User Tag List

First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 189

  1. #111
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Ok
    "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

  2. #112
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post

    that's why, after houdini'ing my way out of the mental chains we collectively share, when busting my way out of a broken metaphysic, when communicating, sometimes i'm just like, let them eat cake. let them untangle themselves. it's just a disconnect, experientially, because i just have no idea what happened. and i'm tired. at least nowadays when i sit down to do work, i commit to a recap period at the end of each session, so i have some story sense to go on, rather than just being tilt-a-whirled to the point of physical exhaustion. deep Ni work is fucking exhausting. it's not something that connects me to my sense of myself as a person, but it is tremendously powerful when i utilize it in a way that does. it needs to be done strategically. otherwise, it's like getting lost in the endless incantations of the butterfly effect, trying to reverse engineer search teams to locate each seed that has contributed to the growing up of this moment, without even being aware of how you yourself arrived there, let alone being able to use that self-awareness in a way that enables you to relate to how others are arriving there as well.
    Hey state (supposing you're still around), what exactly do you mean by "let them eat cake"? Do you mean something like, "Oh f#ck, I'm just going to let them believe whatever they want to believe"?

    I'm remembering a conversation I had once, in my car with my mom when my son was little. She was seated in the back, so we were both kind of shouting to communicate.

    Her: Who is this? [asking about cassette tape I was playing]
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: KATE BUSH.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: ...Yes.

    My son started laughing really hard (he was maybe 3 yo), and gave my mom a rundown of what had just happened. She got really angry that I said 'yes' knowing full well she had the name wrong. This is a very literal example of the kind of misunderstanding that happens with people- usually it's more complicated, and my impression that they aren't hearing me is based on criteria that's harder to explain (not simply whether or not it's literally loud enough)- but it feels like I'm constantly weighing whether or not it's worth the effort to clarify something when it seems like communication is missing some mark. Sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it's just not worth the effort. Either the topic we're discussing isn't that important, or I don't think the person I'm talking to is capable of 'getting' it in the first place.

    With the example I gave- I can't imagine my mother actually liked the music. If it were classical music then I would have continued to yell (louder each time) until she heard the name correctly. But knowing that's just what she does- she asks questions, all the time, about everything (because "that's how people express interest in one another")- I made the assumption that it was just one of those times when she was asking simply to be asking someone questions, and not because she wanted to remember the name in order to find that music later. And anyway, my point is (and I *think* the point you were trying to make with the paragraph I quoted) sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it isn't really important to clarify things, because it gets so exhausting, and it seems so meaningless to spend time connecting over something so unimportant anyway. I'd rather spend that effort connecting over more important things.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  3. #113
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Why wouldn't Ti be able to deal with fuzzy logic? And with probabilities and whatnot, all the shite you listed. Probability theory is totally logical too and all the rest you listed I can *see* and *feel* very well from a logical standpoint.
    I don't know...perhaps it's because fuzzy logic deals with the abstract...things that are not readily observable in the real world (hence the N function) whereas T deals with what's observable in the real world, with concrete data...

    Perhaps N imagines the concept and T then formulates that concept into a tangible, methodic, equation form...?

    Perhaps N gets a hunch about a hypothesis and T checks whether the hypothesis holds true...?

    The fuzziness of N function perhaps comes from N eccentrically jumping way outside what's known in the literature (status quo) or away from the center of mass of that literature (status quo) at any given time...thereby, jumping (in an uncontrolled manner) into and\or ending up in uncharted territory whereas T can navigate within or just outside the perimeter of the boundary of that literature one or a few steps at a time in consciously controlled manner...

    So T cannot imagine an arbitrary point (way) outside a given set of available data (domain) yet N can...?

    So T cannot jump ahead 10-20 nodes ahead into the territory yet N can? Whereas T can identify the neighbouring nodes at any given point whereas N cannot? So perhaps N is insane\eccentric whereas T is sane\centric? Perhaps it's due to that T-dom position themselves close the center of society whereas N-dom end up in the fringes...?

    Edit: So T is near-sighted whereas N is far-sighted...?

    Edit 2: Perhaps N has the ability to suspend disbelief yet T doesn't...?

