• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

DN's Director Type List

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i don't think of isfps as "insane micromanagers." i don't see a natural connection between wes anderson and ernest hemingway, nor do i think of wes anderson as the "rugged outdoor" type. that seems ludicrous. but i will agree that his visual detail, the "bric a brac" criticism, and the inserts for his films do seem more Se than Ne. i would be interested to know more about what the writing process looks like for him. when he speaks he seems somewhat disjointed, but the 4w3 sophistication still comes through.

i don't think i misunderstand S. i think, if anything, it is difficult to interpret and expect in an exacting way the balance of S-N perception in various types, especially when they are developed differently in different enneagram types. yet tertiary Ni is not dominant Ni, just like inferior Se is not auxilary Se. the role they play is so different, because they contribute to such a different organism.

there is a tendency to associate quirky with N. this is bc N frees you from seeing a problem or an action in the same way, a concrete as-it-is kind of way. imaginative perception opens up possibilities, but also loses focuses and is generally less aware of implementation details on a zoomed in kind of way. it abstracts to think across time, over different distances and scopes.

wes, on the contrary, does seem to have what works for him and is gonna stick to it.

his world does have the feel it does based on the composition of the shot, the visual detail, and the visual details of the characters. plus music. the dialogue makes it sound 4w3, very much classic playwright wit/banter/absurdity. it's definitely very down to earth and not conceptual. i think i'm convinced.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
Typically, ISFPs I don't think are 'insane micromanagers', but when it comes to their art, I think they can get downright obsessive. I know I can spend hours doing something over and over, refining like crazy, until I'm pleased with it. It's noticeable because it's so different than how I am otherwise.


Convinced? Awesome.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
probably convinced about the Se. i don't see an Fi dominant yet. i'm still arguing about this in my head. i don't think isfp brings him come fully into focus.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
According to Kiersey, he's listed as a ISFP.

According to Kiersey, he's listed at ISFP.

According to Kiersey, anyone with a shred of artistic talent is ISFP.
 

Killjoy

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
215
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
This list is ridiculous. Film direction is totally ISFP/ISTP territory- observant, keen eye for detail, telling a story via images... I'm not saying that there aren't other types that are directors, obviously there are, but to have two ISFP directors listed? Come on.

Wes Anderson, for one, is fully an ISFP, I'd say enneagram 4w3. Just read an interview with him. Or watch one of his films.

I'd also say Spike Jonze is either ISTP or ISFP. He used to make skateboarding videos, for crying out loud.

And I thought it had already been firmly established that Woody Allen is an ISTP.

Terrence Malick has got to be an ISFP.


Malick is INFP. I'd say the same for Wes Anderson (Maybe INTP).

Woody Allen - xNTP (Though INFJ is possible)

Perhaps directing is sensor territory, but filmmaking requires more than attention to detail and pretty pictures.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i think woody allen is a 3w4, which i think makes the entp intp split all the more difficult (and probably irrelevant) to discern.

wes doesn't look like an infp. yet i too want to call him an intp. if he's a 4w3 like beck, does that make sense?

i do get the sense of technical invention that reminds me of ntp. Ne is probably the best in actualizing a vision than any other function (think entp marketers), especially if the vision is skewed or requires more assemblage from disparate parts. Se seems to know how to work already beautiful/stunning objects, but i don't see it inventing new ones. which is why i see Ne for someone like spike jonze (also, i don't see being john malkovich as an Se film, even if charlie kaufman wrote it).

wes definitely invents very different ways of seeing (life aquatic submarine, fantastic mr fox). my s.o. is adamant that he's an N.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Se seems to know how to work already beautiful/stunning objects, but i don't see it inventing new ones.

Ah, but Se is in the aux position for ISFPs. Fi is inherently creative and does have original ideas. Many Fi-doms report very visual thinking, which includes images and atmosphere.
 

Scorquendo

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
58
MBTI Type
INTP
i think woody allen is a 3w4, which i think makes the entp intp split all the more difficult (and probably irrelevant) to discern.

Maybe this might change things up for Woody:

On STANLEY KUBRICK:
"Stanley Kubrick was a great artist. I say this all the time and people think I'm being facetious. I'm not. Kubrick was a guy who obsessed over details and did 100 takes, and you know, I don't feel that way. If I'm shooting a film and it's 6 o'clock at night and I've got a take, and I think I might be able to get a better take if I stayed, but the Knicks tipoff is at 7:30, then that's it. The crews love working on my movies because they know they'll be home by 6."

