[MBTI General] Theory of Dominae Intuitus

[Desert Flower]

Do you, Manifest, and MLitrell all roll together?

No. But I've seen your post on other threads. And they all tend to be bitter, cynical, and have nothing to do with the topic. It's not that serious. It has more to do with your own personal issues that you want to expose and draw attention to other people's insecurities...for no good reason.

 

[Wrath Mania]

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Four times I say "Thank you".

Okay, the "product" would be a thing or ability that would be REOCCURING. For example, if an athelete has certain S abilities, you can base an entire organization around not only what the S has done, what it can do, but what it will most likely be able to do in the foreseeable future.

Yes, once a N product has come to light and been broght out, others can get on board. I'm not talking about a one time N thing. I am talking about a functional model for basing a group's successful planning when THEIR BEST & MOST RELIABLE ABILITY & COMMODITY IS N. Not any particular N. The ability N.

Before any moves are made, I suggest varios levels of vetting the vision to avoid being "blind sided". No money would be spent until further along. Would this help alleviate the "blindness" potential? Avoiding "blindness" entirely is not a reasoable expectation for a N lead business/organization model because "blindness" is inherit to N. Obviously things will have to be felt out as the N visions work their way to fruition.

I eagerly await feedback

Okay, great. And I agree, intuition is needed for an organization's strategy and diplomacy. But once we hit reality, and when the ideal system crashes against pragmaticism, I'll be more focused on taking the people available to me and making the best combination, rather than adhering to a predetermined system. Because reality probably won't adhere to what I want.

 

[disregard]

DesertFlower was talking to proteanmix...

 

[Desert Flower]

lol

 

[mlittrell]

oh wait, pardon sorry i thought you were replying to my posts lol

*bashes head against keyboard*

ignore previous post

i deleted that past as fast as i could lol

 

[proteanmix]

No. But I've seen your post on other threads. And they all tend to be bitter, cynical, and have nothing to do with the topic. It's not that serious. It has more to do with your own personal issues that you want to expose and draw attention to other people's insecurities...for no good reason.

Defending your friend is quite honorable and if anything is escalating it's because you're escalating it. Martian Manifesto answered my questions and I was satisfied. Now you're jumping into it and I'm going to have to get all bitter and cynical on you. That's not very fun and tends to require bandages and bed rest.

 

[DigitalMethod]

C'mon guys chill.

 

[Desert Flower]

:yim_rolling_on_the_

Proteanmix, could u stop writing messages on my Profile page?

 

[Martian Manifesto]

Okay, great. And I agree, intuition is needed for an organization's strategy and diplomacy. But once we hit reality, and when the ideal system crashes against pragmaticism, I'll be more focused on taking the people available to me and making the best combination, rather than adhering to a predetermined system. Because reality probably won't adhere to what I want.

I disagree with your assertion the N is good for strategy and diplomacy only. It can provide that role in ANY organization.

Perhaps if I make this statement things will be clearer: I believe that there are already many, many successful organization models in existence that include ALL type attributes in the final wholistic entity, BUT the ORGANIZATION'S PRODUCT is N. Or maybe their service is N. Use of N or concepts from N or products driven by N is what the group either gets paid for or known for. That is what they "do".

In a group where F is the dominant force (charity group for example), their will be a need for N, T & S functionality of course. However, the driving force (which will effect recognition, recruitment, strategy, everything) is F. This model is fairly well known. I mentioned a sport figure franchise. The business is that individuals S abilities. The group would need input from all sectors but the DIRECTION of the group still usually has one function take the "flag" as it were. The rest of the groups success is based on whether the group's N product is meeting with success.

By the way, thank you for your considered answers.

 

[CelestialTravels]

That is one of the many reasons INFJs do things. So INFPs can watch. My girlfriend of six years is INFP. She likes to watch me go from silently unreadable to galvanizing entity and then back again. Well, she cringes too, but mainly she likes to watch.

I would the girlfriend to whom MM refers. And I can attest to his good intentions. He does not dislike any of the MBTI types, but he does enjoy sharing thoughts, ideas, theories and engaging in fun debates about any number of topics, including MBTI...and he's right, I usually watch (and occasionally chime in)

 

[Night]

Ah, ENTPs. You guys are so game. I love it. Have a very good friend who is ENTP. Very game.

Anyway, to respond...

1) I am very well schooled in how to make arguements. That however was not what I was doing. Argueing on a forum would be a waste of time and talent. However, I do like theoretical discussions. Is that what we are having? Or is it an arguement? I dislike conflict, but I do enjoy provocative conversation topics. My INTJ friends and I do this ad infinitum. Is this just us? Nobody else does this?

You're playing passive-aggressive.

Instead of directly addressing my point, you seek to misdirect the flow of our interaction in ambiguous muddle. I've underlined just a few examples (this seems to happen throughout your responses).

In terms of "argument", I use the term flexibly. An "argument" is anything that compels an exchange of information.

