[MBTI General] How do NF's talk to S's in general?

[King sns]

Not really, using only sensing, a red light is just a light, same as any other light including green ones. It takes intuition to interpret the symbolic meaning of a red light at a set of traffic lights.

With intuition red means stop, without intuition red just means red.

Of course these are intuition and sensing in their most basic form but that is how I interpret them.

yea or if a woman asks you "do I look fat in this dress?" (and she did) a person not using intuition may say "yes."

 

[Jeffster]

So any type of symbolism is intuition? I'm not sure I buy that. A dog could learn the traffic patterns caused by signal lights.

 

[Quinlan]

So any type of symbolism is intuition? I'm not sure I buy that. A dog could learn the traffic patterns caused by signal lights.

Interpreting symbols is a very basic form of it, at least that's what I think. Why wouldn't we expect very basic and raw forms of similar brain functions to ours in animals?

 

[EJCC]

I have tested 88% Intuitive and naturally I have a serious communication problem with S's in general.

They always seem to give me a look of almost disgust that I care so much about seemingly light issues.

A perfect example would be talking about movies, something I really enjoy talking about. The movie would be WALL-E.

I really saw what the makers of WALL-E were trying to get at. WALL-E and EVE broke out of their "programming" when it seemed to be obsolete. The AUTO bot was just the opposite, he followed "orders" to a fault and nearly killed all the people he was created to protect on the Axiom.

I was explaining this to an S and her reply was: "WALL-E makes funny noises." It was a bit tongue and cheek but that's how the conversation ended. She was basically saying that she couldn't care less about the moral values of the story, and I would assume she is confused why I would care about them.

This may be a bit off topic, but I feel like I should point out that not all Sensors would do BS like that. That's a pretty shallow S you're talking about. If someone said something like that to me, I'd be offended too.

See, if you said that to me, my response would be "Oh, interesting. I hadn't thought about it that way. What struck me most about the film was its message involving instant gratification culture. Those people on the ship struck me instantly as being parodies/exaggerations of TV-obsessed, fast-food-eating westerners, who live by the screen so much that they can't even see the people around them. It's a warning to the world (especially Americans) that they should go outside and live a little."
And I am NOT borderline on S/N. Not even close.

Key point: we aren't all like that! I have an ESFP friend who could talk philosophy with you all day, and not get bored. I have an INFJ friend who thinks so literally that I have a hard time getting my points across to her sometimes. But we AREN'T mistyped! It really just depends on the person.

 

[EJCC]

So any type of symbolism is intuition? I'm not sure I buy that. A dog could learn the traffic patterns caused by signal lights.

And anyone who ever took a high school (11th or 12th grade, probably) English class knows about metaphor, and about analyzing literature and film. Not all Sensors fail English!

 

[Athenian200]

So any type of symbolism is intuition? I'm not sure I buy that. A dog could learn the traffic patterns caused by signal lights.

That's because dogs have Intuition. How else do you think they learn?

One thing people on here seem to neglect is that even animals have Intuition. So obviously a human Sensor is going to have a basic Intuitive capacity that far exceeds that of an animal. No one seems to acknowledge that in relating their experiences with them, though.

In fact, I would say that animals rely on their Intuition far more completely than people do, though it's less sophisticated. Think about it... no one specifically teaches them all the skills they need, but they figure out what they need to do creatively. They can often predict storms before people do. They can often learn to make rather complex associations between things if trained. They're extremely creative, they just can't hold on to memory of enough details or express as many of these ideas in a form outside of themselves. If anything, humans are more S than animals, and not the other way around. How often do you see an animal dwelling on details rather than focusing on what's relevant to itself? How often do you see a human doing this? Think about it...

 

[Unique]

Anyone with half a brain can realize how completely false the first statement is, so I won't bother providing reasons why it is such.

Your second statement seems to contradicts the first. Is intuition needed in the world or not?