"I was never bothered if a film was not well received. But the converse of that is that I never get a lot of pleasure out of it if it is. I'm a compromising person, definitely. It's that I don't get much from either side."

"I never wanted movies to be an end. I wanted them to be a means so that I could have a decent life -- meet attractive women, go out on dates, live decently. A guy like Steven Spielberg will go live in the desert to make a movie, or Martin Scorsese will make a picture in India and set up camp and live there for four months. I mean, for me, if I'm not shooting in my neighborhood, it's annoying. I have no commitment to my work in that sense. No dedication."
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Ah, but Se is in the aux position for ISFPs. Fi is inherently creative and does have original ideas. Many Fi-doms report very visual thinking, which includes images and atmosphere.

i don't think it is inherently creative. or, i don't know what you really mean by that statement. it is a) a cumulative learning function (bc it is introverted) and b) an organizational system for holistic judgment like a huge master map of web diagrams.

but it's not a perceptual process like Ni, so it doesn't travel along them by way of some mind's eye. it recognizes them in Pe articulations, it attaches them to those expressions, tweaking them to find something that better suits them/encompasses them. Se is still pretty cut and dry, concrete, sensory information. it is detailed and designed, but not representational or symbolic or abstract or metaphoric. the assemblage is not from as many sources, or does not introduce as many unlike terms that require conversion, metaphor, abstraction to bring them into the same plane.

they definitely tie objects to feelings, subjective experiences, etc. bob dylan is to isfps what the buddha is to infjs. bob dylan feels like he's always on the move, witnessing, filming, telling stories, etc. eddie vedder does this too, and i think elliott smith is a good example as well. i think the tertiary Ni, tho, is highly necessary to contextualize them into a larger vision, to see how they fit together in a coherency that isn't strictly Fi. or Ne which will turn over sleeplessly until it finds the right idea to go to bed with.



i don't see how that changes anything for woody. he loves to hear himself talk, blow smoke up yr ass, and call it a day. he doesn't want anyone ever telling him who he is. he wants to create images of himself to keep people guessing, at a distance, etc. he loves to talk about himself ceaselessly in his films, star in them, dream about himself. he cares very much what others think, that's a huge part of his whole schtick.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
Ah, but Se is in the aux position for ISFPs. Fi is inherently creative and does have original ideas. Many Fi-doms report very visual thinking, which includes images and atmosphere.

Thank you. I don't think people take judging functions into account enough when they make their decisions on other's types.

Orange, I'm just curious, what do you think is a good description of an INFP? And what makes you certain you are an INFP, not ISFP? I'm not saying you aren't INFP in any way- if that's what you say you are, you are- I'm just wondering.

And yes, Keirsey I think oversimplifies stuff, but I also see a lot of that on the other end, more so I'm inclined to say, especially on this forum. It's like if someone has an original thought they think the person must be an intuitive. It's like we sensors are cameras, just taking pictures of stuff. It's ludicrous.

(This isn't to you, Orange):

Sensors, by the by, have four functions as well. We can grasp abstract concepts, we just appreciate them tied to something real, concrete examples. Same with metaphors, etc. I was a fucking film production/ film studies major/ English minor, for christ sake. I took film theory classes, philosophy classes. I graduated with a 3.7 GPA. I know how to write a kick ass paper. But I am an ISFP. How do I know this? Because in my classes when people talked endlessly of theory, spirituality I would get restless... that doesn't mean I couldn't understand it or employ it if I found it useful or necessary, I'd just rather focus on something real. (Of course there's more to it, but I'd say this is a key sign. Also that I feel better to be doing something hands on vs focusing on analysis.)

For this reason, if I see someone who is also capable of the above, like me, I am not going to automatically assume that they are an intuitive. These assumptions piss me the hell off, primarily because they are flat-out wrong.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
i don't think it is inherently creative. or, i don't know what you really mean by that statement. it is a) a cumulative learning function (bc it is introverted) and b) an organizational system for holistic judgment like a huge master map of web diagrams.

According to Jung, Fi has original ideas and often seeks communication through the arts, in order to cause an equivalent emotional reaction to the one it feels.

