User Tag List

First 6789 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 88

  1. #71
    Senior Member Snow Turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Ashley View Post
    Fun. I like being the INFJ prototype without knowing I'm the INFJ prototype. But which thread? I just jumped in the middle of this discussion.
    Sorry I'll look it up a little later and find it for you.

    As am I. There is a single-minded focus on that one outcome, although I'm aware of alternatives. I think the difference is in how we predict outcomes/meaning and what is focused on in coming to that conclusion. And (edit) these predicted outcomes may be likely different.

    You seem to have a bit of confusion between Ni and Ne, though. Ni doesn't entertain random possibilities, it tends to focus on the most likely one. The difference is that Ni makes leaps or skips steps, doesn't always stick to the map made earlier, etc.
    My bad. You're right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Although, in response to that thing about Si seeking truth... I don't think any perceiving function seeks truth. Perceiving functions just find input that might or might not be truth. If there's a truth-seeking function, it would be Ti. Be very careful of falling into the belief that your dominant function is truth-seeking, that's a very dangerous kind of arrogance.
    Hmm. I like to think of Si as a camera, it attempts to capture reality in it's natural form. Unfortunately all the other functions start colouring in stuff by adding extra functions like lighting and all that. I suppose I use Ti to try and remove all the extra things to see the original thing.

    Regarding Ni... It's such a difficult function to pin down, and it doesn't help when people go on about how it's a difficult function to pin down. x__x
    I've always associated Ni with imagination or perhaps unconscious extrapolation, but perhaps it might not be.

    I like to think of awareness of usage like this.
    Conscious processing
    Se
    Si/Ne
    Ni
    Unconscious processing - Giving it that whole illusive and hidden feel.

    Why do I use this whole idea of unconsciousness/conscious processing? That's my basic understanding of S/N.
    I believe that intuitives are more focused on the process because they come to the conclusions/outline first. Where as for sensors it's more of a conscious building block, therefore they are more interested in getting to the answer. But this could all be just rubbish. I can't exactly test it.

    On a completely unrelated note:
    I've always wondered where my extrapolation came from and whether it was a combination of Si+Ti that was doing so. *Shrugs*
    This was brought up in a previous thread when some person was attempting to explain the difference between Ni and Si, and that Ni deals with theories to predict. It was a confusing thread because I couldn't see the difference...


    I still don't think these misconceptions prove the 'failure' of the MBTI, but I don't have anything more to add to the subject.
    I'm not against MBTI. Otherwise I would have dropped it a long time ago, I just think it needs refining. It's not exactly a finished product and I doubt it ever will be.

  2. #72
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I'm glad you understood where I was going with my post, it seems like no one else got it and totally grilled me.


    Engaging you in debate or challenging your generalizations does not mean no one understands where you are coming from.

  3. #73
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    It doesn't. That was a rhetorical question where I knew the answer was most likely to be no. In the same manner that I know that intuitives will also engage in sensory perception. I'm not sure how much I agree with this idea that sensors somehow have better sensory abilities. It's one of those things I feel fall more into the realm of interest which is not determined by MBTI.
    Sensors don't have better sensory abilities than iNtuitives by definition; they simply prefer to gather data through concrete sensory input more often than by connecting abstract ideas. Everyone does both; this is a question of which you prefer most often on average.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    I've noted the only difference between myself and other NJs is that I'm more interested in the theory that captures reality accurately where N types are more willing to entertain that theory and other theories that don't neccessarily capture reality so well. Si seeks the truth, Ni and Ne seem more to entertain other possabilities purely for their own sake. This is the only reason I don't really disagree with the concept that sensors are more 'pragmatical' as they are more focused on practical application and thus the best solution. But one first has to define what 'application' means.
    It's true that N types are often more willing to entertain unrealistic possibilities. They tend to be comparatively more whimsical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    As for Si seeks truth, well...kind of. Si anchors one in the safety and comfort of what is known and understood directly through past sensory experience. Ni might argue, what exactly is truth and how do we know it?
    The thing about SFs baking cookies or whatever...it doesn't mean SFs aren't emotionally supportive or incapable of depth of emotion. In fact, if you reread my posts on that, SFs are arguably better at providing depth of emotional support because they can connect more directly with others. I would be a mess without my ESFJ mom, and she's one of the most loving and caring people I've ever met, and she really makes an effort to understand our differences, as much as she can.

