User Tag List

First 816171819 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 189

  1. #171
    I want my account deleted
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Yes. If I ever write all four letters as capitals, it is MBTI JCF. If I ever write 3 letters as capitals and the j or p as lowercase, then it is Socionics.

    ENTP - MBTI
    ENTp - Socionics
    Okay. I've seen that elsewhere too. Thanks for the clarification.

    To add to my answer to the driving question. My answer assumed the question could be taken literally.

    As a possible (counter?) example: I'm much better at remembering the details of interactions/conversations than is my INFP. She gets really irritated at me when I do this. She tends to remember our interactions more generally (and when we disagree on what happened, and there's actual actual documentation like email exchanges, I'm far more likely to have been be accurate in my memory of events and sequences of events than she is. Which drives her nuts as well. I tend to second-guess my memories no matter what, so documentation is really useful for me). This is quite likely a skill I developed as a qualitative researcher, for use in fieldwork situations where I have to jot brief notes and then flesh them out later in fieldnotes. When I do qual interviews, though, I can't stand having to keep track of the details as they unfold and much prefer to record the discussion so I can focus on and move with the flow of the discussion. I get distracted from what's going on if I try to focus on the details over the flow as we move forward.

    I have no idea if any of this is relevant or if so, how, though.

  2. #172
    I want my account deleted
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Oy, Alea_iacta_est, this is too interesting, especially since I'm trying to grasp this and don't have it yet. I didn't expect to spend so much time on the site this afternoon but this is really interesting. I blame you

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Static types perceive reality as a bit of a slideshow (metaphorically, its how they first perceive things). Whereas the Dynamic type (such as myself) would recognize the pattern of the road and recall the drive through its winding as a pure generalization, the Static type's memory of the drive would be jagged, with specific instances.

    (Stolen this metaphor from a Socionics site)
    Take for example, a camera. A camera has two options to record data, by recording it with video or by photographing it. If you take twenty or so photographs during a car ride, you can line them up in a row and chronologically organize them (We were here first, then we were here next, then we were here after that...) and each photograph will be highly detailed and defined with specific information. If you were to record the trip with video, however, you would have the entire trip in one sitting, but lose the detailed, defined, and specific information for a general experience of the whole trip rather than certain parts of it. This is Static vs Dynamic.
    Okay. I'm interested/curious to see what my INFP says about these two things.

    My first thought for myself is that the photograph approach would drive me nuts and feel stressful somehow.

    My second thought is to challenge myself on that reaction, because I could see that if someone is willing to do that work and think that way, it would be easier to find data if there was ever a question (because I would be able to sort through pictures more quickly than sorting through video footage).

    Third thought is "But that (picture) data would be limited in its usefulness because it's chopped up and out of context, so I don't know."

    My fourth thought is remembering an ISFP I knew (a fellow semi-techie, we geeked out together on a regular basis) telling me there's a way to code/tag video in the back end of Flash. That idea was really interesting to me (she was going to teach me but we never got around to it). The neat thing about data coding like that - assuming it's like qual text data coding tools - is that it can include as much context on either side as you select, so it's a more contextualized chunk instead of a a-contextual/static thin slice that to me doesn't have much meaning by itself.

    Fifth thought is: if I sorted through the photos or the video via tags/codes, my organic interest/focus would not be on the chronological sequence, it would be on other ways the data could be arranged in non-chronological patterns. And the video would be much better for that than the photos because of the context issue.

    I suspect that at this point I'm off on a pretty significant tangent.

    Anyway, I am curious to hear what if anything you make of my 2 responses to the driving example.

  3. #173
    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
    It’s not that I think it’s ‘wrong’. It’s a relatively common occurrence in this forum for people to say, “That’s not a <whatever function> thing, I do it too.” Sometimes it gets frustrating because it interferes with being able to discuss commonalities.
    Thing is, these MBTI functions are defined in this way and then that way and then that way. People are trying to add too many things into function definitions, associate way too many traits and observations and whatnot without actual grounds* to do so and without ever even stopping to think for a second whether these things are really that well correlated. Yes I said it before and I will repeat that I'm picky with quality of correlations and yes, quality of definitions as well.