    I really don't know...How is your experience in that regard?
    Last edited by yeghor; 03-05-2014 at 01:31 PM. Reason: Blue added

  4. #114
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    ...This is a very literal example of the kind of misunderstanding that happens with people- usually it's more complicated, and my impression that they aren't hearing me is based on criteria that's harder to explain (not simply whether or not it's literally loud enough)- but it feels like I'm constantly weighing whether or not it's worth the effort to clarify something when it seems like communication is missing some mark. Sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it's just not worth the effort. Either the topic we're discussing isn't that important, or I don't think the person I'm talking to is capable of 'getting' it in the first place...
    What if it's not about the other person's incapability to understand but your incapability to convey your thoughts or ideas in a manner\format that is optimized for better comprehension by your counterpart in the dialogue...?

  5. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    I don't know...perhaps it's because fuzzy logic deals with the abstract...things that are not readily observable in the real world (hence the N function) whereas T deals with what's observable in the real world, with concrete data...
    Read Jung on Ti? It's all about abstract shite!

    I guess the only one thing that makes Ti related to real world observation is that Ti logic comes from experience. It's still not as directly connected to it as Te would be. The Ti concepts are not something you can literally see. Only see them inside the mind.

    Ni can come from experience as well but it seems it's more disconnected in a certain fashion.


    Perhaps N imagines the concept and T then formulates that concept into a tangible, methodic, equation form...?
    Well maybe that. Though if you read stuff on Ti, you can see that function can also imagine/create concepts on its own. But yes more tangible and methodical than Ni concepts. By which I simply mean it's logic, has its own logical rules, not irrational.


    Perhaps N gets a hunch about a hypothesis and T checks whether the hypothesis holds true...?
    Yea, N is supposed to be more about hunches than T.


    The fuzziness of N function perhaps comes from N eccentrically jumping way outside what's known in the literature (status quo) or away from the center of mass of that literature (status quo) at any given time...thereby, jumping (in an uncontrolled manner) into and\or ending up in uncharted territory whereas T can navigate within or just outside the perimeter of the boundary of that literature one or a few steps at a time in consciously controlled manner...
    Jung only attributed such literature related limits to Te. Not to Ti.

    I'm not sure if Ti is all supposed to be fully conscious though, mine doesn't always seem to take a conscious form. Still Ti though because it's about the logic of whatever.

    And about the taking only one or a few steps at once, I'm not sure about that either. My Ti can work in a holistic fashion too as I mentioned in my previous reply to you. Everything is processed "at once" in that mode. Inconsistencies (so yep this is still logic) will be seen together at once and so on.


    So T cannot imagine an arbitrary point (way) outside a given set of available data (domain) yet N can...?
    N is perceiving function, yeah. So this is a good point here.


    So T cannot jump ahead 10-20 nodes ahead into the territory yet N can? Whereas T can identify the neighbouring nodes at any given point whereas N cannot? So perhaps N is insane\eccentric whereas T is sane\centric?
    Yeah, perceiving vs judging Again good point


    Perhaps it's due to that T-dom position themselves close the center of society whereas N-dom end up in the fringes...?
    True for Te-dom maybe. Ti-doms aren't really close to "center of society", according to Jung & others


    I really don't know...How is your experience in that regard?
    Well my own experience, it involves both Ti and Ni. Sometimes it's hard to separate them. Note that both functions are introverted so they will def. share some traits

    I have this hypothesis that some of the stuff people try to attribute just to Ni isn't just Ni. Some things mentioned in this thread are just Ni, yes, but people seem to try to put so many various things into just this one concept. I wouldn't expect all of them to only occur together and never at other times. But it's my own view in terms of how I prefer simple concepts where things actually do belong together. I'm very picky about quality of correlations.

    Otherwise I think whatever I said in this post in response to your lines is the stuff that helps me separate the Ni and the Ti. But as I said, it's not always easy for me when I am in this Ti/Ni or Ni/Ti mode

  6. #116
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    I'm remembering a conversation I had once, in my car with my mom when my son was little. She was seated in the back, so we were both kind of shouting to communicate.

    Her: Who is this? [asking about cassette tape I was playing]
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: KATE BUSH.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: ...Yes.