Now who is taking things too literally

I never said a world without intuition would be a good one (far from it) all I'm saying is that it would be possible to still operate

If you don't think a pure sensing world would operate I'd like to know why... sure red wouldn't mean stop... in a pure sensing world there wouldn't be red there would be STOP... eh don't see how that makes operation impossible

A pure intuition world wouldn't be so easy, without the 5 senses to guide anyone things would become difficult to say the least...

But this is really off topic

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Now who is taking things too literally

I said something about taking things too literally? Do all of your debates consist of putting words in others' mouths?

If you don't think a pure sensing world would operate I'd like to know why... sure red wouldn't mean stop... in a pure sensing world there wouldn't be red there would be STOP... eh don't see how that makes operation impossible

You would need to come up with the idea of a stop sign in the first place. Which would require intuition.

A pure intuition world wouldn't be so easy

Right. Both sensing and intuition are needed.

 

[Jeffster]

That's because dogs have Intuition. How else do you think they learn?

Sorry I brought up dogs. That so wasn't the point.

But to answer your question, they most often learn by repetition.

 

[prplchknz]

yea or if a woman asks you "do I look fat in this dress?" (and she did) a person not using intuition may say "yes."

well fine, if people don't want the truth, then don't ask me. sheesh, if you look fat in a dress and you ask i'm assuming you want the want the truth, so you know never to wear that dress again.

 

[garbage]

Sorry I brought up dogs. That so wasn't the point.

Is your point that these sorts of patterns just inherently exist? Because that's an Ne trait, as the functions are defined.

That means that everyone probably has access to Ne. Which they do.

The red light doesn't mean anything outside of its context, really--it is "just" a red light (this mode of thinking is sort what Ni would believe). It only works because we associate red with lots of bad things. In general, the color tells us, through other unrelated contexts, to proceed with caution, to pay attention, or to stop.

Repetition is just one way to reinforce patterns and correlations between unrelated contexts. Pushing a lever doesn't really have much to do with obtaining food through some dispenser, but pigeons have learned the connection.

i'm assuming you want the want the truth

Such a question can mean anything. They can be looking for reassurance, they could want you to notice the dress, they could want you to notice them.. it goes on and on.

Assuming that one wants the truth is a decent starting point, though.

 

[prplchknz]

Is your point that these sorts of patterns just inherently exist? Because that's an Ne trait, as the functions are defined.

That means that everyone probably has access to Ne. Which they do.



Such a question can mean anything. They can be looking for reassurance, they could want you to notice the dress, they could want you to notice them.. it goes on and on.

Assuming that one wants the truth is a decent starting point, though.

yes I realize this, I'm not totally clueless, still, I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out what they mean, and why not ask "what do you think of me in this dress?" because that's more direct then does this "dress make me look fat?" in a weird twisted way.

 

[garbage]

yes I realize this, I'm not totally clueless, still, I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out what they mean, and why not ask "what do you think of me in this dress?" because that's more direct then does this "dress make me look fat?" in a weird twisted way.

Because some people value traits other than directness and absolute truth. Emotions, relations, and so on all play into this.

Why not at least attempt to meet them on their level? That's an even more efficient way to communicate with another person than just plain directness, because what you mean is actually reaching them unfiltered. And it's more efficient to modify your mode of communication than it is for you to influence that of everyone else you have to deal with.

 

[prplchknz]

i don't influence anyone. i don't expect people to be direct, in fact i know most won't be.

 

[Jeffster]

Is your point that these sorts of patterns just inherently exist? Because that's an Ne trait, as the functions are defined.

That means that everyone probably has access to Ne. Which they do.

The red light doesn't mean anything outside of its context, really--it is "just" a red light (this mode of thinking is sort what Ni would believe). It only works because we associate red with lots of bad things. In general, the color tells us, through other unrelated contexts, to proceed with caution, to pay attention, or to stop.

Repetition is just one way to reinforce patterns and correlations between unrelated contexts. Pushing a lever doesn't really have much to do with obtaining food through some dispenser, but pigeons have learned the connection.

Okay, then the traffic light has both symbol and signal meaning. One can learn the signal meaning without any knowledge of the symbol meaning. You don't have to know anything about the history of colors representing things to observe that the traffic goes when the light turns green and stops when it turns red.