    (*: Actual grounds means checking out the workings of many many people. After all, these MBTI functions are thingies that supposedly apply to everyone out there.)

    So... I wish there was some true common ground where it's clear what's NOT supposed to be part of a function and then what is actually core of a function and the rest is just outside MBTI's framework.. I want to explain to people what the problem is with trying to associate everything on earth with everything else. This is part of my agenda. Like it or not... I would still hope that it at least gets understood.

    Before anyone misinterprets this... This doesn't mean that I want to invalidate anyone's experiences**. Nope. That expression doesn't even *make sense*. So no, you and I and everyone have experiences and they are real and everything but not everything needs to be explained by the actually pretty narrow framework of MBTI. I encourage everyone to read up more on general psychology outside MBTI. It's worth the time. If one's already willing to pour so much time into MBTI shite, then how about pouring some time into other parts of cognitive psychology.

    (**: Someone, I think it was @Werebudgie, in this thread asked: "Why can't it be simply that my experiences are mine, yours are yours, and we don't have to have overlap in order for both to be valid? That's a real question." Good point there I would say! I'm only talking about validity from the viewpoint of theory framework.)

    And well that's the second part of my agenda. Show people that there's more to it - the mind and psychology - than MBTI. Yep.

    And the third part of my agenda is - simply discussing internal experiences of the mind's workings. Whether Ni or not Ni. Sometimes it's nicer not trying to attach labels to everything like that. Especially MBTI labels. Just simply describe, discuss, compare, be amazed.


    Or in other words, it’s one thing to say, “I relate to this too.” It’s another thing to say, “I don’t think this is related to being Ni dominant because I relate to it too.” The latter requires the commonalities conversation to stop long enough to explain a whole bunch of things that I don’t especially have the patience to stop and explain, because my focus is already on something else. I think that for Js, the way Ps want to pick apart the micro details that stand out to them- it’s like being expected to stop the car every 15 feet to check the air on the tires; after the first few ‘air checks’, it’s easy to forget what I got into the car for in the first place (which is why Js get angry with a lot of interruptions). So depending on how important the ‘destination’ of the original convo is- I’ll be proportionately agitated by distractions. [irl, I’m rarely as focused on conversation as I am here in the forum, I’m more focused on the people and I’m far more patient with side tangents. It’s much harder for me in written conversation though, to change gears.]
    Alright cool I already said I'm a very patient type when it comes to discussing stuff. I can deal with it if you don't want to approach it the same way I do.

    I will just comment - in line with my agendas I've laid out above - that I don't see it as a J/P thing about management of details. This can be attributed to many other things.


    So this “I relate to this too” business- it’s not that I think it’s wrong. I’ll just say that I too understand what it’s like to be in a GIT ER DONE (!) mode….but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t a stronger characteristic of Te doms than it is of Ni doms. <-I hope that suffices as an explanation.
    Sure suffices. See above.


    [There are times in the forum when I think certain characteristics are wrongly attributed to a function- but people do tend to be a little too trigger happy with the whole “I do that too” argument around here.]
    OK, we see that differently then.


    I agree that "conclusion" can be either, and I think that's the crux of the misunderstanding here. I think- while the “scrambling around” description may resonate- Pe does the ‘scrambling around’ work aloud. [And before you argue this point- obviously it isn’t 100% every single fragment of every single thought must be spoken aloud. That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying in comparison, Pe processes information by bouncing fragments off of others almost in real time as those fragments occur or relatively soon after they occur.]
    First. Allow me to ask you to stop making assumptions about what I was going to argue about. (Regardless of whether the assumptions are correct or not, I just don't want it. Often it's not correct anyway.)

    Now, as for the scrambling stuff, I don't know if that's Pe or what, I just recognise it in myself. As I said, when I think of a conclusion because of whatever that came up that needed a conclusion, I try to flesh it out in concrete steps and/or find the concrete data supporting it. And I'm sorry this isn't to argue with you, just stating my own experiences, so, yes, I do this in my mind on my own. Say I'm ISTP for example but it doesn't change the fact that I still do this on my own even though ISTP is a Pe type.

