N vs. T (amateur question)

[sarah]

The latest post in the thread I linked. An SP said (I hope she doesn't mind me displaying her opinion here) that she loves brainstorming. That's a piece of evidence against our assertion that N acts as brainstorming, even though that was only an example.

To relate these concepts, I try to use examples that are true for me, so knowing/understanding what I did about N, and that brainstorming seems to be a good analogy or example for it, and that I am horrible at brainstorming, I hoped there might be a connection.

SPs love brainstorming possibilities for action, preferably action that can be taken soon! I think what we get impatient with is brainstorming possibilities to be considered for action in the far future with no forseeable concrete way of making any of it a reality.

Sarah
ISFP

 

[sarah]

Whoa... I think you are being far more "put everything in one single place" or too rigid here.

First of all:
1. Everyone uses all functions. SPs have N. NPs have S. It's just how it's used and in what combination that makes a difference.

2. SPs *do* have a well-documented N-emulator. That's what SP actually -- and the Se+Fi combo is often confused with N function use. Read Berens or whomever else, they've talked about this for years and the difficulty people have distinguishing N from SFP.

Yes, yes yes! Especially because the IS_Ps have introverted intuition as their tertiary function, and Se and Ni often work nicely in tandem. SFPs love to play around with envisioning what could be, as long as we can ALSO be free to take advantages of opportunities to turn those visions into reality. For us, the intuitive function serves the sensing function. It would be no fun (ie: no impact on others) if these lovely visions simply existed in our minds and just .. sat there.

Also, I think the "visions of what could be" for SPs tends to have a lot more physical or practical applications. I can happily daydream for hours about what I want things to look like, feel like, etc., and how I think others might react to the changes I'd like to make. I'm not very good at envisioning a path for someone's personal growth (whoo! I leave that sort of abstraction to the NFs.)

Sarah
ISFP

 

[Cimarron]

Thanks, Sarah, that does make a whole lot of sense.

 

[ptgatsby]

SPs love brainstorming possibilities for action, preferably action that can be taken soon! I think what we get impatient with is brainstorming possibilities to be considered for action in the far future with no forseeable concrete way of making any of it a reality.

I agree with this, although I have no problem with long term planning/possibilities.

Where I have issues is in "thinking for thinking sake"... that is, seeing possibilities that can never be taken into action. In order for anything to have interest to me, it needs to be "actionable".

 

[Cimarron]

I agree with this, although I have no problem with long term planning/possibilities.

Where I have issues is in "thinking for thinking sake"... that is, seeing possibilities that can never be taken into action. In order for anything to have interest to me, it needs to be "actionable".

Yeah, that part definitely helped me out. I don't consider "thinking for thinking's sake" to be useless, because you never know when it may find an application. But I consider it unimportant, and the less actionable a thought is, the less important it is to me, and more marginalized. I may think about it in my free time, after the more important stuff is done first.

 

[mlittrell]

The N envisions; the T evaluates and prioritizes.

a little general but very well said nonetheless

 

[Cimarron]

I think I've milked about as much as I can out of this thread, and that I've come to a better understanding. Thanks to everyone for the responses. The thread can keep going if you want, but you shouldn't feel obliged to do it.