I looked up a dictionary definition of intuition. Sadly, the definitions I could find were all pretty vague, but most basically said "cognition without a reasoning process." I can believe that it is possible to do such a thing, but I don't believe it is done nearly as much as most people posting here do apparently. I certainly have to say I disagree with Jung's theory that intuition is something that everybody has/does to some degree. It's just too unlikely for me to accept.

 

[Unique]

I said something about taking things too literally? Do all of your debates consist of putting words in others' mouths?

Sorry thought it was you that said it

You would need to come up with the idea of a stop sign in the first place. Which would require intuition.

Oh it would, would it? Fairly sure that not all ideas come from intuition

Right. Both sensing and intuition are needed.

Needed is an interesting word, I think its better that there is both but needed? hum

Okay, then the traffic light has both symbol and signal meaning. One can learn the signal meaning without any knowledge of the symbol meaning. You don't have to know anything about the history of colors representing things to observe that the traffic goes when the light turns green and stops when it turns red.

I looked up a dictionary definition of intuition. Sadly, the definitions I could find were all pretty vague, but most basically said "cognition without a reasoning process." I can believe that it is possible to do such a thing, but I don't believe it is done nearly as much as most people posting here do apparently. I certainly have to say I disagree with Jung's theory that intuition is something that everybody has/does to some degree. It's just too unlikely for me to accept.

Same

 

[OrangeAppled]

Oh it would, would it? Fairly sure that not all ideas come from intuition

Ideas that involve symbolism are directly related to intuition. Intuition creates associations between things that are are seemingly unrelated.
If you don't grasp this, then you need to read up on the functions more.

The red traffic signal is symbolic for "stop". Someone had to assign that meaning to the signal. Long ago, the red color was just a color and stood for nothing; now it has many meanings, depending on context.

 

[Quinlan]

I wouldn't be looking for dictionary definitions, I think we're all referring to either the two jungian functions or both of them grouped together as N in mbti. I think you guys are making out intuition to be something far more special than it really is, I mean it can be special and so can sensing but in their most basic forms the functions are very mundane things that we all do.

In my opinion the functions are absolutely useless in isolation, they need to be and are always used together.

Sensing sees the red light and sensing sees the cars stopping but to me it is an intuitive leap that connects the two.

 

[INTJ123]

this might sound cold, or mean, but as far as I'm concerned SJs are the drones and clones of society, the way they think...guuuhhh i'll be nice and say simplistic, and the sheer amount of them that there are (clone analogy). However I'm much more likely to get along with SFJ than STJ, the FJ is more likely to be agreeable at least.

 

[garbage]

Okay, then the traffic light has both symbol and signal meaning. One can learn the signal meaning without any knowledge of the symbol meaning. You don't have to know anything about the history of colors representing things to observe that the traffic goes when the light turns green and stops when it turns red.

Right. My point is that, inherently, a light shining red doesn't inherently mean that one should stop; the color "red" was likely chosen due to custom and already-existing associations like those I described. It takes a connection between those ideas, which may or may not have a sound logical basis, for the red light to mean what it does.

I think you guys are making out intuition to be something far more special than it really is, I mean it can be special and so can sensing but in their most basic forms the functions are very mundane things that we all do.

Yeah pretty much this. Intuition isn't some magical ability that's far beyond the layman's reach.. at its core, it's just associations between seemingly unrelated ideas.

In my opinion the functions are absolutely useless in isolation, they need to be and are always used together.

Sensing sees the red light and sensing sees the cars stopping but to me it is an intuitive leap that connects the two.

This, too. The intuition that tells one to stop would be useless without actually sensing the red light.

this might sound cold, or mean, but as far as I'm concerned SJs are the drones and clones of society, the way they think...guuuhhh i'll be nice and say simplistic, and the sheer amount of them that there are (clone analogy). However I'm much more likely to get along with SFJ than STJ, the FJ is more likely to be agreeable at least.

lol