Also:
Feeling judgments....are often associated with images, feeling tones, and gut reactions more than words

According to me, an expressed introvert, I feel very sure it is not merely Ne that propels my creativity. There are two words I would boil myself down to: idealistic and creative.


Orange, I'm just curious, what do you think is a good description of an INFP? And what makes you certain you are an INFP, not ISFP? I'm not saying you aren't INFP in any way- if that's what you say you are, you are- I'm just wondering.

Well, I am very theory-oriented. One of the major differences I see between ISFPs and myself is what information we trust. I trust my personal theory over real experience, to the point where I can be downright unrealistic. As I mentioned above and even before I got into MBTI, "idealistic" is a word that sums me up well.

I notice SPs tend to mistrust theory though. I notice they seek out experience more because of this, which might be why INFPs are more likely to be bookish. I know ISFPs who are avid readers, so I'm not saying they don't enjoy reading. Also, there's a difference between understanding the conceptual and the metaphorical and gravitating towards it, as you say. I think the former is intelligence and the latter is preference. My ESFP sister is very smart, but she tends to dismiss my hypothetical musings, which is how I communicate. She distrusts pure theory, and I'm suspicious of pure experience (because it's not universal).

I'm also not as prolific in creating because I am so cerebral. I love to do things with my hands, but getting outside my head and being in the moment takes a lot of effort. The ISFPs I know enjoy the physical process more than I do, and I get bored once I've worked out the idea mentally.

As for INFP descriptions, there are bits and pieces I like of many. I remember liking Lenore Thomson's a lot, but I don't own that book.
I don't like when INFP descriptions focus too much on the altruistic side. This is a strong suit and often an identifying mark for INFPs, but it needs to be emphasized how abstract it is. We usually are not nurturers the way an ISFJ might be. This thread goes into that more: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/what-s-my-type/23428-isfj-vs-isfp-vs-infp-one.html
I think I'm probably just starting to reiterate those same thoughts :cheese: .
 
B

brainheart

Guest
Thanks for explaining all of this to me, Orange! I love peering into people's brains... very cool.

Yes, I'd say I'm somewhere in-between, which is what has made this whole typing process confusing for me. I like combining theory with experience. (And I don't dismiss people's hypothetical musings, I respect them because they are important to them so they must have some validity and from them I can probably garner some insight). But if you asked me to pick between the two, I will hands-down take experience.

And yes, I love the act of creating, I love the thrill of figuring things out while in the act. And that's why I have a hard time believing that a number of directors, especially someone like Wes Anderson, are NFs, because to be a director I imagine you would have to derive pleasure from the actual tactile experience of film-making- otherwise, why not do something less time-consuming, less physical, especially something that isn't stop-motion animation? That is a freaking painstaking process. Not to mention, as a director, you have to make multiple tactical split-second decisions. You have to be really good at improvising. I'm not saying that NFs can't do these things, but... I think this is where an SP can really shine.

Oh, ps. I love the library, primarily fiction! The rest of what you say about ISFP, though, fits me perfectly.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
According to Jung, Fi has original ideas and often seeks communication through the arts, in order to cause an equivalent emotional reaction to the one it feels.

According to me, an expressed introvert, I feel very sure it is not merely Ne that propels my creativity. There are two words I would boil myself down to: idealistic and creative.

Feeling is by nature relational, to explore your own webs you need something to stir the pot. this is why F types explore each other more, the notion of the self, they relate holistically. you recognize different webs of meaning, which show you how you relate to various objects, people, places, ideas.

Fi is a web of meaning. each object or relationships has an implicit web that emerges outward from it. Fi is a system of organization. i don't know why you're arguing that those organized Feeling webs are ideas or that they are by nature creative. they are how you create expectations, internal organization, and implicit relationships that explain how something is connected to a larger something. of course it is part of your creative process, i don't think it makes any sense to argue against that. Fi is what gives you internal forms to play with.