    There's no need to read things like "SFs are incapable of emotional depth" into MBTI; nobody who takes it seriously thinks anything like that. Just remember that S has an advantage in superior attention to detail and all the realities of the present moment, and N is comparatively strong in considering abstract connections between things, but loses perceptive ability in exchange. NFs are actually, on average, less skilled at meeting the needs of others because they're often too busy running around saving the world. The SF's comparative advantage is in superior awareness of what is immediately tangible, and that has a lot of implications in terms of real skills.

    S sees and describes every detail of a particular tree; N can't do that as well but understands the relationships between different trees and sees more readily the way they form a larger whole called a forest. Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

    Note, also, that being an N doesn't mean you automatically have better iNtuition than a Sensor; it simply means that your iNtuition is preferred to (and by extension generally stronger than) your Sensing. Someone else could easily be better at both, regardless of MBTI type.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    I'm willing to listen to others experience, if we clash there will be problems. Either my assessment of reality is wrong, yours, both, we're missing extra data or there is a misunderstanding of some sort.
    I would argue that right now you're missing data because you're pretty new to MBTI. Don't worry; there's a lot of nonsense and misinformation out there, but there is a practically useful way to interpret it, with practice.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #74
    Senior Member Snow Turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Sensors don't have better sensory abilities than iNtuitives by definition; they simply prefer to gather data through concrete sensory input more often than by connecting abstract ideas. Everyone does both; this is a question of which you prefer most often on average.

    Note, also, that being an N doesn't mean you automatically have better iNtuition than a Sensor; it simply means that your iNtuition is preferred to (and by extension generally stronger than) your Sensing. Someone else could easily be better at both, regardless of MBTI type.
    No disagreement here.

    There's no need to read things like "SFs are incapable of emotional depth" into MBTI; nobody who takes it seriously thinks anything like that. Just remember that S has an advantage in superior attention to detail and all the realities of the present moment, and N is comparatively strong in considering abstract connections between things, but loses perceptive ability in exchange. NFs are actually, on average, less skilled at meeting the needs of others because they're often too busy running around saving the world. The SF's comparative advantage is in superior awareness of what is immediately tangible, and that has a lot of implications in terms of real skills.
    There are people who take those generalisations seriously and that's the reason I argue on these boards, to stop misunderstanding or false generalisations from spreading. I don't know whether the statements you mention hold true for NFs either, but I'm not a NF so I won't comment on that.

    S sees and describes every detail of a particular tree; N can't do that as well but understands the relationships between different trees and sees more readily the way they form a larger whole called a forest. Each has its advantages and disadvantages.
    For me I believe it all converges towards one point - the full picture.

    I would argue that right now you're missing data because you're pretty new to MBTI. Don't worry; there's a lot of nonsense and misinformation out there, but there is a practically useful way to interpret it, with practice.
    Dude. I've been on INFPgc and INTPc since October 2006...

    I'm just ranting against particular aspects that I see crop up now and then. Regardless just becaues I've been here for a long time doesn't mean that I'll know another persons mind, that's why I mentioned that I could still be wrong. Ultimately all I can do is clarify sensor topics from a sensors perspective.

  5. #75
    Senior Member Jeremy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    There are people who take those generalisations seriously and that's the reason I argue on these boards, to stop misunderstanding or false generalisations from spreading. I don't know whether the statements you mention hold true for NFs either, but I'm not a NF so I won't comment on that.
    We should be friends in this battle. I seriously cringe every time I see a post about how "bad" sensors are. People love to judge others on the basis of S vs. N, and simplify everything down to S = bad, N = good.

    I wonder if there's something within the intuitive mindset that leads to the creation of broad, inaccurate stereotypes? To be honest, within type theory, that makes sense - seeing the big picture with only a few details can lead to inaccuracies, and I think that's why this happens. People have a negative relationship with a parent or friend that identifies as an S, and therefore assume that all people who are S are stodgy, arrogant assholes who want to impose their agenda on you.
    "Can you set me free from this dark inner world? Save me now, last beats in the soul.."

