User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 37

  1. #21
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,776

    Default

    On time I've decided it doesn't exist we are eternally stuck in the same moment forever. So it's neither linear nor spherical basically we don't exist nor does anything else, but I'll let you believe everything does, when it doesn't I forgive you
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  2. #22
    Senior Member TheCheeseBurgerKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Ni can be pretty awesome, but is worthless without being filtered by Ji

  3. #23
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    My sense of time is kind of parallel to actual time and is based on something different. Sometimes it lines up remarkably well and sometimes really poorly. INJ's I think mark time around patterned events, which is how they can see the future, but they may also think they can cram a million things into a small space of time or think they have forever when they don't. My experience anyway, which seems to accord with what I've gotten from other people.

    I intend to read the OP later, but this is what I have to offer for now.

  4. #24
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    This.

    The idea is retarded.

    Time is linear, and anyone who doesn't think so is an idiot.

    There are some ways of looking at it that can bring in elements of cyclicality, but it is indeed still linear.
    @Zarathustra, @OrangeAppled, @Fuzzy Conduit --

    I know the OP is about Socionomics, but the picture is so accurate I felt duty-bound to post it.

    4ef4951a28ff11e3b23122000a1f98cf_8.jpg
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  5. #25
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by collierm48 View Post
    Ni can be pretty awesome, but is worthless without being filtered fact-checked by Ji Te (and Se)
    Fixed

  6. #26
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grey_beard View Post
    @Zarathustra, @OrangeAppled, @Fuzzy Conduit --

    I know the OP is about Socionomics, but the picture is so accurate I felt duty-bound to post it.

    4ef4951a28ff11e3b23122000a1f98cf_8.jpg
    I'm actually more P, in that diagram.

    Part of the reason I find the J vs P axis to be much more ambiguous/meaningless than it is often made out to be.

    There are some tendencies that can be derived from it, but, for the most part, it just tells you which of the first two functions is dominant, and which is auxiliary.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    I relate to Ni being the intuition of time fairly well. The descriptions aren't that great and could be better, but they work for now.

    I relate to Ni being more like a vortex (almost like an inversion, actually), especially when assimilating information passively (unconscious inf. Se/Suggestive Se) and reaching the "zen-like state" (as Dario Nardi describes it) when thinking about the future, which, to me, seems to be like gazing inwardly and cutting oneself off with the physical world entirely in favor of mental imagery.

    I posted this on a thread on a different forum regarding Ni.

    For me at least, I think of Ni as sort of like an inversion. Normally I just sort of nibble on various little musings I have grabbed from my environment or own thoughts, playing out little timelines based on small things that will probably never happen for my own amusement. If I actually get stimulated and highly interested in something that I'm thinking about, trying to solve, etc., I sort of completely detach from reality in an inverted manner, as if I'm drawing my entire focus inward to manipulate a problem, a thought, etc. When I'm engaged in this state, I literally have no connection to the external world; I just completely neglect all sensory input in favor for the imagery in my mind. The best way to describe the exact process would be ripping the thought/problem to shreds in my mind with such celerity that my own reasoning can't keep up with it to make sure it hasn't made an illogical tear at the stimuli. It sort of feels like sprinting in your own mind while cleaning up the footprints behind the sprinter at the exact same time. Sometimes I will reach a conclusion and have forgotten my entire process for arriving at the conclusion, meaning that I have to retrace my thoughts while already having the conclusion in my mind to double-check my own rapid, uncontrollable work. I stay completely drawn into my own mind while in this state, and the deeper the thoughts/problems go, the more internalized my focus becomes. Eventually, I get to the point where I completely assimilate an idea, a conclusion, a solution, etc., where it feels personalized, as if it is mine. Thus begins a wave of idiosyncratic associative weaving where I knit a visual perspective through information that had been drawn into the abyss that is me. I favored Chemistry much due to the fact that I would absorb the information, rip it apart, and weave it back together to form my own artistry of atoms colliding in clouds of gas, and electrons oscillating energy levels and orbital shells all while seeming to pop into existence and out of existence due to wave particle duality. It feels like the world itself has been ripped apart by my mind, and I get to see the beautiful mechanism that governs everything about it.
    I have begun to question whether or not the assimilation of information becoming personalized is due to the Ni-Fi mechanism, where Ni has weaved its artistry and Fi projects, as a Ji function, positive/negative values on it.

    Ni - Shredding, weaving, mental exploration of Se's factual/observable information
    Te - Applying Ni/Fi digested information to the external world
    Fi - Verifies Ni's artistry in accordance with one's own belief structure/value system, adds emotional weight to internalized conceptual information
    Se - Unconscious absorption of factual/observable information

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    136

    Default

    I have an INFJ perspective on time and everything that I was pretty satisfied with at the time of writing. It is in Swedish though and about one A4-page large in normal font. I'll try to translate it this evening. It makes very much sense to me but I've learned to be careful with Ni and objectivity. I would love to have it critizised so that it may be improved.