Ne is different in that it is how you see these webs of meaning in objects/relationships in actual material, situations, moments, etc. as Ne you focus this process more on abstract and imagined actualizations, conceptualizations, metaphors, etc than Se does, which focuses more on specific objects, consistency of facts, visible physical reactions, decorations, and concrete articulations (so-called "real things"). which are simply objects as they are, before they are abstracted, imagined, re-interpreted, etc.

both Ne and Se actively find their internal judgment processes, the processed forms of organization and expectation, in their environment. dominant Ji test them all the time, feedbacking it with their Pe actualizations, articulations, experiences, perceptions, data collection, present situations, etc. the tertiary trap is destructive for them bc they can lose touch with this external feedback process that helps clarify, move along, and provide new opportunity for testing. as a result, it creates fixation to specific judgments that become so limiting they start breaking apart the overall structure, collapsing it like a black hole.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
And yes, I love the act of creating, I love the thrill of figuring things out while in the act. And that's why I have a hard time believing that a number of directors, especially someone like Wes Anderson, are NFs, because to be a director I imagine you would have to derive pleasure from the actual tactile experience of film-making- otherwise, why not do something less time-consuming, less physical, especially something that isn't stop-motion animation? That is a freaking painstaking process. Not to mention, as a director, you have to make multiple tactical split-second decisions. You have to be really good at improvising. I'm not saying that NFs can't do these things, but... I think this is where an SP can really shine.

INFPs will do painstaking work if it's important to them. I'm a visual artist, and I get super detail-oriented about anything I create. I've directed photo shoots and other designers and been in charge of large projects. I just need motivation, and that mostly comes from caring about it and having deadlines. I'm also waaaaay more of a perfectionist than my ISFP step-dad. Idealism gives you insanely high standards, and you will strive to meet them even as it kills you.

Intuition also gives you visionary ideas, and most Ns want to express those somehow. Many INFPs talk about having movie like thoughts, a constant film in your head, and I relate to that. Some may tell a story through a novel with it, but maybe some make films. My ENTP dad, who is a musician, makes funny, stop motion films as a hobby. That's his outlet for his comedic side.

That's partly what I don't like about Keirsey's descriptions - according to him, INFPs are just humanitarians and writers. Many are into music and art also, just as not all SPs are artists.

I don't find it unusual that NFs or NTs would become directors, but I do agree that many SPs would be drawn to it. I think people jump to the N conclusion too quickly for some artists, but I think Keirsey types every artist as ISFP, which is also ridiculous.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Feeling is by nature relational, to explore your own webs you need something to stir the pot. this is why F types explore each other more, the notion of the self, they relate holistically. you recognize different webs of meaning, which show you how you relate to various objects, people, places, ideas.

Fi is a web of meaning. each object or relationships has an implicit web that emerges outward from it. Fi is a system of organization. i don't know why you're arguing that those organized Feeling webs are ideas or that they are by nature creative. they are how you create expectations, internal organization, and implicit relationships that explain how something is connected to a larger something. of course it is part of your creative process, i don't think it makes any sense to argue against that. Fi is what gives you internal forms to play with.

Ne is different in that it is how you see these webs of meaning in objects/relationships in actual material, situations, moments, etc. as Ne you focus this process more on abstract and imagined actualizations, conceptualizations, metaphors, etc than Se does, which focuses more on specific objects, consistency of facts, visible physical reactions, decorations, and concrete articulations (so-called "real things"). which are simply objects as they are, before they are abstracted, imagined, re-interpreted, etc.

both Ne and Se actively find their internal judgment processes, the processed forms of organization and expectation, in their environment. dominant Ji test them all the time, feedbacking it with their Pe actualizations, articulations, experiences, perceptions, data collection, present situations, etc. the tertiary trap is destructive for them bc they can lose touch with this external feedback process that helps clarify, move along, and provide new opportunity for testing. as a result, it creates fixation to specific judgments that become so limiting they start breaking apart the overall structure, collapsing it like a black hole.


It makes sense because 1) I am Fi-dom, and probably grasp it better than you do and 2) According to Jung and most descriptions of Fi, you are wrong. The way you describe Fi does not align with other descriptions. Fi is not merely a system of organization. Sure, it heavily involves evaluation, but it also has original ideas. Jung stated it, and so do other MBTI experts.
Fi-dom values are often very different from their communities for that reason: the significant ideas come from within. I think you have a hard time grasping that because you are Fe-aux.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It makes sense because 1) I am Fi-dom, and probably grasp it better than you do and 2) According to Jung and most descriptions of Fi, you are wrong. The way you describe Fi does not align with other descriptions. Fi is not merely a system of organization. Sure, it heavily involves evaluation, but it also has original ideas. Jung stated it, and so do other MBTI experts.
Fi-dom values are often very different from their communities for that reason: the significant ideas come from within. I think you have a hard time grasping that because you are Fe-aux.