    Fonewearl and proud of it!

    I (85%) - N (80%) - F (35%) - P (90%)
    O: 94% C: 18% E: 21% A: 94% N: 38%
    9w1 (SP, SX, SO)
    (9, 5, 4)
    RCUAI (Primary Calm)

  6. #76
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I said "more likely to neglect" in comparison to the SF. That doesn't mean most NFs are emotionally negligent, just that they're more likely than an SF (all other things equal) to neglect real-world responsibilities of any kind because they tend to aim for broader scope moral causes.
    Yeah I'm totally about causes, but I do think of one of the first things to do for a friend or a family member is to just be with them. I also cook. However, could this be because my Se is just more developed than other NFs? I don't know.

    I remember spending time with my nephew every night and making a point to do it when my sis was having some personal problems and my mom was taking care of my little niece. And this wasn't "out of character" for me.

    No one's ever called me emotionally negligent, unless I'm pissed off at them. One of the reasons why I think I'm an introvert is because I'd rather give lots of time and energy to people I really love instead of spreading myself too thin among acquaintences.

    I guess everyone's different. I do picture Ss cleaning more though - maybe being the one's who are trying their damnedest to have the perfect home or something.

  7. #77
    Aspie Idealist TaylorS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    972 so/sp
    Socionics
    EII Ni
    Posts
    365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    We should be friends in this battle. I seriously cringe every time I see a post about how "bad" sensors are. People love to judge others on the basis of S vs. N, and simplify everything down to S = bad, N = good.

    I wonder if there's something within the intuitive mindset that leads to the creation of broad, inaccurate stereotypes? To be honest, within type theory, that makes sense - seeing the big picture with only a few details can lead to inaccuracies, and I think that's why this happens. People have a negative relationship with a parent or friend that identifies as an S, and therefore assume that all people who are S are stodgy, arrogant assholes who want to impose their agenda on you.
    Infantile and under-developed Si?

    I hate S-bashing, I know a lot of very intelligent and well-educated Sensors, they are not stupid or close-minded, they just have a different, more pragmatic and down-to-earth perspective that I find very helpful quite often. For example, my Ni has a tendency of exacerbating my anxiety issues, and I'll go "If this happens, as it might..." and my ISTP stepdad goes, "one problem, it WON'T happen, so quit getting worked up about it, it only gets you stressed out without helping anything!".
    Autistic INFP


  8. #78
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post

    Things like "SF" are more likely to bake cookies or cater immediate emotional need like comfort etc. :steam: The hidden message behind this is that SFs aren't dealing with the more deeper emotions when helping another individual. It also unconsciously perpetuates the idea that somehow SFs are more inept at experiencing deeper emotional feelings because they don't help others (Yes these are some of the things posted in the past, it's almost akin to the idea that Ts are robots and don't experience emotions). I completely object at the idea that I don't understand my feelings deeply or that I have a limited understanding of other peoples emotions. You see problems?
    Nobody's really answering the OP anymore it's turned into a debate about sensing vs. intuition.

    I totally agree with this. One of the things I strive to be is accessible and responsive to people. I do not want to be or try to be ethereal, otherworldly, or like some helium balloon floating off into the atmosphere. I don't think it's cute or adorable. Frankly, when I meet a person who's in La-la land and doesn't even seem like they're equipped to handle the real world, I don't even try to go there with them.

    I'll give this as an example. Me and two of my coworkers (one of them INFP) were having a serious conversation about how we've dealt with cancer in our families. The INFP was quiet for most of the conversation and didn't say much. When she did say something she looked at the folders behind my colleague and said "Those look like a stack of rainbows!" The metaphor did not escape me. Maybe she felt uncomfortable and didn't know what to say and said the first thing that popped into her head. Who knows what was going on inside her head and what she was getting from the conversation. But when she came out with that completely unrelated comment in the middle of a heavy conversation to me that implied she wasn't even there with us. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't. I wondered, is she even listening? Why am I here talking about such a personal topic to someone who's not even present? I know that sounds horribly stereotypical, but it's so true, it really happened! If I don't feel like a person is present in what was going on, I cease to involve them in issues that I guess people here call "deep." This is an example of things that shut me down towards people and what I try to avoid doing. She did not convey to me that she had the ability to relate to me on that level and still doesn't but whatever. I don't know what she did when she was alone or how deeply empathetic she felt. I know that for me, right then and there, I would've signaled to a person doing such heavy emotional lifting that I'm mentally there with them. That comment was like being suddenly dunked in sub-zero water. I know I personally I felt uncomfortably exposed talking with her about that and I don't talk to her in that way anymore, but I tried it to see what would happen and how she would respond. And if she was a poster on the forum, she'd probably say I know this ESFJ and all I ever hear her talk about is celebrity gossip and fashion. And she's right because that's all she'll ever get from me.

