User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 145

  1. #81
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    Yeah, but we'll go with panting too!
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  2. #82
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    *sigh*

    ...

    You know, the INTJs don't want to claim Blue, either.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  3. #83
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    When did I ever say Ti users are incapable of putting together sentences and paragraphs? They do, but they are usually concise about it.



    Before this forum existed, a fair number of INTPs came to the conclusion he was INTJ. We got so tired of reading his lists (yeah, he wrote a lot of lists) that we moved them all into one thread.

    He starts with a conclusion. The end is always in sight. This is common of primary Ni users. He makes it worse by never deviating from the conclusion no matter how much evidence is brought in opposition. Many immature INTJs do this. They cling to their precious conclusions like drowning men cling to a life preserver. Everything goes to this end. He then builds his arguments to support this conclusion. He lays all this out in copious detail, even detail that could be discarded. This is Te, building the framework to support the conclusion. Good Te users learn to remove the extraneous info, he has not yet.

    Extraverted thinking lays out the entire line of reasoning. This is why it is external - all the workings are laid out. Introverted thinking is done internally. What is finally exposed is the boiled down essence of that thinking. NOT the entirety.



    I read dozens, how many do I have to read?



    I took a sentence from the description.

    Here is the full description:

    "Introverted Thinking often involves finding just the right word to clearly express an idea concisely, crisply, and to the point. Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it. It also involves an internal reasoning process of deriving subcategories of classes and sub-principles of general principles. These can then be used in problem solving, analysis, and refining of a product or an idea. This process is evidenced in behaviors like taking things or ideas apart to figure out how they work. The analysis involves looking at different sides of an issue and seeing where there is inconsistency. In so doing, we search for a leverage point that will fix problems with the least amount of effort or damage to the system. We engage in this process when we notice logical inconsistencies between statements and frameworks, using a model to evaluate the likely accuracy of whats observed."

    Nothing that follows that first sentence changes its meaning.
    This is quite interesting.

    Extroverted Thinking is primarily concerned with practical applications of reasoning more so than for reasoning in its own right. A General or a Business executive can serve as a representative of an Extroverted Thinker. His ideas are means to the end of achieving a practical goal. A philosopher or a scientist as a representative of an Introverted Thinker, he is chiefly concerned with the truth irrespectively of the practical applications.

    It is indeed the case that the Extroverted Thinker's process is externalized and therefore observable by all. However, unlike the Introverted Thinker he tends not to be very interested in nuances of thought. He does not want to explore the problem in thorough detail as this is not necessary for the practical applications of his ideas that he seeks out.

    So what we get in a nutshell is the following: you are more likely to see an Introverted Thinker write very detailed arguments because he is concerned with every last nuance of his thought. Especially with the cogency of his reasoning. The Extroverted Thinker is less concerned with the nuance of thought and cogency of reasoning, hence is more likely to work out only the very basic problems and focus primarily on the conclusions, because conclusions are most relevant to the practical applications of ideas.



    You seem to be confusing the two important notions of 'detail' which need immediate clarification.

    This is the kind of detail the INTJ is concerned with. Proper instructions on how to implement plans. Proper presentation. (E.G accurate bar graphs, charts, lists, etc. If he were a mathematician, he would insist that all the lines and graphs are drawn meticulously with a ruler, if your hand slips and the line skews downwards, he would insist that you redraw this.)

    This is the kidn of detail that the INTP is concerned with. As it has been earlier established, the Introverted Thinker is concerned with every last nuance of thought and will work out his reasoning to meticulous detail to make sure it is as accurate as possible. He will make sure that all terms are very clearly defined as well as accurate and will provide long chains of reasoning to make sure that they are clearly defined and accurate.

    Very often you see INTP philosophers like Hegel, Heidegger and Spinoza, or even ENTP philosophers like Hume and Russell make a proposition and then pontificate for another 5 pages arguing why this proposition is sound.