it makes sense bc i say it does. this feels a bit parental, don't you think?

our articulations may not line up, but the reason is just as likely that you do not understand what i say. the entire attempt to use analogies to convey these ideas only shows that the language used to articulate these processes shows but a side at a time of a many-sided story.

i don't know why you think i'm shouting "merely" "merely" "merely." i'm saying that without a corresponding Pe process, the forms of introverted judgment have no articulation, no expression, no actuality. Ji stores judgments, which are weighings, mullings, decisions, evaluations, etc. it stores, shapes, forms, and expectations, once it has a decision it stores it for future use. it's like a legal analogy, and Pe looks for precedent first and foremost. calling these ideas or not ideas is irrelevant to me. you'd be a much different person with Ti instead of Fi, with a different type of creativity. why is this so antagonistic to you? i have no desire to attack you, nor trap you. i don't understand why you think my judgment is wrong, or why you think this produces a negative opinion of infps.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
it makes sense bc i say it does. this feels a bit parental, don't you think?

No, because that's not what I said. I don't see why you refuse to acknowledge Jung's theory and most MBTI experts. I am referring to them in these posts, whereas you are the one saying it is one way because that's what you think.

our articulations may not line up, but the reason is just as likely that you do not understand what i say. the entire attempt to use analogies to convey these ideas only shows that the language used to articulate these processes shows but a side at a time of a many-sided story.

i don't know why you think i'm shouting "merely" "merely" "merely." i'm saying that without a corresponding Pe process, the forms of introverted judgment have no articulation, no expression, no actuality. Ji stores judgments, which are weighings, mullings, decisions, evaluations, etc. it stores, shapes, forms, and expectations, once it has a decision it stores it for future use. it's like a legal analogy, and Pe looks for precedent first and foremost. calling these ideas or not ideas is irrelevant to me. you'd be a much different person with Ti instead of Fi, with a different type of creativity. why is this so antagonistic to you? i have no desire to attack you, nor trap you. i don't understand why you think my judgment is wrong, or why you think this produces a negative opinion of infps.

I agree that the outlet for Ji is Pe, but Ji creates something for it to express. I don't think Fi is merely organizational. I keep saying "merely" because you basically keep denying it can be a source and are trying to boil it down to a structure that holds ideas, not one which forms them. I am saying it forms ideas, and this is not just my opinion, which is why I have quoted Jung more than once. If I am misunderstanding you, then please clarify what you are saying, because this is what I am getting from you.

I don't think you have a negative opinion of INFPs or Fi, but if you want to piss any INFP off, completely misunderstand them. What you write sounds like a misunderstanding of the INFP mind, IMO.


EDIT: Here's the section from Jung on Fi that goes into what I am referring to:

But the very fact that thoughts can generally be expressed more intelligibly than feelings demands a more than ordinary descriptive or artistic ability before the real wealth of this feeling can even be approximately presented or communicated to the world. In order to communicate with others, it [subjective feeling] has to find an external form not only acceptable to itself, but capable also of arousing a parallel feeling in them.

It [introverted feeling] is constantly seeking an image [ideas, values, etc] which has no existence in reality, but which it has seen in a kind of vision.

The primordial images are, of course, just as much ideas as feelings.
 
Last edited:

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
No, because that's not what I said. I don't see why you refuse to acknowledge Jung's theory and most MBTI experts. I am referring to them in these posts, whereas you are the one saying it is one way because that's what you think.

I agree that the outlet for Ji is Pe, but Ji creates something for it to express. I don't think Fi is merely organizational. I keep saying "merely" because you basically keep denying it can be a source and are trying to boil it down to a structure that holds ideas, not one which forms them. I am saying it forms ideas, and this is not just my opinion, which is why I have quoted Jung more than once. If I am misunderstanding you, then please clarify what you are saying, because this is what I am getting from you.