    And it's so funny that when she walked into the office, my coworker and I gave each other looks like should we keep talking about what we were talking about or should we quickly change the subject? I make this point to say, just because you're not privy to people talking about "deep" or psychological issues doesn't mean those conversations aren't happening or people aren't grinding those issues internally. They're just not happening when you're around for whatever reasons. Just as I'm not sure what she's capable of but the time I did go there, she blew it with me.

    Perhaps this is the difference between SF and NF. If SFs are better able to meet people material needs I don't restrict that to just making sure people are clothed and feed. There is a range if things that meet the qualifications of "material needs." I'm all about making meaningful connections with other people. I know I've written about this before but I personally strive to reach a level with people in ways to communicate we can be utterly real with each other and be ourselves. I want people to feel comfortable around me and like they can talk to me about a range of topics from celebrity gossip to personal insecurities and triumphs, science, politics, whatever. Maybe I can drop some knowledge on you, maybe you can drop something I've never heard of who knows? When this happens I feel very flattered that the other person felt like they could speak to me and open themselves up to me in that manner, I feel like we've bonded in a meaningful way and I feel like I can speak openly to them as well. Is this perhaps a difference between NFs and SFs? I am often shocked at sincerely asking someone "How are you? No, really. How ARE you?" is so effective a tool at making that first breakthrough. If they're willing to go there, I leave the door open if they want to and if they do that's cool and if not that's cool as well.

    I don't expect to get deep down in it with everybody. I don't want to because I believe you've got to be careful with who you open yourself up to and who opens up to you. I don't feel like I should have some people's emotions on me or open myself up to them because their emotions are tainted in someway and I don't want mine to become tainted either. I'm concerned that I won't be able to cycle that negativity out very well.

    A lot of this traits that SFs supposedly lack are simple things that can be learned by exposure. I've noticed since I've been out in the real world who they direct (explicit) vs. subtle (implicit) communicators are at my job. My preference is for the direct/explicit communicators because I don't like to play guess what I really mean with people, but I also understand that sometimes we can't say what we really mean to each other so we have to do it in different ways. I have identified the more subtle communicators and have learned to do more reading between the lines with them. Example: A coworker will be at my cube chit-chatting and my boss (who I know is a subtle communicator) will come to my cube and say "Excuse me, I don't mean to interrupt you" and give me some trivial thing to do. I know that she does that when she thinks a person has been visiting me too long but she'll never directly say to me she thinks I have too many visitors.

    I just see so much of what is supposedly intrinsic to NFs as things that if you are at all a student of human nature, you'll get if you care to pay any attention to it and learn your way around it. I don't believe that there is some level of something out there that I will always be oblivious to or standing outside peering at a party I'll never be invited to. I can ride my bike with no handlebars...
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  9. #79
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    I'll give this as an example. Me and two of my coworkers (one of them INFP) were having a serious conversation about how we've dealt with cancer in our families. The INFP was quiet for most of the conversation and didn't say much. When she did say something she looked at the folders behind my colleague and said "Those look like a stack of rainbows!" The metaphor did not escape me. Maybe she felt uncomfortable and didn't know what to say and said the first thing that popped into her head. Who knows what was going on inside her head and what she was getting from the conversation. But when she came out with that completely unrelated comment in the middle of a heavy conversation to me that implied she wasn't even there with us. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't. I wondered, is she even listening? Why am I here talking about such a personal topic to someone who's not even present? I know that sounds horribly stereotypical, but it's so true, it really happened! If I don't feel like a person is present in what was going on, I cease to involve them in issues that I guess people here call "deep." This is an example of things that shut me down towards people and what I try to avoid doing. She did not convey to me that she had the ability to relate to me on that level and still doesn't but whatever. I don't know what she did when she was alone or how deeply empathetic she felt. I know that for me, right then and there, I would've signaled to a person doing such heavy emotional lifting that I'm mentally there with them. That comment was like being suddenly dunked in sub-zero water. I know I personally I felt uncomfortably exposed talking with her about that and I don't talk to her in that way anymore, but I tried it to see what would happen and how she would respond. And if she was a poster on the forum, she'd probably say I know this ESFJ and all I ever hear her talk about is celebrity gossip and fashion. And she's right because that's all she'll ever get from me.
    If someone said that to me I'd assume that they were just immature. Is she very young? Sounds like maybe the topic made her uncomfortable and she wasn't mature enough to deal with it.