    What I do like to talk about with others in the "bouncing Pe style" is simply about whatever things that then make me think in the process of the discussion. Like, I do that thinking on the move and I don't think about it when I'm on my own. That actually is one of the reasons why I don't see myself as Ni-dom because that goes pretty much against the core of that, I think. (Yes. A long time ago in a period of my life that now seems like maybe never really existed, I thought I was INFJ.) :p Anyway that can also have me in the process find such conclusions as above. So I would say I'm 50/50 on this thing. Sorry if I don't fit neatly into the MBTI boxes. *Sarcasm off*


    Someone around here once said that Pi does it’s “churning” of information internally (I think ‘churning’ and ‘scrambling around’ probably mean the same thing), and that seems true to me. I have to scramble internally, my own way- whereas PeJi/JiPe is inclined to want to bounce immediate fragments of the churning/scrambling process off of others. The process may not feel “immediate” to PeJi/JiPe- but it is from a Pi perspective. Think of it like a microwave- if all you ever use is a microwave, then it might sound ridiculous when someone claims food is “instantly” heated: sometimes it takes as long as 5 minutes to cook something. But in comparison to a conventional oven- it’s pretty instant.
    Hmm, as for churning, I think of the information that got collected over time without processing it right away. And then one day it comes up processed. I do that a lot too.

    The scrambling to me means as above, what we talked about tracing steps to a conclusion. That's done relatively slowly compared to the AHA! moment that produces the conclusion, but it's still done much faster than the "churning" as defined by me in the above lines.

    I wonder which one you meant actually? I think we were originally talking about the first one or is it that to you these two processes (that I called churning vs scrambling) aren't distinctly different?


    Yeah, it looks that way to me too. One of the problems with the internal ‘churning’ is that having someone bounce a bunch of fragments of thoughts off of us can sound like a bunch of gobbledy-gook if some strong bullet points are not presented as staples to frame that information. While Ti generally makes sense to me (in spite of the fact that it gets exhausting to get pummeled with Ti fragments, I can still usually follow), that’s not so much the case with Fi. I need a context in which to place the fragments or they will go in one ear and out the other.

    And so with Te doms- I’m starting to think a lot of times (when I thought they were dogmatically rejecting anything they didn’t already agree with) they reject Ti because there’s no staple or no framework ready to hold the fragments in place.
    I didn't really understand the part about Fi framework but no worries.

    I think I get the part about "bunch of gobbledy-gook". I guess I'm better at taking that than the Te-doms because I don't really require bullet points Otoh, I do still like to try and make sense of "gobbledy-gook stuff" too, depending on my current mindset. I either just absorb information without processing it right away or I want to take it apart and make sense of it. (Yea I am again 50/50 sorry. :p) In an active discussion I usually have this latter mindset though so I'm sorry if it's exhausting to you being pummeled with my Ti fragments.


    I have been comparing Ni to a Rube Goldberg contraption for a while now (it probably applies somewhat to Si as well): if you put a marble in the top, it has to progress through a series of mechanisms before it hits ground zero. That’s what happens to information: it has to run the course through a series of diagnostics before I give it much weight. People tend to want to bypass this metaphorical Rube Goldberg contraption. It’s pretty common for people to feel like we’re “not listening” if they can’t say something and have it instantly bounced back at them in the way they bounce things back themselves. Pe dom/aux are much better at directly interacting with the information being presented in the moment (whether or not they’re actually giving it a chance is another story- sometimes they only take enough in to be able to shapeshift it into something more self serving before they throw it back, but that’s a whole other topic).
    I see. I don't mind that, I've had NJ people before tell me that they need some time to think about whatever. That's fine. Yes, I'm not like that, I do try to interact in the moment if something gets thrown at me (and I would say I am 100/0 on this, not 50/50, hehe).

