User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 180

  1. #41
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default My responses to some comments

    Thanks to ALL of you for participating!

    I was getting a little worried because there are so many Ns here--so I did PM a number of Ss and invite them to play.

    I'll let you read the responses and you'll see the "expected" differences.

    iNtuitors grab onto the moods, patterns, and possibilities. Because I'm NT, I started giggling at some of the NF responses, like Niffer's and Targo's; they put themselves right into the images, doing both the N possibility thing and the F personal thing. (If you're looking for them, Niffer's playing in the piazza column shadows and Targo's up on top of the Eiffel Tower enjoying the view.) Other Ns talk about themes and impression and use metaphor/simile to describe: the tower is "phallic", the space leaves one feeling abandoned, the painting is "locking up or constraining." Also, ideas pop in and out. Bluebell deliberately returns to the consideration of the image; Wolf puts the design of the space in relationship to the history of architecture.

    The Sensors describe what they are seeing. Sometimes these are lists of details like colors and objects. Arilee picks up on the weather (anyone else notice the jackets on the people?) and the time of day. Girlnamedbless sees the trees outside the space. Sdalek tells us where the colors and objects are oriented in the painting.

    In some respects, the iNtuiting responses seem more subjective and personal to me than those of the Sensors. Sensors are telling us exactly what they're seeing without interpretation, whereas iNtuitors are telling us how they're responding or conjecturing about intentions (trying to get into someone's head).

    Quote Originally Posted by bluebell View Post
    I was making a supreme effort to be as S as I could and actually pay attention to the details. (I'm INTP) But I couldn't. So I just wrote down my thought processes anyway. I kept trying to focus on the details but, well, you know, the connections between what I was looking at and what's in my head was all that was really happening for me. I can pay attention to seeing what's really there if I have to, but I have to switch off NT-ing to do that .
    Great comment! That's why the handwriting exercise is such a great opener for MBTI introductions.

    It's hard for Ns to learn Sensing skills. It's equally difficult for Ss to learn iNtuiting skills.

    On the other hand, it can be fun and it's definitely useful to learn non-preference skills. Jennifer and I both do technical writing, which is an exercise in S skills of sequencing and observing. Look back at who uses actual lists in their descriptions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zergling View Post
    Some of the answers almost seem too stereotypically S or N, if they are actual, honest answers without the ideas of what a person's type "should" notice, that would be amazing.
    This is true, but what I wanted were the first impressions, which will be from the preferred function. After that, the non-preferred function kicks in. You'll see both Sensing and iNtuiting details in the descriptions, but there will be a weight one way or the other, like what Bluebell noted.
    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    Honesty aside, I'm sure knowing what is being tested has a subconscious effect. For that reason I'd like to hear from Geoff and others who have done this in groups of people who didn't know their preference.
    I'd like to hear more of this too. Like I say, I do this to unsuspecting people at times for fun, but the stories are cool.

    About four months ago, I brought a picture home from a Jungian seminar on the Path archetype. I showed it to Sdalek and told him to describe it. To be honest, his Sensing comments fascinated me so much I wanted to share the experience with other people.

    Extra challenge
    If you made it this far, I really do congratulate you! Now, try these:
    • Go back and look at the pictures using your non-preferred function. See how that feels.
    • If you're an iNtuitor (odds are good), read the Sensors' comments and see if you make any more connections. Then tell us about it.

    I'd add something for Sensors to do, but I think they've had that beaten into their heads enough already from the education system.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  2. #42
    Dhampyr Economica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Nice followup!

  3. #43
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Since I was asked to respond, I would have to say my response would be quite similar to Wolf's. On another note, this is another stereotypical fallacy that Sensing types will pick up on more detail than those preferring intuition. We may be able to describe the details in a more descriptive term, but that's about it.

    Like any type, Se only works if the person has an interest in the object. Otherwise SP types in general, are going to miss as much as any intuitive type.

  4. #44
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    Since I was asked to respond, I would have to say my response would be quite similar to Wolf's. On another note, this is another stereotypical fallacy that Sensing types will pick up on more detail than those preferring intuition. We may be able to describe the details in a more descriptive term, but that's about it.

    Like any type, Se only works if the person has an interest in the object. Otherwise SP types in general, are going to miss as much as any intuitive type.
    Thanks for chiming in!

    Describing the details well is an important difference. I notice a difference in the Se and the Si comments. It's true that people will notice things only if they're interested in the object.

