User Tag List

First 614151617 Last

Results 151 to 160 of 163

  1. #151
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    your brain can't have two conscious streams of thought at the same time
    How can you quantify or qualify a conscious stream of thought?

    And you haven't said anything that proves that Thinking and Feeling are different functions. Who said the brain isn't using F power when solving a puzzle? Who said you don't use T power when choosing what fruit to eat?

    And where does instinct fit in, in this discussion?Memories? Only there are short term and long term memories.Do they use different functions?etc

  2. #152
    o edward cullen! Ardea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sytpg View Post
    Who said the brain isn't using F power when solving a puzzle?
    From what I understand, Fi can be used to "add a bit more spice to a recipe". Take that and run with it.
    Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  3. #153
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FemmeUrbane View Post
    From what I understand, Fi can be used to "add a bit more spice to a recipe". Take that and run with it.
    lol
    Martha Stewart understands!

  4. #154
    Senior Member Blackwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ERTP
    Posts
    454

    Default

    Hi Evan, I like the post that I'm quoting below. Though I'd like to challenge some points and see what comes up, I hope its okay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    if you're an Ni dominant, there are two choices for MBTI type: INTJ and INFJ. You are INTJ if you use Te/Fi and INFJ if you use Fe/Ti. But what if you're an Ni dominant that uses Fe/Ti but prefers Ti to Fe? You can't call yourself INTJ because the functions don't match. But INFJ implies that you use Fe more than Ti. Neither type is a particularly good description of your function usage.
    Indeed this was an open question in Jungian theory before it was quantified into MBTI. - MBTI, however, were right in assuming that for most INFJs Fe supercedes Ti. - Though you could put at least two different spins on it:

    1: There are INFJs who really do use Ti more than Fe. Examples of these would include Wittgenstein, Schopenhauer or Plato (for those who believe that these were likely INFJs). - (Likewise, from this perspective Ayn Rand might be said to be close to be Ni/Fi.)

    2: Another perspective would be, that indeed, MBTI really did nail all people when they made the types. This is not as unlikely as it sounds. - From this perspective we see that Wittgenstein, Schopenhauer and Plato are indeed using a very well developed form of Ni/Ti in their reasonings, but yet they still yield to that F-fingerprint of an INFJ type. To put it bluntly: Wittgensteing being in love with reason gives him away as someone who uses, or at least, is naturally disposed to use, F rather than T.
    Schopenhauer is an exception, but Wittgenstein and Plato give thenselves away as F-ish-types in their philosophies, even though those philosophies do not rely on F arguments they end up relying on ideals, that have certain trinklish flavour to them. - When Plato says that the ruling elite should live in poverty and that they won't mind because of their virtue, this is a form of idealism that sets him apart from typical NTs who are pragmatic rather than idealistic.
    In my personal life I know several INFJs who believe themselves to be INTs. The above mentioned inclanation towards idealism and enthusiam gives them away though

    EDIT: Oh yes, and similarily, you could also say that the very notion of wanting to defy the established function orders on extraordinary grounds attests to a certain idealism in itself

    Though I don't understand how you arrive at this:

    Thinking/Feeling is certainly a false dichotomy.
    I mean, its as false as any other intellectual dichotomy, but not more so than that?
    best collection of philosopher typings online

    http://www.celebritytypes.com/philosophers/

  5. #155
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Despite whatever pseudo-science magazine told you so, your brain can't have two conscious streams of thought at the same time even though it works 'in parallel'.
    Both Thinking and Feeling can only exist in the conscious realm of thought (otherwise they're perception functions, or un-documented... either way, it won't make it to your conscious stream without a perception function; this is probably where intuition lives).

    Ergo, if you're using Thinking, you're not using Feeling and if you're using Feeling, you're not using Thinking. It's got to be one or the other, even if that means switching back and forth at an incredibly high rate, and having the end decision a composite of several smaller decisions.
    When it gets to the bottom of it, this doesn't actually explain why the two can't happen at the same time. So you can only have one stream of conscious, and and Thinking and Feeling are both conscious, but this does not describe why one stream of conscious cannot qualitatively be Thinking and Feeling at the same time. Even the exmaple doesn't explain why, it just describes the apparent process, supposing that the statement is true.

    And of course, that is only concerning the conscious, but I doubt humans aren't making some value judgement at a sub-conscious level. I think it would be difficult to coordinate if people really good only act on what either Thinking or Feeling was processing at a given moment.