    As for shapeshifting things. I believe it's totally completely fucking normal if something gets misinterpreted the first time by whoever. Or not even misinterpreted sometimes but just gets interpreted through the filters that everyone has in place. Well let me give it a better name, one that you used yourself. It's the filter that you yourself called your POV. Everyone's got a POV in this sense. And that's fine. It doesn't mean there can't be mutual understanding. Say, even if there is disagreement, the parties understand each others' POV's. This is why I believe in giving the chance to everyone who's willing to discuss stuff. I think that's where my previously mentioned patience comes from - I really am *not* a patient person in other situations.

    I agree it's a problem though yes, if someone doesn't want to give it a chance, and that's what I call "not being receptive". Not the stuff about the person needing time to think through stuff, that's fine.


    So let me get this straight: after spending years around a woman who asks “Who is this?” every single time there’s music playing (Every. Single. Time.) and who only ever later asks “Who was that musician…” or establishes any deeper interest where classical music is concerned- you wouldn’t pick up on that? Ever? It’s unreasonable to assume that this particular instance of asking is probably going to be no different than the (literally) thousands of times that preceded it?
    Well the way I am.. I would just answer the question and not worry about the deeper meaning of why it was asked. So I can't really tell you much about that. I hate a lot of assumptions in general.


    She isn’t always asking because she’s interested in the artist- she’s asking because she’s expressing interest in the person playing the music (it is possible to reasonably figure out- after being around someone for 20 years- the difference). She incessantly asks questions as a means to feel connected to people and/or just to be talking. Because some people are like that. There aren’t many people who can handle being around my mom very much because of it- it never stops, she never runs out of things to ask questions about.
    So um was that why she got upset about you not actually answering her?

    I didn't really know the reason for her interest when you originally described the situation but I still strongly felt it was unfair to deny her the answer. She obviously felt the same way because she got upset. So that's why I even commented on it.


    And in short, (sorry but) I find it annoying to have someone point out that I’d made too many assumptions when their own observation about it- in itself- is actually based on too many of their own assumptions. It feels like it creates too much work for me communication-wise, and it’s actually a good example of the point I’ve been trying to make (about how there’s no one to ‘blame’). Sometimes, with some people, I can tell blanks are getting filled in with information in such a way that’s too difficult to keep track of and communication starts feeling like it’s more trouble than it’s worth. [I do think Ni- or at least NiFe- is especially sensitive in this way.]
    Yeah that's pretty logical, I wasn't there, so yes I don't know what actually happened, I did assume you were telling the whole story with all relevant details. So anyway I understand you that you found it annoying and sorry for that. Otoh I already talked above about feeling strongly about the story.

    As for blanks getting filled in, let me refer you back to my previous lines in this post about how it's completely normal to see something in WHATEVER way. Say, you see it in WHATEVER way because you have a specific POV. This isn't a sin and no one is exempt from it either. You either. I have seen you changing stuff I said. Just like everyone does. Ni-dom or not Ni-dom, NiFe or not NiFe. I don't have a problem with it though as long as the parties stay open; I value communication pretty highly. (See patience thingie.)

    The only thing I do have a problem with is *if* you don't seem to acknowledge that it's you *too* who fills in blanks and whatnot. Earlier you seemed to acknowledge just that though.


    So anyway, you seem to complain about how other people's POVs get in the way. While you earlier mentioned that your POV will not change easily no matter what others say (I related to that, remember ), only if they say something that's really good POV-changing stuff (wow, I related so much to that too). Does that not mean that your POV can get in the way just as much as other people's POV's can? In this case why complain? It's a perfectly normal thing. Or do you mean that your POV doesn't get in the way because your POV is usually so much better than other people's? I wouldn't assume you actually wanted to claim that.

    Please, do not take this as a personal attack, it's a glaring inconsistency to me right now and I would like to see it resolved. That's all.

  4. #174
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    @Z Buck McFate, too many hard questions/issues?

  5. #175
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Skimmed the last few pages and commenting;


    Quote Originally Posted by Werebudgie View Post
    Interesting. Yeghor first suggested I was an ISTP in a PM dialogue, and when I didn't get on board with him in private, ended up bringing it out into this public discussion.
    Wow all that retyping bullshit. (Please @yeghor do not take this personally, I just hate that sort of thing.)


