User Tag List

12311 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 143

  1. #1
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default Do N and T really go together?

    I've actually been wondering for a while now. It seems like ST and NF make sense, but NT and SF don't.

    An ST uses specific, sensed details, and reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion. Basically, the calculator/bean-counter type. I can see those two going together well.

    An NF uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then weighs this according to their subjective sense of value. These two also go well together.

    An NT also uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then... reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion?

    Intuition is a highly unconscious, somewhat subjective process. It relies on a kind of vague instinct, a subjective perception that can't be expressed literally. So why, then, would you go ahead and stuff all of that into a simplistic, impersonal box that's better suited to simple details? You're perceiving reality subjectively, and then trying to turn around and throw away all of the instinct and irrational process that gave rise to the idea in the first place, to clean it up and push it through a simplistic, linear, impersonal process that can't possibly capture much of what was perceived.

    It's almost like it turns against itself halfway through the process in a half-hearted effort to make an appeal that will be listened to by "bean-counter" types.

    So, what is an NT, really? Is it an Intuitive that was forced to discipline their imagination into working with logic? Is it a conflicted person who tried to set up a strange compromise between the rational and irrational parts of their mind? Is it someone who wants to hide/destroy their own sensitivity for some reason?

    I know that if you're an NT, you might very well understand how it is they go together, and may even think that N and F don't go well together. I'm just curious as to why those processes should work together, and how they fit together for you.

  2. #2
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    So, what is an NT, really? Is it an Intuitive that was forced to discipline their imagination into working with logic? Is it a conflicted person who tried to set up a strange compromise between the rational and irrational parts of their mind?
    If it was, then you would be too. You got a non-rational Ni and a rational Fe in that same conflict, in'tcha?

    Is it someone who wants to hide/destroy their own sensitivity for some reason?
    N is sensitive? Its got feelings?


    The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.

    You may be responding less to a conflict between N and T and more to NTs having less overt feeling, and how could that possibly be unless they're broken?

  3. #3
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Yeah, don't F-up the N function.

  4. #4
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    IME, N sees the big picture, while S sees (only??) what's exactly in front of you. Often with my S friends, they are amazed that I can predict in my head how a moment will affect us in a split second. It's not instinct, it's foresight based on previous pieces of knowledge that often don't appear to be related. Imagination doesn't come from the air, it comes from keeping record of things past. It doesn't feel subjective to me, it's rather objective. It's like 2 different ways of learning - one is by memorization, the other is by considering the context. Both are effective, but very different.

    This will seem like a silly example, but this actually happened yesterday. An S friend went to a Kabbalist who didn't ask him any questions but directed him to open a holy book and pick a random phrase. Based on that, he was told to do a certain action at 4 certain times. He mentioned to me how he didn't believe the guy knew what he was talking about and it was all a hoax (which I can neither support or deny). He said he wasn't sure why these times were chosen, but he would just do as instructed.

    But when he told me all 4 times, it all made sense to me in the blink of an eye. I am not Jewish and have not studied Kabbalah, but I've read about it here and there. As soon as I saw the random times, I saw a pattern. All the numbers added up to 18, which is a spiritual (chai) number in the ancient Jewish tradition (gematria). The fact that he was supposed to do this action on a Tuesday added to symbolism. So I was able to tell him why the numbers were not arbitrary for his specific situation (which I further broke down to reveal that his entire "situation" existed in multiples of 18 - the dates of occurrence, the letters in the names of the principal players, etc...) which is extraordinarily lucky. To him this seemed like I was psychic, to me it was just completely obvious and I couldn't see how he had missed the significance.

    Life, through my eyes, looks like a huge jigsaw puzzle that is just one color and I spend most of my days trying to figure out how all the pieces fit together. (maybe to an S the puzzle is color coded in a linear fashion?? idk...) When I am putting together something from Ikea or whatever, I cannot (cannot!!) follow the step by step instructions. It's one of the most difficult things for me to do. I must look at the picture on the box and see for myself how all the parts work together, and then I can visualize in my mind what each piece does and why - based on that I know where it should go. Does that make more sense? I'm always looking for the big picture.