    In my own thought processes, it seems that even if I am focusing on the work mostly handled by Thinking or Feeling, the focus is still in some sense framed by the other function. One function keeps the other in place. Is this just an extremely rapid alternation of functions? Even if it is, it leads into this question:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sytpg View Post
    How can you quantify or qualify a conscious stream of thought?
    Most of this won't make any sense until it is explained exactly what one stream of thought is. To me, a stream seems to imply a flowing series of something. That is why I tend to think of rapid alternation between Thinking as Feeling as being a singular stream of though unto itself. That one split moment of checking something with T doesn't seem to qualify as a stream in its own right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sytpg View Post
    And you haven't said anything that proves that Thinking and Feeling are different functions. Who said the brain isn't using F power when solving a puzzle? Who said you don't use T power when choosing what fruit to eat?

    And where does instinct fit in, in this discussion?Memories? Only there are short term and long term memories.Do they use different functions?etc
    Interesting questions.

    You know what? I'd like to throw this forum at Steven Pinker and George Lakoff, and see what they make of most of the crap that's asserted at this place.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #156
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackwater View Post
    Indeed this was an open question in Jungian theory before it was quantified into MBTI. - MBTI, however, were right in assuming that for most INFJs Fe supercedes Ti. - Though you could put at least two different spins on it:

    1: There are INFJs who really do use Ti more than Fe. Examples of these would include Wittgenstein, Schopenhauer or Plato (for those who believe that these were likely INFJs). - (Likewise, from this perspective Ayn Rand might be said to be close to be Ni/Fi.)

    2: Another perspective would be, that indeed, MBTI really did nail all people when they made the types. This is not as unlikely as it sounds. - From this perspective we see that Wittgenstein, Schopenhauer and Plato are indeed using a very well developed form of Ni/Ti in their reasonings, but yet they still yield to that F-fingerprint of an INFJ type. To put it bluntly: Wittgensteing being in love with reason gives him away as someone who uses, or at least, is naturally disposed to use, F rather than T.
    I don't really see these options as much different. Even INFJs that use Ti more than Fe still use Fe more than any extroverted function -- which means they have to translate Ni/Ti thoughts through Fe language.

    I see your point about being in love with reason, though -- that certainly describes me.

    Schopenhauer is an exception, but Wittgenstein and Plato give thenselves away as F-ish-types in their philosophies, even though those philosophies do not rely on F arguments they end up relying on ideals, that have certain trinklish flavour to them. - When Plato says that the ruling elite should live in poverty and that they won't mind because of their virtue, this is a form of idealism that sets him apart from typical NTs who are pragmatic rather than idealistic.
    I dunno...to say that NTs are not idealistic...I agree that on average NTs are less idealistic than NFs, but Ni/Ti INFJs shouldn't be more idealistic than an INTJ for example.

    In my personal life I know several INFJs who believe themselves to be INTs. The above mentioned inclanation towards idealism and enthusiam gives them away though
    Yeah...I don't really agree with this point. Or at least I don't think it applies to me, but then again, I don't have a very objective view.

    EDIT: Oh yes, and similarily, you could also say that the very notion of wanting to defy the established function orders on extraordinary grounds attests to a certain idealism in itself
    I defy the function order because a) it doesn't make sense and b) I've seen counterexamples.

    Confirmation bias? :rolli:

    Though I don't understand how you arrive at this:

    I mean, its as false as any other intellectual dichotomy, but not more so than that?
    It's false in that I'm an F in type code, but I use Thinking more than Feeling. T vs. F does not capture what it's meant to, for me and others I've observed. And it's not like if you Feel more, you Think less or vice versa.

    For example, my ENTP ex would be considered a very strong T, but I think we use Ti about exactly as much as each other. But I use Fe more than she does. So even though my Thinking is as strong as hers, she's considered more of a Thinker.

    I just don't think it captures enough information, and makes it easy for people to draw false conclusions.

    I guess this is true with a lot of intellectual dichotomies, but this one seems particularly bad.

  7. #157
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    70

    Default

    Ive thought a lot about this as well. I read a book a while back which explained these types of things in terms of neurotransmitters, and your affinity for them. Such as an I might be more sensitive to norepinephrine (dont remember which one is which) than an E. This means that the I would be less likely to find activities which produce high levels of this stimulating, but instead overwhelming. I could see how this would work with feeling as well. Feeling function also had one of these where they were more sensitive to that neurotransmitter. In the end I think this would mean that the things which motivate a feeler have more to do with novelty, newness, and intensity of the experience or idea than maybe a thinker would. I dont necessarily think it has to do always with emotion necessarily.