2) Rocks? In a way, yes. INFJs are better at countering than initiating. For this reason when we do initiate we do so forcefully, thus assuring that we make an impression.

You may not like this tactic, but it is a useful one for INFJs to employ.

What I like/dislike is extraneous to the apparent direction of your thread - the interlinking of behavioral characteristics and MBTI type.

I offered obvious flaws in your rationale schematic. You are conflating unrelated terminology - intelligence is not empirically bridged to MBTI.

You have given me much data to work from on you. All you have are things you have inferred from my posts. Do you actually think this tells you anything about me? No. INFJs always put out feelers first. Always. Even on message boards if they are wise.

And I, you.

From the responses this experimenting provides, the INFJ can narrow down those who are likely to be good for interacting with. The criteria I am looking for has absolutely nothing to do with the post (you mind may leap there). If you think I am looking for people to "agree" with "my" arguement then you would be mistaken. I want them to respond naturally and let there personality show from there.

No.

You are certainly trying to influence others to take a stand with/against your position. You quietly imbibe inflammatory language throughout your piece. As I mentioned earlier, your rhetoric is indirect.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with this.

I know this sounds very convoluted but it is how we work. This topic is one that had spurred many lively discussions so I thought it would be a good "conversation starter".

You are free to judge both this methodoly and my success at implementing it.

Type expression is a fluid entity. No one enclave of humanity processes/reacts to stimuli in precisely the same way.

This fallacy is likely central to your belief that Type A is superior/inferior to Type B on the basis of behavioral preference alone.

 

[Martian Manifesto]

I would the girlfriend to whom MM refers. And I can attest to his good intentions. He does not dislike any of the MBTI types, but he does enjoy sharing thoughts, ideas, theories and engaging in fun debates about any number of topics, including MBTI...and he's right, I usually watch (and occasionally chime in)

That's my sweet baby/moral compass!

 

[mlittrell]

The way I see intelligence, and this is a personal theory, would be this:

The intelligences in order:

ENFP (diplomatic, strategic, tactical, logistical)
ENFJ (diplomatic, strategic, logistical, tactical)
ENTJ (strategic, diplomatic, logistical, tactical)
ENTP (strategic, diplomatic, tactical, logistical)

I see what your saying though (and this isn't quite related to that).

 

[Martian Manifesto]

You're playing passive-aggressive.

Instead of directly addressing my point, you seek to misdirect the flow of our interaction in ambiguous muddle. I've underlined just a few examples (this seems to happens throughout your responses).

In terms of "argument", I use the term flexibly. An "argument" is anything that compels an exchange of information.

* An argument is not intended to compel and exchange of information.

What I like/dislike is extraneous to the apparent direction of your thread - the interlinking of behavioral characteristics and MBTI type.

I offered obvious flaws in your rationale schematic. You are conflating unrelated terminology - intelligence is not empirically bridged to MBTI.

* No you didn't. Wrath Mania did. We don't necessarily agree but we are discussing.

And I, you.




No.

You are certainly trying to influence others to take a stand with/against your position. You quietly imbibe inflammatory language throughout your piece. As I mentioned earlier, your rhetoric is indirect.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with this.

* There was nothing quiet in my imbibing of language with flames. It was suppossed to be obvious and funny. That fact that you missed both saddens me.




Type expression is a fluid entity. No one enclave of humanity processes/reacts to stimuli in precisely the same way.

This fallacy is likely central to your belief that Type A is superior/inferior to Type B on the basis of behavioral preference alone.

* The only superiority I speak of is superiority of a strategy based on the strengths of a given group. IF a group is blessed with a preponderance of N and wished to make moves/career as a GROUP, what would be the way it would roll out? This is the THEORY I was putting forward. It is a raw theory and thus why I look forward to feedback.

 

[Moiety]

What's with this recurring kind of defensive reply with these threads? Why do people feel like they are being attacked? I don't agree with the OP but geez...

 

[nolla]

That is one of the many reasons INFJs do things. So INFPs can watch.

Yep. That is why INFPs are around, so that you have an audience. I can come watch you do your tricks, but I don't promise to cheer.

 

[substitute]

I don't get it. I don't get why all the hostility. All the dude seems to be saying to me is "N types understand each other better than anyone else" - hello, captain obvious? and "I have an idea as to how the N-primary types can really help each other achieve their potential".

I don't get where all the accusations of prejudice and whatever are coming from??
Unless it's just a knee-jerk thing?

 

[Haphazard]

I don't know if it'd be a good idea to put too many N-dominant types in the same place at the same time...

 

[substitute]

DEJA-VU.

(though, MM, unless you want to earn an image as the new BlueWing, perhaps working on presentation a bit and establishing a personality here before presenting big ideas and theories would be a good strategy, then you're less likely to be taken wrongly, there's some Ne-Ti advice for ya )

 

[Martian Manifesto]

Yep. That is why INFPs are around, so that you have an audience. I can come watch you do your tricks, but I don't promise to cheer.

Fair enough