    The thought process of the Introverted Thinker is internal and that of the Extroverted Thinker is external. However, once again, the Introverted Thinker, when forced to argue a point will need to ensure that his arguments are well supported (which means going through a long and tedious reasonign process) that he shall be forced to put out in the open. The Extroverted Thinker on the other hand does not have the aptitude for such rigorous reasoning, at least not nearly as much. When he shall be asked to prove his point, he will not pontificate for 5 pages with long chains of reasoning, he will merely state the facts, appeal to an authority, point out what may appear to be empirical evidence, or in short give a practical reason to believe in his case.

    Practical applications is the key term. The Extroverted Thinker will not be interested in working out his problems in great detail because he lacks the interest in theoretical reasoning which is the defining trait of the Introverted Thinker.

    Both the Introverted Thinker and the Extroverted Thinker have their conclusions in mind always. This is the case because both faculties are judging functions. This is often more noticeable with the Extroverted Thinker because he is more expressive of his judging mindset and passes judgment on more things than his introverted counterpart. (As Jung famously notes the Extrovert proliferates and the Introvert conserves. The Extrovert will apply judgment to as many things as possible, whilst the Introvert to only a few).

    The Introverted Thinker will not have conclusions in mind concerning most things because he has not thought about them much. However, he will be just as rigid and often more rigid and conclusion focused than the Extroverted Thinker when the discussion concerns the few things he has thought about in great detail.

    There is no reason to associate 'decisiveness, or focus on conclusions' with the Extroverted Thinker and not with the Introverted Thinker. It is without a doubt the case that 'decisiveness and focus on conclusion' is a 'J' characteristic. J is a code for 'judgment'. Both Introverted Thinking and Extroverted Thinking are faculties of Judgment.

    We must take note again of the aforementioned distinction between the two notions of 'detail'. Both Judging types, the Introverted Thinker and the Extroverted Thinker are concerned with detail. First and foremost because as Thinkers they are logicians, this requires accuracy of thought. The Extroverted Thinker is an implementor. As I said before, if he were a mathematician he'd be first and foremost concerned that the numbers are written in their proper space and that the lines are drawn neatly. The Introverted Thinker would make sure that all the problems are worked out as clearly as possible in every detail.

    Because of the nature of Extroversion of the Extroverted Thinker he will be concerned that the details of implementation are worked out properly. As aforementioned, he would make sure that all the instructions are stated clearly, and that all things are done to make sure that the plan is carried out properly. Because of this he will not be concerned with working out his thoughts in great detail, this is not necessary for sound implementation of plans. It is a distraction from the necessary practical instructions. This is another reason the Extroverted Thinker will not present his thoughts in great detail. (In addition to the few already mentioned).

    My lists were concerned not with the detail concernign practical instructions or any implementable plan. They were concerned with the detail of working out abstract problems.

    If they were concerned with Te detail, there would be very detailed instruction concerning practical applications of knowledge of typology. A Te, as an extrovert, does not loose his audience. His reasoning is always in tune with practical intellectual concerns of others. My details were concerned with strictly ideas irrespectively of practical intellectual concerns of others. As has been mentioned before. NTP philosophers have been painstalkingly thorough at prooving their point. Bertrand Russell's Principia Mathematica stretches for over a thousand pages of detailed proofs in an attempt to support his basic axioms. As Liquid Laser has maintained, there are many books written by Ti philosophers stretching for over a thousand pages. Just as rigid and detailed Te is about implementation of plans, Ti is the same way about their theoretical conception.

    Liquid Laser was also correct to point out that me sharing the whole thought process is indicative of lack of sound Ne functioning. ENTP philosophers like Hume and Russell were less thorough with their proofs because the extrovert in them made them in tune with the sensibilities of others. They realized that their audience is not interested in the very detailed working out of their proofs. They realized that they could make a point without making it clear that the reasoning is impeccable. However, the Ti in them still seduced them into tedious elaborations of thought. Now, on one hand we have the INTP who is all about integrity of thought and almost no consciousness of presentation and on the other the ENTP who is mostly this way, but a little less so because he is more conscious of presentation. The Te is most conscious of presentation and even if he could (which he usually cannot) present work out his thoughts in great detail, he would not because he clearly knows his audience is not interested in this.