    I, too, don't relate to how he describes Ni, and I also don't recognize Ni in his attempted descriptions of that cognitive function, self-descriptions of Ni, and how he describes it. And I've been hesitant to get into this next bit because MBTI is just a tool for me, not some sort of street cred thing.
    Alright the thing is it DOES matter what we try to call "Ni" because when you use this abbreviation of two letters, there will be too much information loss if the two letters don't mean the same thing for all partners in a discussion. It's a simple basic idea for effective communication.

    So I do encourage people to not use these two-letter thingies too much, better use everyday words and direct descriptions of experiences.


    This will tie into the topic here:

    It might be worth noting that I often don't share in words with others the deepest Ni information/insights. I mean, when I read your description of your in-motion video Ni information, I asked myself would I be willing to share one of my Ni image-metaphor perceptual experiences in this discussion if it ever came up. I decided I didn't feel okay doing that in a context where the OP goal was to talk about Ni in ways that don't seem crazy and (presumably) are more understandable to those who don't have this as a dominant function.
    Do share. It won't be "crazy".

    (Disregard that I'm the person who says to do it when deciding if you want to share it.)


    Quote Originally Posted by Werebudgie View Post
    On a skim, I see a lot of abstract theorizing about what you think Ni is as a concept, and not a whole lot of speaking from what the actual experience of being a Ni-dom is for you in particular. So it makes sense that you'd respond to my comment about intellectual/values masturbation as if I'm dismissing some core attribute of Ni. (...) it looks to me like when it comes to discussing Ni, you're more interested in abstractly defining a concept of Ni, I'm more interested in describing my perceptual experiences and reading/interacting with descriptions of perceptual experiences from others - specifically Ni-doms for the purpose of this thread - to see if there's any convergence of various actual experiences of Ni (rather than what you seem interested in, which as far as I can tell right now, is more about theoretical consistency of the concept of Ni as related to a thinking system that includes or focuses on cognitive processes).
    I can't remember all the stuff in the thread right now but I wasn't surprised seeing that there isn't 100% convergence. Again, MBTI == too narrow model for such a much more complex system that the human mind is.

    As for trying to define a concept that we can then all call Ni, that'd be with the caveats I already mentioned in this post and in my previous one. And I'm frankly sick of those issues. There's like a hundred definitions of Ni floating around. No point to any of that.


    @yeghor: From my perspective, you persistently display serious misunderstanding of Jungian cognitive functions at the most basic of levels, and your view on Ni is no exception. Overall, as I see it, it's not that your theories are 100% wrong - it's that in my view, your theories are basically made up of a semi-structured conceptual word-salad composed of little tiny bits of accurate information tossed up with a whole huge mess of distorted nonsense. I've held back from saying this largely because I'm not willing to expend the time and energy to pick apart all (or even a specific chunk) of this distorted nonsense to illustrate what I mean. At the same time, from my vantage point, this situation seems glaringly obvious in what you've written and linked to in our sub-discussion in this thread alone, and having it on display is enough for me. And to be clear, this comment is not an invitation for any further discussion.
    Way too easy to judge someone else's thoughts as "huge mess of distorted nonsense". Instead of taking the time to try and understand what the other person is actually thinking in their mind? I am not expecting a reply for this one but I do recommend you stop and think about that a bit or more than a bit. Again, my fav issue of communication.


    Quote Originally Posted by Werebudgie View Post
    From my end, I am less and less okay with having my experiences translated through other people's frameworks and thus distorted from what those experiences actually are. I can tell you I was much more willing to accept that kind of translation earlier in my life
    That's interesting. I always thought an experience is an experience, no more no less. A framework for a system, is just "the map, not the territory". The experience is where the systematic interpretation can come from and that's where it leads back too.. interpretation cannot change reality in this sense. It does "change" it in another sense, of course, if you consider that you perceive everything through your body and inside your mind only, it's inevitable that this perception system is not going to be perfect, it will have distortions etc etc. But that perception, if you assume you are an agent in a world outside you, will still be dependent on the reality outside. There is a certain correlation even with all those distortions (of course if you really fuck up the perception system in some way, it will lose that correlation etc etc).