    My son started laughing really hard (he was maybe 3 yo), and gave my mom a rundown of what had just happened. She got really angry that I said 'yes' knowing full well she had the name wrong. This is a very literal example of the kind of misunderstanding that happens with people- usually it's more complicated, and my impression that they aren't hearing me is based on criteria that's harder to explain (not simply whether or not it's literally loud enough)- but it feels like I'm constantly weighing whether or not it's worth the effort to clarify something when it seems like communication is missing some mark. Sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it's just not worth the effort. Either the topic we're discussing isn't that important, or I don't think the person I'm talking to is capable of 'getting' it in the first place.

    With the example I gave- I can't imagine my mother actually liked the music. If it were classical music then I would have continued to yell (louder each time) until she heard the name correctly. But knowing that's just what she does- she asks questions, all the time, about everything (because "that's how people express interest in one another")- I made the assumption that it was just one of those times when she was asking simply to be asking someone questions, and not because she wanted to remember the name in order to find that music later. And anyway, my point is (and I *think* the point you were trying to make with the paragraph I quoted) sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it isn't really important to clarify things, because it gets so exhausting, and it seems so meaningless to spend time connecting over something so unimportant anyway. I'd rather spend that effort connecting over more important things.
    O_o How do you know without actually ASKING your mother if she truly liked the music. Or how do you know whether someone else is incapable of "getting" whatever idea you have? Too many assumptions seriously. I'd prefer to figure out if the assumption is actually true.

    Also you mention that you could have continued to yell louder each time if you really wanted to get the point (the name) across to your mother. But you didn't do that because it wasn't classical music. So it means it wasn't only her fault that she didn't hear the name right if we must resort to fault finding.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    What if it's not about the other person's incapability to understand but your incapability to convey your thoughts or ideas in a manner\format that is optimized for better comprehension by your counterpart in the dialogue...?
    Haha +1! I mean I don't specifically mean to say this about @Z Buck McFate, just in general I think it's very reasonable to take into account the other side of things.

  7. #117
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Hey state (supposing you're still around), what exactly do you mean by "let them eat cake"? Do you mean something like, "Oh f#ck, I'm just going to let them believe whatever they want to believe"?

    I'm remembering a conversation I had once, in my car with my mom when my son was little. She was seated in the back, so we were both kind of shouting to communicate.

    Her: Who is this? [asking about cassette tape I was playing]
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: Kate Bush.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: KATE BUSH.
    Her: Kate Wood?
    Me: ...Yes.

    My son started laughing really hard (he was maybe 3 yo), and gave my mom a rundown of what had just happened. She got really angry that I said 'yes' knowing full well she had the name wrong. This is a very literal example of the kind of misunderstanding that happens with people- usually it's more complicated, and my impression that they aren't hearing me is based on criteria that's harder to explain (not simply whether or not it's literally loud enough)- but it feels like I'm constantly weighing whether or not it's worth the effort to clarify something when it seems like communication is missing some mark. Sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it's just not worth the effort. Either the topic we're discussing isn't that important, or I don't think the person I'm talking to is capable of 'getting' it in the first place.

    With the example I gave- I can't imagine my mother actually liked the music. If it were classical music then I would have continued to yell (louder each time) until she heard the name correctly. But knowing that's just what she does- she asks questions, all the time, about everything (because "that's how people express interest in one another")- I made the assumption that it was just one of those times when she was asking simply to be asking someone questions, and not because she wanted to remember the name in order to find that music later. And anyway, my point is (and I *think* the point you were trying to make with the paragraph I quoted) sometimes I make the unilateral decision that it isn't really important to clarify things, because it gets so exhausting, and it seems so meaningless to spend time connecting over something so unimportant anyway. I'd rather spend that effort connecting over more important things.
    i'm guessing you remember it as the famous marie antoinette line. when i say it, i mean it in a way that also speaks to my own disconnect, at times, which is most relevant on complex differences, rather than simple information. it's pointing back to me, too. to be able to do it once, is one thing. to be able to do it three or four times, and do so in a way that a piece of me can branch off to truly observe what is happening so that i can lead the way, well, it requires the whole of me, a lot of time, and an opportunity to do so that it is very difficult for me to feel like i'm actually fully in control of anyway. it's particularly relevant for deep, deep Ni work.