  8. #158
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Are there any TRUE dichotomies in the MBTI? I think not. Not if the definition is taken literally.

    Me thinks too many people want to be right and not enough want to understand though....
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  9. #159

    Default

    I've been thinking for some time that the fact they called it "Thinking" causes this line to be drawn that isn't there. Almost all Dominant Intuitives I know also do extremely well in their work. My friend who is an INFJ always does well at things. Changes areas and picks new things up very quickly. And I got close to perfect scores for 3 maths subjects in my final year of school without studying (argh! F makes this thinking and logic so confusing... hehe).

    It is bad because I often see INTPs as slow because I have to wait for them to get a bit of paper to draw the whole problem on it before they agree with me on the answer. And I noticed I'm way more purist when it comes to theory than a lot at university. As a characteristic of being ENFP, I rarely trust another's work or accept it as a solid part of the system if I can't verify it. And I re-derive everything. Like knowing how to build it from the ground up goes into memory normally, rather than anything rote learned.

    In this whole thinking-feeling war, all of this is missed. Dom Ne will always be a killer at systems because their whole world, cognition, understanding, works based on them. Nothing is allowed to be isolated. And almost every rational problem is a system. A system of logic, a system of reason, a connecting of concepts. The fact it is backed up with an F just means I go for core understanding and relevance, over logical consistency. But logical consistency is incorporated in it, if the conceptual links don't make sense there is no way they'll be accepted. Plus at the age of 27 I have tertiary developed, so I've got Ne Te. Thinking in the external world shouldn't be too hard. Not that it ever was.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  10. #160
    Senior Member Blackwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ERTP
    Posts
    454

    Default

    repply for evan

    I don't really see these options as much different. Even INFJs that use Ti more than Fe still use Fe more than any extroverted function
    Point taken - Though what I was trying to set apart was they in one view (1) types such as Ni/Ti/Fe do exist and MBTI function hierarchies do not do such types justice. this is what you are arguing. - in another view (2) MBTI function hierarchies really *do* nail everybody; presumed Ni/Ti/Fe-types, then, are in fact INFJs repressing Fe from its "natural" position. (and they inadvertibly give themselves away when doing so.). the second view implies that Ni/Ti/Fe types are abnormal or pathological to some extrent. the first view doesn't.

    Personally, I lean towards (2) but of course people should be allowed to use the system in the way it makes the best sense to them
    The reason I lean towards (2) is because I have repreatedly observed INFJs in my personal life who believe themselves to be INTs when they clearly qualify as feelers in my book. but i'm talking about my own experiences. - to challenge you, personally, I'd have to meet you in RL situations involving coffee

    I dunno...to say that NTs are not idealistic...I agree that on average NTs are less idealistic than NFs, but Ni/Ti INFJs shouldn't be more idealistic than an INTJ for example.
    this is exactly why I presented the two views above:

    if we go with view (1) then there is no reason Ni/Ti/Fe types should be more idealistic than the average NT. - Though my point was that such Ni/Ti-types often end up being very idealistisc so none the less, even though there is no good theoretical reason why they should be so. - Which speaks for the function hierarchies established by the MBTI, i.e. view (2).

    I defy the function order because a) it doesn't make sense and b) I've seen counterexamples.

    Confirmation bias?
    Right, I know my reasoning here isn't especially NT-esque, so take it for what it is - but psychologically, I have observed how NTs, especially NTJs seem distressed when someone, or they themselves, do not fit neatly into the system. Whereas the INFJs that I know seem to revel in the fact that they somehow do not fit into the boxes. But again, I'm telling you what my Ne has observed IRL. Not who you are
    best collection of philosopher typings online

    http://www.celebritytypes.com/philosophers/

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] Adam-12: GREAT Display Of Thinking Vs. Feeling
    By LauraIngallsWalton in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2017, 04:19 AM
  2. Thinking vs Feeling
    By Eastwood in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-25-2015, 04:07 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Thinking vs Feeling
    By Doomkid in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 05-12-2014, 06:49 AM
  4. Thinking Vs Feeling
    By oxymoron in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-18-2010, 05:14 PM
  5. Thinking vs. Feeling: What if...
    By Nonsensical in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-16-2009, 11:43 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