    So, how did your experiences get distorted? is what is pretty interesting to me, if you feel like talking about that then do.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    I have considered and keep considering the other option (that my own typing might be off) as well...The difference is far too distinct for me to ignore, and my perception so far leans more towards the conclusions that I've addressed in my previous post...
    That's just fine, there's 7 billion people, you try to put them into 16 boxes, it's natural to have distinct differences between two people put into the same box, or "type".


    It's not myself that I've felt bad about...but the inconsistency of the data we've shared about the INFJ type...Something's felt off to me...Something doesn't add up...
    You know what doesn't add up? Everyone here's trying to use a framework (MBTI or jungian functions, whatever), that it's not meant for. It's a way too narrow framework to categorize everything into it. I explained this a bit more in my previous post above.


    And my conclusion in my previous post was the best explanation (that satisfies the MBTI model I have in mind) I could come up with based on available data...
    Your "MBTI model" is one of 100000000 such thingies. :/ I still think it's too narrow.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    Because we both are trying to define the same\common things but I can see that they are not converging but diverging...if I define "red" and it doesn't sit with your definition of "red", then what's "red" actually? And, what is the thing that I've been (mis)-perceiving as "red" so far? It throws me off...
    And all that above answers this too.

    "Red" is just a word, nothing more.


    I agree that the thread is still valuable in terms of understanding Ni...including your perception of the Ni function either way...
    I would rephrase that - it's a valuable thread if you want to read about people's minds, how their thinking works in specific ways and how they perceive their own thinking, and so on. It's definitely interesting.

  6. #176
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I'm not sure if this pertains to INFJs, but as an Ni dominant, I routinely plan out conversations that might never happen or timelines that may never happen in my head just in case they do (part of the irrationale of Ni?). I often will find myself preparing myself mentally for debate by addressing probable questions from the party that I would be debating with in order to strike down their point and deliver my own well. I find myself planning for no reason, almost like entertainment sometimes, to see what would happen in a sequence of events and what would be the probable outcome of something.
    Haha sure all that's typically assigned to N functions. I don't do it myself much, no, I prefer to live the actual thing, the actual debate in this case. Though yes planning can be useful at times. So if it has a use to it I may do it but not so much for entertainment - I mean, as long as it's connected to reality. That is, I sometimes can and will think up stories for entertainment that have no connection to reality, to my world, anything I live in.


    In terms of your own perspective, would you say that:

    The world around you is constantly changing, while you, as a person, remain constant or unwavering?
    or
    The world around you is constant and unwavering, but you, as a person, are constantly changing?
    You weren't asking me specifically but where is this question coming from?

    Btw interesting set of questions for sure. This one, I suppose I'm the former, if that data point (=my answer) means anything to you. But it's hard to say because I don't really perceive myself as constant either. (Not truly changing though, either.) So I picked the former only because I can only tell about the perception of the world. And I'm not quite sure if perception of world vs perception of yourself have to always be opposed in such a way. Perhaps if you explained more about how this is supposed to work.


    Do you perceive reality as a:

    Series of snap-shots, photographs that contain specific events that are arranged in chronological order. (Ex. Do you remember certain paths because of specific points on the route, such as a gas station or something, and if those specific points disappeared, you'd be lost?)
    or
    A single, continuous, flow of events, as an unbroken chain where the general occurrence is preserved. (Ex. Do you remember certain paths as one, undivided route, not by landmarks but because of the general pattern?)
    Is this from socionics? Please don't mix the two theories

    (but yeah seriously don't :P )

    Btw, I'm curious how you'd try to categorize my answer to that one! Taking the example of remembering routes; I remember & navigate routes by an abstract impressionist pattern. I don't pay attention to specific objects like there is a gas station wherever. It's a pattern of spatial orientation of things, not the things/objects themselves. However I don't really get this idea about remembering the path as one undivided route, I don't think I do that. How is that even done? Tell me?