    To all this we should add that Macguffin's claim that having conclusions in mind is indicative of Ni is false. The reason for this is that Ni is a perceiving function. It is more judicious than Extroverted perceiving functions by virtue of introversion (introvert unconscious focuses on things of his interest instead of all things around him, hence Ni, unlike Ne focuses on ideas and perceptions of interest to himself, as opposed to all ideas. Hence it conduces to a small degree to having conclusions in mind, but only indeed a very small. The deciding factor in having conclusions in mind and not having them is Judgment. This applies to both Ti and Te.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #84
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    ^ I rest my case.

    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    This is the kind of detail the INTJ is concerned with. Proper instructions on how to implement plans. Proper presentation. (E.G accurate bar graphs, charts, lists, etc. If he were a mathematician, he would insist that all the lines and graphs are drawn meticulously with a ruler, if your hand slips and the line skews downwards, he would insist that you redraw this.)
    Yes, this is true.

  6. #86
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    The Introverted Thinker will not have conclusions in mind concerning most things because he has not thought about them much. However, he will be just as rigid and often more rigid and conclusion focused than the Extroverted Thinker when the discussion concerns the few things he has thought about in great detail.

    There is no reason to associate 'decisiveness, or focus on conclusions' with the Extroverted Thinker and not with the Introverted Thinker. It is without a doubt the case that 'decisiveness and focus on conclusion' is a 'J' characteristic. J is a code for 'judgment'. Both Introverted Thinking and Extroverted Thinking are faculties of Judgment.
    Yes, this is exactly my understanding of extraverted judgement vs. introverted judgement.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  7. #87
    Senior Member Gabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    590

    Default

    This is getting incredibly stupid. I said before, if an NTP rambles, they'll do it with percieving functions. And I gave some very good examples of Ne-Si rambling that you people should've read but probably didn't.


    Now I'm going to pick through BW's posts bit by bit and point out the Te.

    "You people need to start out with your arguments, not conclusions. For now, most of the feedback has been wholly arbitrary or irrelevant to the given text.

    I can say all I want how God does not exist, or Darwin's theory is superior to creationism, or whatever point I want to make, but this is all substanceless unless some good reasoning preceeds such claims."

    attempting to parent with Te. Ti's don't emphacize 'arguements' or, whether "it would be hard to argue against __". Te's do. We see this emphasis throughout his posting, he always mentions "reasons" when talking about thinking, and all 'proove' this and 'arguement' that.

    Also, a Ti would not title a thread "F mystery debunked" as that is painfully incorrect grammar, yet BW didn't even reply to the first person to point that out. Clearly, BW does not really care about using the *right words*.

    "Very often we come across a convocation that one may describe as that between the ruthlessly cold and the omni-compassionate. The sentimental twaddlers and the sound logical thinkers, and so on."

    Even when I disagree with Ti's I have to at least admit that thier frameworks are original. The above is some of the most unoriginal tripe I have ever read. It is a learned framework, one that in this case BW learned from our culture. On that note, BW has yet to come up with an original framework of his own. On the other hand, his introverted thinking is conventional and derivative.

    "When you speak of 'reasoning' you take the matter outside of the province of Feeling, therefore render it irrelevant to the matter of Fe. Fe in its own right is indeed all about your mother, your church, or your street gang taught you."

    Why does he find it neccesary to put in a "therefor". Probably to be as much of a caracature of thinki-ness as he can. Too bad he picked the wrong attitude.

    "This is because the INTP is a dominant Thinking type, therefore favors impersonal endeavors most of all and disfavors interpersonal. INTJ is an intuitive type therefore favors endeavors of imagination most of all, and because Thinking is only secondary, it is not as intensely interested in impersonal matters as that of the INTP. Since Feeling is tertiary, instead of inferior, there is more tolerance for interpersonal matters."

    Actually, INTJs are usually the ones who are all "I am totally 100% logical" and, through cultural influence, often don't want to be seen using thier imagination. Tertiary feeling for INTJs is introverted, and is usually much less apparent to others than INTP extraverted feeling. Also, in stereotypical terms (including the facet crap) people usually think of INTPs as "very F". Revision to BW's bullshit premise: The INTJ disfavors the interpersonal (Fe) much more than the INTP. Also, the fact that BW gets this backwards is further evidence that he mis-typed himself.

