X's in type make very little sense

[INA]

Ti analyse information... goes "that's rubbish"... Ne goes "what is?" ... Ti replies "nothing"....
What happen then?

(not sure about circles... producing too many of my own to sort that one out )

In my own experience:
Ti analyzes info, says: "that's neither here nor there so toss it, but let's follow this little Ti-string and see where it leads us." Then, in the course of following the string, Ti comes to find the info wasn't total rubbish after all because now it sees the connection.
Never happens to you?
Of course some tossed things stay tossed.

 

[Xander]

In my own experience:
Ti analyzes info, says: "that's neither here nor there so toss it, but let's follow this little Ti-string and see where it leads us." Then, in the course of following the string, Ti comes to find the info wasn't total rubbish after all because now it sees the connection.
Never happens to you?
Of course some tossed things stay tossed.

Err no not really. As soon as Ti junks it unless my intuition or other external sources suggest I should continue I move on. Too much to do to ponificate everything...

 

[Jack Flak]

In my own experience:
Ti analyzes info, says: "that's neither here nor there so toss it, but let's follow this little Ti-string and see where it leads us." Then, in the course of following the string, Ti comes to find the info wasn't total rubbish after all because now it sees the connection.
Never happens to you?
Of course some tossed things stay tossed.

My theory is that if you tell someone what their function order is, even if it's made up and ludicrous, they'll start to think "Oh, when I do this it's my Ne etc.etc.etc...".

 

[Xander]

My theory is that if you tell someone what their function order is, even if it's made up and ludicrous, they'll start to think "Oh, when I do this it's my Ne etc.etc.etc...".

That's be your Ti backed up by your Ne with some Ni haunting it all in the background.

 

[mlittrell]

very well put ^

 

[Jack Flak]

That's be your Ti backed up by your Ne with some Ni haunting it all in the background.

That's what I thought IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW

 

[runvardh]

I see what Xander is getting at, it's also one of the reasons why I drop signs while doing formulas if I'm going too fast.

 

[mlittrell]

I see what Xander is getting at, it's also one of the reasons why I drop signs while doing formulas if I'm going too fast.

I write in my own shorthand lol. I do the same thing with math ^

 

[Dom]

heehee
I am at work . . . I have to skim read here. I think we're partly on the same page, sort of. The language is what threw me. People sometimes say "just throwing that out there", to mean they are "just suggesting/conveying a piece of information." Hence the confusion re my first response to you.
I still don't entirely agree that INTPs "don't even consider it" before discarding the info, since they have to Ti-consider and deem it irrelevant before discarding it. But once they have deemed it irrelevant, yup: out it goes.

I know this is a few pages back, but I think he used the phrase in both contexts. To mean share information in on eplace (Throwing it out there) and throwing it away/disregarding it (Toss it out)

Err no not really. As soon as Ti junks it unless my intuition or other external sources suggest I should continue I move on. Too much to do to ponificate everything...

Sometimes that external source has to shout....

Anyway you try living with information having to pass Ne first... it's like nothing is ever irrelevant... :S makes for a heavy work load...

 

[Xander]

In light of my learned friends thinking would it be more clear to suggest that EJs and IPs tag information with a relevance value AS they collect it and EPs and IJs do that after they've collected it?

 

[Dom]

In light of my learned friends thinking would it be more clear to suggest that EJs and IPs tag information with a relevance value AS they collect it and EPs and IJs do that after they've collected it?

Hmm...

Or is it that IPs and EJs collect information after tagging a relevance value?

Which is only a light alteration.. trying letting your Ne play wit it if the Ti asks how on earth can you tag relevance before collecting...

 

[Xander]

Hmm...

Or is it that IPs and EJs collect information after tagging a relevance value?

Which is only a light alteration.. trying letting your Ne play wit it if the Ti asks how on earth can you tag relevance before collecting...

Pre-emptive questions are very presumptuous :steam:

Ne can add in information without the Ti tagging it but it's one of those processes that requires effort. That's possibly the best way of finding out what your preferences are, find that which comes naturally and without effort.

 

[Dom]

Pre-emptive questions are very presumptuous :steam:

Ne can add in information without the Ti tagging it but it's one of those processes that requires effort. That's possibly the best way of finding out what your preferences are, find that which comes naturally and without effort.

Dude, if it requires that much effort to use your Ne, as your secondary function, I need to come down there and help you practice.

I mean let your Ne play with the concept that IP's and EJ's somehow tag a sufficent level of relevance to a piece or information or concept before picking it up.

I think we all make presumptions all the tiem no matter how wrong that is. There are people here whoes opinion you respect more than others, based upon you contact with them. When they post do you not already expect what they say may be useful and worth reading?

 

[Xander]

Dude, if it requires that much effort to use your Ne, as your secondary function, I need to come down there and help you practice.

I mean let your Ne play with the concept that IP's and EJ's somehow tag a sufficent level of relevance to a piece or information or concept before picking it up.

It's not that which confuses, it's the whole thing of not picking it up at all to tag it which kinda produces on of those Escher moments of thinking.

I think we all make presumptions all the tiem no matter how wrong that is. There are people here whoes opinion you respect more than others, based upon you contact with them. When they post do you not already expect what they say may be useful and worth reading?

I suspect, yes. Prejudge?... not conciously.

 

[Dom]

It's not that which confuses, it's the whole thing of not picking it up at all to tag it which kinda produces on of those Escher moments of thinking.

Yeah that's why i suggested Ne rather than Ti to get the essenece of what I meant....

Ti isn't going to like them crazy stairs....

 

[Xander]

Yeah that's why i suggested Ne rather than Ti to get the essenece of what I meant....

Ti isn't going to like them crazy stairs....

If picking up is 'to have contact with' then tagging must take place either during or after pick up... before would mean not knowing it's there (as even intuition is observation) but having a value preset.

Extrapolating this.. do you mean that via the predicive qualities of intuition you place a tag on things you've yet to come across but have predicted?

That'd make sense.

 

[Dom]

If picking up is 'to have contact with' then tagging must take place either during or after pick up... before would mean not knowing it's there (as even intuition is observation) but having a value preset.

Extrapolating this.. do you mean that via the predicive qualities of intuition you place a tag on things you've yet to come across but have predicted?

That'd make sense.

Well yes like when you know which piece of the jigsaw you want next but haven't found it yet, you've assigned it value (as it's the piece you next want!

But I also thought that the phrase "picking up" seemed to implied deliberate action rather than mere "contact with".