  5. #5
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    If it was, then you would be too. You got a non-rational Ni and a rational Fe in that same conflict, in'tcha?
    I suppose so, depending how you consider Fe as a process.

    N is sensitive? Its got feelings?
    Well... no. Of course not. But it is more subjective than, say, sensing. I'm saying that the whole process of creativity, curiosity, imagination... there's something about it that seems to involve a certain kind of irrationality, a kind of passion/obsessiveness. Not the kind of sensitivity or passion you see in feelings. But it seems like NTs try to eliminate those elements and reduce the ideas entirely into simple, linear, impersonal logic.


    The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.
    Oh. Well, I don't care if they wear pants or not.
    You may be responding less to a conflict between N and T and more to NTs having less overt feeling, and how could that possibly be unless they're broken?
    Well, it's not about overt feeling. It's more about logic being limited to impersonal, linear, A-to-B kinds of processing. That seems like an incredible bind to put on Intuition, to me.

  6. #6
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    I'm not wearing pants!

  7. #7
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    Yeah, don't F-up the N function.
    I see what you did there. Very funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    IME, N sees the big picture, while S sees (only??) what's exactly in front of you. Often with my S friends, they are amazed that I can predict in my head how a moment will affect us in a split second. It's not instinct, it's foresight based on previous pieces of knowledge that often don't appear to be related. Imagination doesn't come from the air, it comes from keeping record of things past. It doesn't feel subjective to me, it's rather objective. It's like 2 different ways of learning - one is by memorization, the other is by considering the context. Both are effective, but very different.

    This will seem like a silly example, but this actually happened yesterday. An S friend went to a Kabbalist who didn't ask him any questions but directed him to open a holy book and pick a random phrase. Based on that, he was told to do a certain action at 4 certain times. He mentioned to me how he didn't believe the guy knew what he was talking about and it was all a hoax (which I can neither support or deny). He said he wasn't sure why these times were chosen, but he would just do as instructed.

    But when he told me all 4 times, it all made sense to me in the blink of an eye. I am not Jewish and have not studied Kabbalah, but I've read about it here and there. As soon as I saw the random times, I saw a pattern. All the numbers added up to 18, which is a spiritual (chai) number in the ancient Jewish tradition (gematria). The fact that he was supposed to do this action on a Tuesday added to symbolism. So I was able to tell him why the numbers were not arbitrary for his specific situation (which I further broke down to reveal that his entire "situation" existed in multiples of 18 - the dates of occurrence, the letters in the names of the principal players, etc...) which is extraordinarily lucky. To him this seemed like I was psychic, to me it was just completely obvious and I couldn't see how he had missed the significance.

    Life, through my eyes, looks like a huge jigsaw puzzle that is just one color and I spend most of my days trying to figure out how all the pieces fit together. (maybe to an S the puzzle is color coded in a linear fashion?? idk...) When I am putting together something from Ikea or whatever, I cannot (cannot!!) follow the step by step instructions. It's one of the most difficult things for me to do. I must look at the picture on the box and see for myself how all the parts work together, and then I can visualize in my mind what each piece does and why - based on that I know where it should go. Does that make more sense? I'm always looking for the big picture.
    Actually, you're helping make my point. The things you're seeing involve perceiving a significance, which isn't something that's usually seen logically. Also, you admitted that you're obsessed with the big picture, that you're obsessed with seeing how things might go together, don't like just following steps or sticking to the obvious... you want to read something into things, and sometimes you'll go out of your way to do a task in a way that engages this process. Even if it's not the most logical way. So, there's a mild conflict between the linear tendencies of logic, and the more holistic perceptions of intuition.

    I don't know, perhaps I'm just missing something.

  8. #8
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    There was once an image I found on the internet, where a matrix of 4x4 black round dots was presented in front of a white background. It said then: S sees the dots and N sees the relation between the dots.

    Meaning a N sees a gearbox and then all the possibilities it can be used for to make money with it. Like cars, wind power stations or (two steps ahead in the future) a CVT gearbox, which allows for variable transmissions over a given curve of increasing rotations.