    The other things this exercise highlights are the dangers of generalizing and the trouble with typing based on observable traits. The more I work with type, the more I think PTGatsby is right about using the FFM for team-building. I really think type is more useful for self-knowledge than for situations where you're dealing with externally observable behaviors.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  5. #45
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    I dunno, I thought pretty much all the Ns were pretty good at describing the details in the pictures.

  6. #46
    Senior Member sdalek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    I dunno, I thought pretty much all the Ns were pretty good at describing the details in the pictures.
    I agree with that and I don't there was anything stereotypical about the responses. Everyone picked up on details, details that were significant and meaningful to them. Yes, there's a pattern but what is its significance? Some people seem to project themselves into the scenes, act interactively with the scenes, and others step back and look at the scenes from afar.

  7. #47
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    I also think about an N's tendency to "use metaphors and analogies" in communication. I quite honestly have never met anyone who regularly spoke in such a way.

    Maybe an Intuitive would give a basic overview of the event (i.e., "It all happened so fast...") while a Sensor would catch more details, but there's nothing unusual about either form of speech.

    I also think there's a misconception on how a Sensor will notice details while an Intuitive will interpret meaning. I think what this really means is that an Intuitive will be more investigative and try to have an understanding of a subject while the Sensor would probably accept it at face value.

    As for Sensors interpreting things literally and Intuitives interpreting things figuratively, there is definitely a social bias. I think an Intuitive could just as easily interpret "You're biting my head off" literally if he/she is from a different social group.

    I think the literal leaning in Typewatching is part of accepting reality as it is and just living it accordingly, as a Sensor would prefer. An Intuitive will dig deeper and want to understand the whys, but to understand the meaning based on a "hunch" is a bit naive -- some writings tend to take Intuition in its literal sense.

    In reality, I think that an Intuitive, rather than taking things at face value, would be more inclined to study it rather than simply enjoy it.

  8. #48
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rivercrow View Post
    The other things this exercise highlights are the dangers of generalizing and the trouble with typing based on observable traits. The more I work with type, the more I think PTGatsby is right about using the FFM for team-building. I really think type is more useful for self-knowledge than for situations where you're dealing with externally observable behaviors.
    I should mention that with the way all of these theories go, the proper usage would not be at the individual level but at the strategic level. Even team building can be pretty difficult to do with FFM - type has a place here! And there is a fairly good correlation between them, so they don't need to be exclusive.

    Common views in FFM applications; You want HR to have a good slew of agreeable (Fs). And you want strategic development to be Open, and depending on the situation, disagreeable (NT). And you want management to be Concientous (J). And you want team leaders (PMs especially) to be low neuroticism. Sales need to be aggressive (often E, often sTP or sTJ) while business development needs a similar bent (often E, typically more F-P).

    The reason why type fails to do this as well is because it puts an additional layer between behaviour and cognitive functions. And type is personal - FFM research uses large numbers to draw correlations. Type's greatest strength - the personal touch, the understanding... is also its weakness in applying it against behaviours. Individual behaviours are always specific - too much environment - to work from a generalised trait down to specifics.

    FFM deals with this fairly well by isolating the traits rather than building a generalised view of 'who you are'. It makes it, IMO, more suitable for broad application where single traits are dominant in a job position/etc.

  9. #49
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    I didn't choose the space, but it had the strongest impact on me, I think. The word that came immediately to mind was "stark." I found it unpleasant.

    I chose the tower and I think my answers were pretty similar to Arilee's.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  10. #50
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    I agree with that and I don't there was anything stereotypical about the responses. Everyone picked up on details, details that were significant and meaningful to them. Yes, there's a pattern but what is its significance? Some people seem to project themselves into the scenes, act interactively with the scenes, and others step back and look at the scenes from afar.
    From what I saw, the N types didn't fit completely into a pattern, but the S types all had less interpretation/putting things together than the N types.

Similar Threads

  1. Sensing/Intuiting MBTI Test
    By Mal12345 in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-21-2016, 11:25 AM
  2. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-10-2015, 09:56 AM
  3. The Sensing-Intuitive Look-a-like
    By 527468 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 02-10-2009, 05:01 PM
  4. Sensing, Intuition, and Glasses
    By ssrprotege in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-12-2008, 12:56 PM
  5. Thinking/Feeling game: Same Difference
    By rivercrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-14-2007, 08:17 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