    "Conspiracy theory often appeals to this type for this reason as the external world for the introvert is often deemed bad news and in this case the external world in question is the external environment (since the perceiving function is concerned primarily with the environment), secondly conspiracy theory is appealing to the INTJ because as Thinkers they tend to be mistrustful of the motives of people."

    more Te rationale.

    "We should not use typology to answer the questions of behaviorists, namely why people do things that they do. Those should be placed within the realm of personality, which Jung's typology has little to do with."

    Compartmentalizing of disciplines, very much a Te thing. INTPs, on the other hand are all about "crossing the artificial boundaries of thought"-- (Berens and Nardi, "the 16 types, descriptions for self-discovery")

    By the way, what BW said above is somewhat true, but not in because of compartmentalization. He prefers te, so he'll bring up the boundary. "hey, wait, now we're talking behaviorism", "hey, hey, wait, now we're talking geopolitics". That's Te, folks.

    "Te applies paths of reasoning already developed by others, Ti concocts those of its own. Tis like Aristotle, Leibniz and Russell were the ones who explored logic. Tes were merely concerned with memorizing their teaching and passing down to others"

    While I've already mentioned how BW has unoriginal and derivative tendencies in important ways that he doesn't recognize, the above is an incredible mis-charactarization of the thinking attitudes, and it's part of how he fools himself into believeing he's an INTP. A "path of reasoning" is usually Te whether it's already been developed or not (his personal extreme spin on the extraverted functions). And I doubt that Aristotle was a Ti

    "INJs and ENPs are most intuitive, however they are not the best at using their Intuitions. INPs are the best at using their Intuitions because they are most judicious about their intuitions. (Introverted Judgment is the strongest form of judgment.) You do not need as much Intuitive power as INJs and ENPs have in order to apply your intuitions well, you need much less. INPs have just enough."

    Oh look, another Te rationale!

    "Oh no..please continue..tell me more about how you use your Fe to get from people what you want (I want to learn about this purely on the theoretical level, I am not interested in applying it), and moreover manage to prevent them from seeing that you're using/manipulating them by making your motives appear congenial"

    Trickster Fe (which doesn't look remotely like aspirational Fe)

    "Of course you didnt understand... I will not realize that I am wrong untill I see a logical argument for the case... I have no way of knowing unless logic tells me about it... because I trust logic more than anything else...

    Intuition can suggest.something that is true.. but it will not be accepted untill logic confirms that intuition was right...Nothing is accepted untill it is authorized only by logic."

    Is BW what Lenny Nemoy does now? Seriously, the above is very obviously Te, not Ti.


    "No there isnt..

    Premise 1-ENFJs will help others if they enjoy it
    Premise2-ENFJs enjoy helping others

    Conclusion: ENFJs help others


    Argument 2

    Premise 1: If ENFJs dont enjoy helping others, they will not
    Premise 2: ENFJs no longer enjoy helping others...

    Conclusion:ENFJs will not help others because they dont enjoy it."

    This one made me laugh my head of.

  8. #88
    Senior Member htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    I agree with BlueWing on thinking, and incidentally with Liquid on BlueWing's being an INTP.

    Apropos, I wanted to impose bullet points on BlueWing's writing. Not pejoratively, but simply my own desire to neatly frame the arguments and be done with it; a dialectical shish kebob.

  9. #89
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    I have further edited my post.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  10. #90
    Senior Member Gabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    This is quite interesting.

    Extroverted Thinking is primarily concerned with practical applications of reasoning more so than for reasoning in its own right. A General or a Business executive can serve as a representative of an Extroverted Thinker. His ideas are means to the end of achieving a practical goal. A philosopher or a scientist as a representative of an Introverted Thinker, he is chiefly concerned with the truth irrespectively of the practical applications.

    It is indeed the case that the Extroverted Thinker's process is externalized and therefore observable by all. However, unlike the Introverted Thinker he tends not to be very interested in nuances of thought. He does not want to explore the problem in thorough detail as this is not necessary for the practical applications of his ideas that he seeks out.

