that Ti "sees the whole in the parts". My impression of Ti is that its focus is on how components, working together, produce an outcome. That's what I meant by the emphasis on internal coherence. Te is less focused on process, and more focused on that outcome. It's not so much that we need it stated explicitly, as we take it as a starting point and move forward from there.

    To use your example of an activity, we take as our basic assumption that that activity creates some effect. Whether it be a sense of enjoyment in the participants or creating widgets. Then we want to know how the effect of that activity impacts the enviornment it takes place in. That's what we consider "the point". It's not that baseball is a game where two teams attempt to score the most number of points in a series of nine innings. It's that it's a sport that people rally around because its a symbol of a common national identity, so it can be evoked when you're looking for a short-hand for "traditional American values". That knowledge for me has all kinds of applications.
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth

  7. #47
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    First, I think Te is capable reverse engineering exercises like the one that you're describing. We just think about it a little differently. I think you put it very aptly that Ti "sees the whole in the parts". My impression of Ti is that its focus is on how components, working together, produce an outcome. That's what I meant by the emphasis on internal coherence. Te is less focused on process, and more focused on that outcome. It's not so much that we need it stated explicitly, as we take it as a starting point and move forward from there.

    To use your example of an activity, we take as our basic assumption that that activity creates some effect. Whether it be a sense of enjoyment in the participants or creating widgets. Then we want to know how the effect of that activity impacts the enviornment it takes place in. That's what we consider "the point". It's not that baseball is a game where two teams attempt to score the most number of points in a series of nine innings. It's that it's a sport that people rally around because its a symbol of a common national identity, so it can be evoked when you're looking for a short-hand for "traditional American values". That knowledge for me has all kinds of applications.
    Cool.

    Although the stuff about baseball sounds more like introverted perception (and maybe Ni specifically).

  8. #48
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Cool.

    Although the stuff about baseball sounds more like introverted perception (and maybe Ni specifically).
    It's hard for me to decouple Te and Ni. On its own, I think Te is kind of mindless. Like you were getting at, any idiot can point at something and say that it does such and such a thing. It's the application--figuring out the point, in other words--that makes it interesting.
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth

  9. #49
    Senior Member pinkgraffiti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    748 sx/so
    Posts
    1,489

    Default

    mmm, no, from a by-stander i totally understood FDG's post (and found it funny!) and found the other poster to be pretty dumb and unnecessarily offensive.
    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    To be fair, FDG, your phrasing was not very clear. I was confused by your double negative, too, and interpreted it the same way yenom did -- not in the "stupid FDG" sense, but in the "FDG is telling people who aren't always focused on efficiency to get a life" sense.

    So... let's everyone take one of these.

  10. #50
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    You know, Ne is always something of the dark horse of the ESTJ functional stack. Gives such an unexpected tang to ya'lls cognitive processes that I think people neglect at their own peril.
    It really does tend to surprise people! I love watching the reactions when people see my silly side for the first time...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    First, I think Te is capable reverse engineering exercises like the one that you're describing. We just think about it a little differently. I think you put it very aptly that Ti "sees the whole in the parts". My impression of Ti is that its focus is on how components, working together, produce an outcome. That's what I meant by the emphasis on internal coherence. Te is less focused on process, and more focused on that outcome. It's not so much that we need it stated explicitly, as we take it as a starting point and move forward from there.
    ^ Yep.

    A really good example of that is your typical INTP/ESTJ brainstorming session.

    ESTJ: Which of the two options should we choose? X or Y?
    INTP: *Goes off on very detailed descriptions of options X and Y*
    ESTJ: So, you're saying option Y is better.
    INTP: Well... in a sense... *adds even more data*
    ESTJ: Yep, sounds like option Y is better. Let's do it.
    INTP: ... *fumes over all the data that the ESTJ ignored*
    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    Ehhh...I try not to make threads like this about me. Really, it's the whole bit about me never fully comprehending the cognitive functions. One day, I'll think I totally have it, but the next I realize I don't.

    The bolded is probably another issue I have due to not being at all like an intuitive. Thing is, I dislike the descriptions.
    Well, damn. Usually I tell people to try and look through the BS details of type descriptions to the "important parts" and the "general gist", but I guess that won't work here.

    Have you looked at "Was That Really Me" by Naomi Quenk? It's really, really well written, with a ton of real-life examples, and also explains the functions very clearly. I related to literally every sentence of the Te-dom section.
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkgraffiti View Post
    mmm, no, from a by-stander i totally understood FDG's post (and found it funny!) and found the other poster to be pretty dumb and unnecessarily offensive.
    I just meant that I didn't think it was dumb. Offensive, yes, but I was being devil's advocate about the miscommunication aspect of it.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

Similar Threads

  1. How do you measure success, what does it mean to you?
    By Betty Blue in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-09-2012, 05:07 AM
  2. Which type(s) do you think are the most reluctant (desinterested in) to talk about
    By Halfjillhalfjack in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-22-2010, 02:35 PM
  3. [INFJ] To Other Types: How does it feel when an INFJ gives you the (super) cold shoulder?
    By fill in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 10-03-2009, 06:23 AM
  4. [Fi] NTJs: how does Fi manifest in your type?
    By Venom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 05:08 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