I don't think you have a negative opinion of INFPs or Fi, but if you want to piss any INFP off, completely misunderstand them. What you write sounds like a misunderstanding of the INFP mind, IMO.

perhaps you linked your quotations in another thread? you are telling me jung and "mb experts" say something, but providing very little information. yet, you are right that, ultimately, if i disagree with them, i disagree with them. i am interested in thinking about what they have to say, but i do not feel as if they have necessarily perfected human psychology. they're a sketch, upon which a revision will be made, upon which another revision, etc. the way this picture fits into other pictures always pulls apart our understandings, which then have to be put back together. which is to say that the information supplied by jung would be helpful if it clarifies, but "expertise" or citation does very little to sway me by default. like you, i think keirsey is a crock of shit. i don't like beebe nor do i follow the 8-function model. berens is ok, but ultimately i think all temperament theory is more misleading than cognitive functions approaches.

regardless, this is all extraneous. you don't like my explanation of Fi in this thread (perhaps elsewhere as well). i do. you feel an implicit critique in my thread, as if Fi must be an exclusive generator of its own content, but i think nothing exclusively generates its own content. Fi logs it, organizes it, weighs it, stamps it, metabolizes it, etc. this is judgment. it is an absolutely necessary aspect of human cognition, without which would have no structure whatsoever, nothing consistent, no purpose, no form, no stability, no expectation, no communication, etc. experience is made up of both perception and judgment.

i don't know what the difference between "holds" and "forms" is in your mind. if it is that i don't think you have recognizable ideas in pure introversion that correspond to nothing and are articulated in nothing, we might be getting to the root of this conflict. i can "sense" in pure Ni something is there, but i don't get to it unless i sketch it out, speak it out, etc. just like you can feel something, but if you don't have it exemplified in Pe percept, you just fuzz along without any ability to articulate, communicate, locate, materialize, view, revise, etc.

it is easier to clarify if you object in a way that shows me what you think, rather than going for claims about my credibility. if you think we need to revise the way in which we speak of "ideas" in terms of cognitive functions, i would be more than open to that. ie an idea is part of a larger communicative process that requires both perception and judgment (so is not "merely" N, or F, or S, or T.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
with your edit it seems as if we are not in conflict?

the quotation says that holism is more difficult to communicate than linearity, that implicit thinking is more difficult to communicate than explicit thinking?

i think the "vision" is very much rooted in what makes a function introverted. there is a kind of inner awareness. for me too this is highly visual, in so much as my only ways of possibly beginning to describe this inner experience, this introverted process, would rely on time and space, shapes, colors, etc. i think of Ni as a weird dream-like assemblage space. Fi, i assume, would feel imprints, but this is the part that i cannot know without science, subjective experience, and communicative feedback. (like you, i am trying to separate what is not me from what is).

i do know that all types use their actual bodies to experience mental/cognitive processes, events, etc. so you can feel the weights and pulleys moving even if you cannot literally sense the actual perceptual stuff, there is still this shadowy phantom process, place-held information, formal encoding, etc even if the actual sensory shit isn't firing 100% live bullets.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
Yeah, Orange, I get what you're saying about NF and NT directors; I was thinking about all of this on my walk, and you are right. We all have our way of approaching things, our motivations, and we find our own unique way of accomplishing them. And then I started to think, hmm, maybe I am an INFP, because I have movie-like thoughts, etc. That's actually how I write; I see it as a movie. It has to do with being a visual person, I think, not to mention having been a film major, not with typology.

But then I read these last few posts, and it's further confirmation that I'm an ISFP. :sleeping: (No offense, I'm kind of making fun of myself, or making an observation, at least. I have no idea how you two do it...)

State, I don't know whether you intend to or not, but you put off this vibe that you consider your opinion to be gospel. It can be hard to take sometimes, especially when you are telling us IXFPs what our Fi does or our Ne or Se or whatever. I think it's pretty apparent both to Orange and myself (and to all the INFPs and ISFPs I've known over the course of my life) that we have buckets in common. The Se vs Ne thing can almost seem superfluous at times, in all honesty. This leads me to believe that Fi is more than a 'system of organization' as you say. Every ISFP and INFP I have known has been extremely creative and introspective and insightful. The fact that Fi provides this capability of "putting yourself in someone else's shoes" allows for much in the way of, as Orange termed it, 'hypothetical musings' or imaginings or altered impressions of things.

Look, State, I know you are going to kick the pants off any argument I can possibly make because that is what you are good at. But perhaps you could accept the fact that your opinions are quite likely not infallible. I mean... geez.
 
Top