    Perhaps this is the difference between SF and NF. If SFs are better able to meet people material needs I don't restrict that to just making sure people are clothed and feed. There is a range if things that meet the qualifications of "material needs." I'm all about making meaningful connections with other people.
    I think this is completely off base. I think that maybe *you* are more able to make meaningful connections with SFs, but that doesn't mean that NFs aren't capable of making meaningful connections. To the contrary, some of the first people I ever made deep, meaningful, empathetic connections with were NFs (though I've also been very close to several SFPs) - I needed this because my experiences with SPs and SJs (probably mostly SJs) were shallow. I thought that they were materialistic and didn't know how to relate to people as their inner selves. Now this is an adolescent...

    But what I'm wondering here is this: do you feel that you make more meaningful connections with SFs because you are also an SF so you relate to them better? Do you see what I'm getting at? Because I don't think the statement you made here is true at all in most cases, though I'm sure some NFs are like that - just as some SJs are shallow, materialistic purse collectors. There's good and bad with every type.

  10. #80
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    If someone said that to me I'd assume that they were just immature. Is she very young? Sounds like maybe the topic made her uncomfortable and she wasn't mature enough to deal with it.
    She's my age which is 28.

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    I think this is completely off base. I think that maybe *you* are more able to make meaningful connections with SFs, but that doesn't mean that NFs aren't capable of making meaningful connections. To the contrary, some of the first people I ever made deep, meaningful, empathetic connections with were NFs (though I've also been very close to several SFPs) - I needed this because my experiences with SPs and SJs (probably mostly SJs) were shallow. I thought that they were materialistic and didn't know how to relate to people as their inner selves. Now this is an adolescent...
    Yeah, you're right, I said me. Nor do I think that NFs can't make meaningful connections.

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    But what I'm wondering here is this: do you feel that you make more meaningful connections with SFs because you are also an SF so you relate to them better? Do you see what I'm getting at? Because I don't think the statement you made here is true at all in most cases, though I'm sure some NFs are like that - just as some SJs are shallow, materialistic purse collectors. There's good and bad with every type.
    What's off base? What I think is odd that NFs seem to be limited to connecting with other Ns, but can't seem to cross that gulf into S-land. Which I asked in my previous post, why are NFs billed as the great typological humanitarians when most NFs on this forum admit they don't communicate well with sensors. It seems like people are repeatedly saying it's the sensor not getting IT or understanding IT. If you consistently have problems communicating with a group of people across the board then why is it a limitation of that other groups understanding? How well do they communicate with each other? If it seems to be minimal or easily clarified communications when they communicate, then where does the problem lie? Why is the problem automatically with the other group?

    And most of my friends are NFs and as far as I know we understand each other.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] Do other NFs feel like they observe their feelings more than live them?
    By The Wailing Specter in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 09-30-2014, 09:28 PM
  2. [ENFP] ENFPs, do you ever feel more like SPs or NTs than NFs?
    By Elfboy in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-14-2011, 10:19 PM
  3. [MBTItm] NFPs and NFJs... more different than alike?
    By Elfboy in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 01:01 AM
  4. I am typed different than I first was
    By Amorfous in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2010, 11:19 PM
  5. [NF] NF: since we think 'differently' than normal folks...
    By niki in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 10:54 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