    And then, in general, I don't really try to recall the past, like, I don't try to recall the past 24 hours, but yes I tried to see how it worked for me, and it's definitely a series of visual snapshots, with kinetic data deeply integrated, yet it's static snapshots. Like, I take a snapshot of almost everything that is directly related to my going around, doing stuff, etc. and it's recalled as a series of photographs. If I'm to describe my past 24 hours in words, I will just list the actions I've done throughout the day. Again, my way of navigating a path or even recalling a path, does not use such concrete snapshots.

    So it's that just your example usage sucked here, or it's that this issue/topic just isn't that simple. You know I'm thinking the latter.

  7. #177
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Skimmed the last few pages and commenting

    Wow all that retyping bullshit. (Please @yeghor do not take this personally, I just hate that sort of thing.)
    It's OK...it's just I've started seeing ISTPs everywhere... Like I've suddenly become (more) sensitive to the type template...

    High T correlates with the intelligence stat in D&D I guess (hence the ego)... So high T types may be prone to being narcissistic or egotisticall unless it is countered by say something like Ni that introspects on the self...So ISTPs later in life may develop some self-awareness and self-criticism...that may temper their ego...a high Se, which I correlate with the id and impulsiveness and sensation seeking and also promiscuity, also diminishes the effectiveness of superego in them...So a developed Ni might start serving as a superego, making them more mature and insightful...

    Is it the same in Perc or does it have smt to do with TypoC? Or are ISTPs over-represented on the net wrt other types?

    On another note, would an ISTP female be happy with an INFJ male, perhaps later in life? In other words, would a retired/repented assassin be willing to settle with a reclusive monk (crouching tiger?)

    And here's a quick indicator for high N, do you daydream and fantasize a lot? As for Ni, do you have an overdeveloped inner critic that constantly berates you for your shortcomings and mistakes, lowering your self-esteem?

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    That's just fine, there's 7 billion people, you try to put them into 16 boxes, it's natural to have distinct differences between two people put into the same box, or "type".
    It's not just that but also a model of how human mind/psyche works...all kinds of things like AI for instance can be modeled from it...

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    You know what doesn't add up? Everyone here's trying to use a framework (MBTI or jungian functions, whatever), that it's not meant for. It's a way too narrow framework to categorize everything into it. I explained this a bit more in my previous post above.
    I know but Ni is obsessive about simplifying this (perhaps reducing their resolution/detail in the process, for easier storage and faster recall and processing times perhaps?)

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Your "MBTI model" is one of 100000000 such thingies. :/ I still think it's too narrow.
    OK...

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    I would rephrase that - it's a valuable thread if you want to read about people's minds, how their thinking works in specific ways and how they perceive their own thinking, and so on. It's definitely interesting.
    Yes, human psyche...

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Haha sure all that's typically assigned to N functions. I don't do it myself much, no, I prefer to live the actual thing, the actual debate in this case. Though yes planning can be useful at times. So if it has a use to it I may do it but not so much for entertainment - I mean, as long as it's connected to reality. That is, I sometimes can and will think up stories for entertainment that have no connection to reality, to my world, anything I live in.
    It's like preparing too much baggage for an upcoming trip...over-preparedness and obsession...it's just a mental baggage in this case...

    Sent via Tapatalk

  8. #178
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Or do you mean that your POV doesn't get in the way because your POV is usually so much better than other people's?
    I think that others' points of view being so incredibly different is what the problem is- I don't think mine is "better" just because communication is strained. And I apologize for not responding, but this exchange is actually a good example of someone else's point of view being so different that communication is strained. I really can't even figure out what you're getting at in the above post or what you're asking. If you have questions about introverted intuition or the opening post, maybe someone else can answer them.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  9. #179
    Aspie Idealist TaylorS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    972 so/sp
    Socionics
    EII Ni
    Posts
    365

    Default

    My understanding is that Ni takes sensory information from Se and generates various subjective "perspectives" on something. This is in contrast to Ne, which generates objective possibilities from subjective (Si) sense impressions and memories.

    "There are many ways you can look at this" is a common motto of an Ni-user.

  10. #180
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    @Z Buck McFate, too many hard questions/issues?
    Perhaps some posters here, such as myself, don't went to spend that much time on a long response.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

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