    i'm guessing that with non-aspie intjs, they figure out how to do this much more constructively than i do. i'm assuming that most are able to more efficiently marshal resources and establish a clearer method for showing the verification of their experience in some sort of meaningful, outlined kind of way. if nothing else, it's certainly more direct. if Te is well-functioning in boiling down the degree of complexity to the appropriate level, and if the person has realistic goals for achieving a sense of veracity, observations are linked in a more linear process. regardless of the method of verification, whether it is more of a tangible, methodological, sequential one, or a more kind of abstract, sprawling, meant to be embodied and tacitly understood poetic one, it doesn't really work without Fi/Ti. the process needs F for relating and recognizing how something is received, how it lands, what it is like qualitatively, just like it needs T for formalizing enough, for constructing to a degree of specificity and structured objectiveness to constrain how one can experience it, to make an efficient, clearly informative message. defining objectives is really the crucial role here.

    i also know that as a 5, i try to operate on scopes too big to be truly effective when communicating. part of this is simply headstrongness and a difficulty, at times, motivating myself to truly FOCUS. i'm sure this challenge for me plays into how i interpret my own experience for myself and for others. i'm sure that my tension with this is especially difficult to work with skillfully when i don't recognize my emotional needs and how those are playing into what i am saying, what i am doing, what i want in terms of how others receive what i do. i like sprawl, but at times i need to do a bit better job taking ownership when mental sprawl isn't meeting my own needs.

  8. #118
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    INFJs talk WAY too much

  9. #119
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    What if it's not about the other person's incapability to understand but your incapability to convey your thoughts or ideas in a manner\format that is optimized for better comprehension by your counterpart in the dialogue...?
    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    O_o How do you know without actually ASKING your mother if she truly liked the music. Or how do you know whether someone else is incapable of "getting" whatever idea you have? Too many assumptions seriously. I'd prefer to figure out if the assumption is actually true.

    Also you mention that you could have continued to yell louder each time if you really wanted to get the point (the name) across to your mother. But you didn't do that because it wasn't classical music. So it means it wasn't only her fault that she didn't hear the name right if we must resort to fault finding.




    Haha +1! I mean I don't specifically mean to say this about @Z Buck McFate, just in general I think it's very reasonable to take into account the other side of things.
    I don't think I ever presume it's entirely the other person, and actually assume it's my own shortcoming more often than not- as I first alluded to here (the bolded, and especially the underlined):


    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post



    The point I was trying to make is that sometimes it's not worth the effort. Sometimes communication is more work than it's worth, that doesn't mean there's anyone to 'blame'.

    eta, about the bolded line: Really? It's unreasonable to make an assumption about what kind of music someone likes after having just lived with them for 20 years?
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  10. #120
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    I don't think I ever presume it's entirely the other person, and actually assume it's my own shortcoming more often than not- as I first alluded to here (the bolded, and especially the underlined)
    Yeah I remember you talking about this sort of stuff before where you explained how you try to understand the other person's viewpoint


    The point I was trying to make is that sometimes it's not worth the effort. Sometimes communication is more work than it's worth, that doesn't mean there's anyone to 'blame'.
    Guess it depends on motivation... I'm way too patient for my own good in attempting communication


    eta, about the bolded line: Really? It's unreasonable to make an assumption about what kind of music someone likes after having just lived with them for 20 years?
    Yep to me

    This is the sort of thing I absolutely don't make judgments on Like, preferences can be totally irrational so it's certainly possible that someone doesn't like X but likes Y for god knows what reason, even though Y shares some traits with X (but of course is not the exact same thing as X or it would be called X right :p ) It's also possible that someone's tastes change, they start to like something for some reason that they didn't before.


    Btw did you see my previous reply to you? I guess you didn't get the time yet to respond?

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] INJs and Introverted Intuition
    By Martian Manifesto in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-12-2011, 03:07 PM
  2. [JCF] Introverted Intuitive
    By Fife in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 12:04 PM
  3. Introverted Intuition as "spiritual gift"?
    By Eric B in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 03:49 PM
  4. Judgment Problem of Introverted Intuition?
    By Kephalos in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 07:15 PM
  5. [INTP] INTP and Introverted Intuition (Ni)
    By Cypocalypse in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 10-26-2008, 12:41 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