    So what we get in a nutshell is the following: you are more likely to see an Introverted Thinker write very detailed arguments because he is concerned with every last nuance of his thought. Especially with the cogency of his reasoning. The Extroverted Thinker is less concerned with the nuance of thought and cogency of reasoning, hence is more likely to work out only the very basic problems and focus primarily on the conclusions, because conclusions are most relevant to the practical applications of ideas.



    You seem to be confusing the two important notions of 'detail' which need immediate clarification.

    This is the kind of detail the INTJ is concerned with. Proper instructions on how to implement plans. Proper presentation. (E.G accurate bar graphs, charts, lists, etc. If he were a mathematician, he would insist that all the lines and graphs are drawn meticulously with a ruler, if your hand slips and the line skews downwards, he would insist that you redraw this.)

    This is the kidn of detail that the INTP is concerned with. As it has been earlier established, the Introverted Thinker is concerned with every last nuance of thought and will work out his reasoning to meticulous detail to make sure it is as accurate as possible. He will make sure that all terms are very clearly defined as well as accurate and will provide long chains of reasoning to make sure that they are clearly defined and accurate.

    Very often you see INTP philosophers like Hegel, Heidegger and Spinoza, or even ENTP philosophers like Hume and Russell make a proposition and then pontificate for another 5 pages arguing why this proposition is sound.

    The thought process of the Introverted Thinker is internal and that of the Extroverted Thinker is external. However, once again, the Introverted Thinker, when forced to argue a point will need to ensure that his arguments are well supported (which means going through a long and tedious reasonign process) that he shall be forced to put out in the open. The Extroverted Thinker on the other hand does not have the aptitude for such rigorous reasoning, at least not nearly as much. When he shall be asked to prove his point, he will not pontificate for 5 pages with long chains of reasoning, he will merely state the facts, appeal to an authority, point out what may appear to be empirical evidence, or in short give a practical reason to believe in his case.

    Practical applications is the key term. The Extroverted Thinker will not be interested in working out his problems in great detail because he lacks the interest in theoretical reasoning which is the defining trait of the Introverted Thinker.

    Both the Introverted Thinker and the Extroverted Thinker have their conclusions in mind always. This is the case because both faculties are judging functions. This is often more noticeable with the Extroverted Thinker because he is more expressive of his judging mindset and passes judgment on more things than his introverted counterpart. (As Jung famously notes the Extrovert proliferates and the Introvert conserves. The Extrovert will apply judgment to as many things as possible, whilst the Introvert to only a few).

    The Introverted Thinker will not have conclusions in mind concerning most things because he has not thought about them much. However, he will be just as rigid and often more rigid and conclusion focused than the Extroverted Thinker when the discussion concerns the few things he has thought about in great detail.

    There is no reason to associate 'decisiveness, or focus on conclusions' with the Extroverted Thinker and not with the Introverted Thinker. It is without a doubt the case that 'decisiveness and focus on conclusion' is a 'J' characteristic. J is a code for 'judgment'. Both Introverted Thinking and Extroverted Thinking are faculties of Judgment.
    When you say "long chains of reasoning", do you mean long chains of if-then-therefors? Oh wait, that's Te!

    And quit hyping up the whole "external" vs. "internal" bullshit. You can communicate Ti to others, and you can do Te in your head. And in the end, Ti and Te does NOT determine who has more interest in an application of thier thinking! You can be 'theoretical' with either attitude.

    Heck, business executives are just as often __TPs.

    You are skewing the aspects of "introverted" and "extraverted" and you are distorting what actually goes on with the processes by trying to make that compatible with what people commonly recognize as extraversion and introversion. What stems for that is your nonsense about internal and external, and you are really just talking about two different uses of Te.

Similar Threads

  1. The Euthyphro -- Ti vs. Te?
    By Athenian200 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-08-2011, 08:19 PM
  2. Ti vs Te consistency
    By Cimarron in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 03:53 PM
  3. Hypothesis about Ti vs. Te writing styles
    By ygolo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-23-2009, 10:42 PM
  4. Maths and Ti vs. Te
    By Gauche in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-14-2009, 05:11 AM
  5. Ti vs. Te, do they trust each other?
    By heart in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-03-2008, 10:57 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