    The S's on the other hand are more prone to notice change within things. Therefore they are better at managing a constant state. Meaning for example a N is more likely to not notice that he is becoming insane.

    There are a lot more differences those two styles of perceptions show, when you start to watch people closely. Mainly its through the little things, the two styles of perceiving show themselves in the world.

    If my dad as an ISTP for example sees a car, he associates all sort of practical applications with it. Like topspeed, max. load, hot design and good machining, while I see all the work that was put into it. I see the combustion engine and draw relations deep down till the level of thermodynamics, when the whole engine just becomes a geometric showable process, which is an abstract image of reality and if shown to someone outstanding, not graspable at first, if you dont explain, what it was derived from.

    Thats why I had to think twice, the day the guy asked me what colour my car is, after I explained him for 1 hour all the technical specialities it's got and how they work.

    Furthermore I think N mustnt be a subjective process. Its of course my relations I draw between logically connectable things, but I think Ne is more practically oriented towards the real world. In my opinion Ni is more likely to develop a life of its own and become somewhat distorted in their views on reality.

    What I cant understand is why a NT must be free of imagination. I see that a F is more prone to leave out key logic details, to rather create a harmonious / disharmonious image of a situation, what seems like they have more room for imagination. But in my opinion, I think its rather more room for interpretation, cause you dont follow the rules of maths / physics / the universe or rationality. I dont see, why though, a NT should have a fewer imagination then. To be honest, I felt a bit offended after reading about that part.

    Last but not least, I think this is a wise quote to end with:

    The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  9. #9
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Actually, you're helping make my point. The things you're seeing involve perceiving a significance, which isn't something that's usually seen logically. Also, you admitted that you're obsessed with the big picture, that you're obsessed with seeing how things might go together, don't like just following steps or sticking to the obvious... you want to read something into things, and sometimes you'll go out of your way to do a task in a way that engages this process. Even if it's not the most logical way. So, there's a mild conflict between the linear tendencies of logic, and the more holistic perceptions of intuition.

    I don't know, perhaps I'm just missing something.

    I don't believe I used the word obsessed even once. And nothing I said felt like an "admission", so maybe you are missing the point a bit. I'll try to rework it.

    The illustration I gave above is one in which I saw a logical pattern. There was a bunch of dots scattered around and I saw the connection. I didn't create them.

    Significance is logical to me because all the clues are there. In films, director speak with pictures - that is why they are called motion pictures. If you only hear the dialogue, you will miss a significant amount of information. Camera angles, camera movements, color choices, placements of mirrors and shadows - these all mean something and they are not arbitrary. But if you've never studied film, you would never know this. If I say that a particular character is a fragment of himself or has multiple identities, I am telling you this because we only see the character reflected through glass or mirrors. The choice to film this way is not arbitrary and I am not guessing.

    Hitchcock is famous for this mirror technique. You can see it starting with "M", by Fritz Lang. Also, evil spirits/people always move from right to left across a screen - I can list so many films that this occurs. It's called cinematic language. This is film studies 101, but you wouldn't know this unless you studied film. If you haven't studied this, you will only understand the explicit meaning of a film. Once you have studied film language, you will start to understand the implicit meanings. (of course there is always a rogue director who tries to deviate, but most things are pretty much standard. A lot of newbie directors who have never studied film subconsciously repeat the same patterns because they are so ingrained in film society.)

    My point in that explanation is that I see my NeTi as studying life and it's patterns, much like we would study cinematic language. I am very aware of how things link together. It's not my imagination. I collect information with my Ne and I identify the patterns with my Ti.

    Maybe ST is perhaps the "how it works" and NT is the "why it works" but they are both logical processes. (I can only speak from an NeTi perspective, so I don't know how it manifests in others)

  10. #10
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    I wanted to add: in the end, everybody uses a mixture of F and T, therefore the OP question is flawed from the beginning, disregarding of whats said here.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-08-2011, 10:05 AM
  2. gullibility and sweetness, do they go together?
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-18-2009, 03:20 PM
  3. What direction do you see the USA going in, and where would you like it to go?
    By Risen in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 01:09 AM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-29-2008, 12:14 PM

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