  9. #29
    Earth Exalted Thursday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    LIE
    Posts
    3,965

    Default

    Time is ruled by emotions, and moved by events, not my measurements.
    I N V I C T U S

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    136

    Default

    As promised here is my take on the subject.
    I wrote it in 2005 and it is heavily influenced by ideas from Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Camus, with some amendments about classical physics and general math/logic that weren't known to them.
    The consequences of the model, would it be true, are none :-)
    Emotionally I liked coming to closure after five years thinking about the subject and I haven't thought about it much since then.
    But I didn't really like the conclusion and I still don't :-)


    The world exists both as subject and object.
    This is the root cause of all differentiation.
    The subject corresponds to the desire/will of the world (that which experiences).
    The object corresponds to the representation of the world (that which is experienced by that which experiences).

    But the desire/will (the subject) can only experience * itself * as there is nothing else.
    The world thus becomes self-conscious, that is, the object (the representation) is a
    subset of the subject.
    Subset because the world does not know itself completely.

    Complete self-awareness would namely imply that the set itself (the subject) could be an element (an object) in the same set, i.e. that infinite recursion would be possible.
    Had the world known itself completely then subject had been identical with object, but reality contradicts this.
    Infinity does thus not need to be introduced as a concept.
    Discrete theory building is therefore the logical choice (except for approximations).

    Suppose the possible states of the world F(n) are finitely many (n = 0,1, 2, ..., N) and that those states can be described by finitely many degrees of freedom dim (F) = M.
    Now let F(n+N) = F(n), i.e., let the states be ordered in a cyclic way.
    Beginning and end thus coincide, and become arbitrary.

    According to experience, all interactions diminish with distance.
    The world is therefore as most self-conscious when its representation is as small as possible.
    Similarly, the world is as most unaware of itself when its representation is as large as possible.
    Let the latter state (arbitrarily) be F(0), i.e. n = 0.
    Here Sisyphus looks at the stone that he is about to roll up the hill, so to speak. Note that F(0) = F(N).

    The world experiences painful interaction, which it wants to minimize.
    This is formalized in physics as “the law of least resistance”, that is, the desire to minimize the potential energy.

    In its efforts to minimize the suffering, the subject gets to know its surroundings, and gradually the world as a subject realizes that its surroundings (the representation) in fact is a part of the world itself, i.e. the subject realizes that knowledge building, in fact, means getting to know itself, to become self-conscious.
    At the same time it realizes that the price to become conscious is suffering, because knowledge building requires examining the object, that is, interacting with it, which always results in some pain.

    A way for the desire/will to completely avoid suffering would therefore be making itself completely unaware. In the world as representation one can imagine that this is equivalent to elementary particles being so far apart that they completely cease to influence each other. This in turn can be achieved if the desire/will produces one last very painful effort and gathers all space-time and matter in a single, completely symmetrical, zero-dimensional region (one point) and fires off.

    The symmetry in this perfect Big Bang would result in matter to spread uniformly in all directions and no particle would experience any net force from the other particles. The consciousness of the desire/will would slowly drain away.

    The world, however, as mentioned, may never become fully self-aware and therefore the region was not entirely symmetrical and point-like, which in turn gave rise to a new aggregating of matter and a new long pursuit of complete self-knowledge. The circle is closed and the cycle repeats itself identically.

    The overall objective of minimizing the suffering gives time direction, i.e. the ability to arrange the states of the world F(n) in a sequence.

    As space-time expands, so does entropy, and suffering declines.
    In this phase the world becomes less and less self-conscious.
    Sisyphus’ stone rolls down the hill.

    When space-time is compressed, entropy is reduced and suffering increases.
    In this phase the world strives for complete self-awareness.
    Sisyphus pushes the stone up the hill.

    The transition between these phases correspond to the Big Bang:
    The world has become aware that it causes itself pain as it strives to minimize the suffering by learning to know itself.
    Sisyphus is on top and has just rolled the stone all the way up.
    It recognises that one way to escape out of the paradox and the suffering is to try to become completely unconscious.
    The stone starts rolling down again.

    The model is fully deterministic and makes the concept of free will meaningless. It's just a matter of interpretation: I *must* follow the laws of nature (I have no free will) is the same as I *want to* follow the laws of nature (I have free will).

Similar Threads

  1. How do you relate to your inside-out/outside-in doppelganger type?
    By ZNP-TBA in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-17-2016, 09:54 AM
  2. How do you relate to each instinct?
    By Stansmith in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-23-2013, 04:33 PM
  3. NJs how do you convince other people that to trust your Ni ?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-29-2010, 03:10 PM
  4. How much do you relate to your type's profile?
    By Asterion in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 09-01-2009, 09:41 AM
  5. [ISFP] ISFP, How much do you relate to these?
    By wolfy in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-08-2009, 06:44 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