User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 34

  1. #11
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Just a thought - the distinction between orientation of judging functions could perhaps be characterized as "judging as doing" (i) vs. "judging as done" (e). So, if you're talking to someone judging through "Ti", they need all the premises as exactly as possible, because they're not just listening to you, they're doing the thinking along with you. Meanwhile, if you're talking to someone judging through "Te", the thinking is already done, and the premises are less important as long as the conclusion is valid.

  2. #12
    Pumpernickel
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post

    ENTJs seem to be the ones prone to other people playing with their words yet the least interested in analysing each word in the sentence. Perhaps the most consistent when it comes to staying on topic. They understand quickly what other people are trying to say without getting confused by their wordings. This is good as this avoids floating away from the issue discussed however an ENTJ and INTP debating with each other may get the INTP confused often about what the ENTJ means and the ENTJ may get irritated from the depth of the analysis of the INTP with their words.
    This is pretty true, though I will say that I think INTJs are more prone to people misunderstanding what they're trying to say due to their wording than ENTJs. It's definitely an Ni thing, they'll expect people to see what they're seeing without actually having accurately described it. Happens to ENTJs pretty often as well, and it frustrates me a lot when people just won't follow the point just because my wording isn't precise.

  3. #13
    Senior Member INTPness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    2,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JustHer View Post
    This is pretty true, though I will say that I think INTJs are more prone to people misunderstanding what they're trying to say due to their wording than ENTJs. It's definitely an Ni thing, they'll expect people to see what they're seeing without actually having accurately described it. Happens to ENTJs pretty often as well, and it frustrates me a lot when people just won't follow the point just because my wording isn't precise.
    I like to pick the brain of my ENTJ friend, who I've been hanging out with more lately. He gets pretty intellectual (there are certain topics that his knowledge just blows me away) and I love listening to it. But, I like to pick apart what he is saying - partly because I'm genuinely interested and want "the whole story" (not just a generalization), and partly because it's just fun to pick at him and make him go off on another 30 minute tangent (benefits me too). Sometimes I think he gets a little frustrated if he is trying to drive home a point and I won't let him, but most of the time I think he enjoys it. My line of questioning gets him riled up (in a good way) and he just starts spitting out all this knowledge like a fire-breathing dragon.

    It's a great complimentary friendship in terms of knowledge sharing. It's like we have both "met our match". I'm able to pick apart everything he says which challenges him to go back and gather more information/solidify his arguments. He, on the other hand, just fills me up with knowledge on these particular subjects he knows so well. Listening to him is almost like listening to a book on tape. Every 5 minutes or so, I'll interrupt him and say, "this doesn't make sense though. Let me tell you why!" And he'll scratch his head, think for a minute, and either come up with a really good answer or say, "I'll have to look into that!" Mental stimulation for both parties!
    NTJ's are the only types that have ever made me feel emo.
    ENP's are the only types that have ever made me feel like a sensor.


    There are two great days in a person's life - the day we are born and the day we discover why. --William Barclay

  4. #14
    Senior Member Robopop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
    I know that I often have to suppress the urge to correct people in casual conversation---otherwise nothing will be accomplished. But it's sometimes astounding how many casual errors people make while speaking (And I sit there holding my tongue with a pained expression) and how difficult it is to not correct them. In debates or arguments, however, I will be relentless. Casual conversation I watch myself for politeness' sake.
    It really irritates me too, like for example, a teenager is a person between 13 and 19, I have heard people call a 20, sometimes even 21 year old a teenager. I have automatically deemed this person an idiot in my mind, this is common knowledge, thirteen, fifteen, eighteen(there's a huge maturity difference between a "teenager" and twentysomething also). They are probably using "teenager" in a very loose way, but I want the "precise" definition.

    Another thing is that sometimes there's sometimes up to 30 different definitions for a single word, so it is important to have the right definition out of the many meanings of a word.
    Reserved Calm Unstructured Egocentric Inquisitive Clown

    Johari Nohari

  5. #15
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Literally, I would agree with you. Teenager = 13-19

    Socially, I would interject that "adolescence" is almost interchangeable with "teenager," so (in the States, at least) you're pretty much still a "teenager" when you're twenty. Hell, because our youth are maturing so quickly, I often lump in preteens with the teenage group, mostly because middle school (for me) started before I was eleven or so, and I feel that it's mostly lumped into my "teenage years." It's often just easier to lump those years together if I'm being vague, or if it's a non-issue. I know other peoples' middle school experiences start at different ages, so I can't speak for them though.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  6. #16
    The Eighth Colour Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    Aeon
    Enneagram
    10w so
    Socionics
    LOL
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    This is an interesting topic, I missed it the first time around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post
    There seems to be a common thing between many INTPs. Every word within a debate with them would end up analysed in which case the INTPs may often get confused to what people mean. It's never an "I know what you mean" with them when other's find it hard to properly express their opinions. The INTPs seem to expect perfect accuracy in other people's wordings which can get irritating as it may take up another whole conversation about what the message conveyed really meant.
    I'm not sure if I fully relate to this. If it is a central point to the argument and I don't understand their point of vice versa, then naturally I will try to clarify this. But if it is a secondary point, I will usually let it slide, perhaps take note if I need to refer to it later. In a debate, I feel you should always concentrate on the most important points, even to the point of letting other errors slide.

    You do often see it in internet debates, there are those who try to argue just the central points, and those who feel it is necessary to write counter points against every small point that could be questioned.



    Quote Originally Posted by InsatiableCuriosity View Post
    It must be age or something. Unless it is a topic/concept/belief that is important to me and/or the people engaged in the discussion are important, these days I tend to sit back and listen or walk away - unless I am feeling mischievous that is.
    I do that too. It can come across as a little passive-aggressive though, sitting back and then pulling the rug out from underneath them (by attacking their central point) when they thought you agreed with them. I try not to do that much though.

    Quote Originally Posted by JustHer View Post
    This is pretty true, though I will say that I think INTJs are more prone to people misunderstanding what they're trying to say due to their wording than ENTJs. It's definitely an Ni thing, they'll expect people to see what they're seeing without actually having accurately described it.
    "Accurately described it" might be the wrong way to put it, but I think I know what you mean. The tendency to explain things in the clearest way that they need to understand it. But this might not be the way that you need it explained.

    And then they dismiss you as stupid/ignorant when you don't see it.

    Although one may argue that the INTJ way of explaining things is still better than the INTP way, which usually starts by deriving all the intermediate points from first principles and getting completely sidetracked and/or alienating the audience long before the central point is fully established.

  7. #17
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catbert View Post
    This is an interesting topic, I missed it the first time around.
    Goodness, a rather old thread. Unsure of my thoughts on it at the current moment though I'd assume similar.

    I'm not sure if I fully relate to this. If it is a central point to the argument and I don't understand their point of vice versa, then naturally I will try to clarify this. But if it is a secondary point, I will usually let it slide, perhaps take note if I need to refer to it later. In a debate, I feel you should always concentrate on the most important points, even to the point of letting other errors slide.

    You do often see it in internet debates, there are those who try to argue just the central points, and those who feel it is necessary to write counter points against every small point that could be questioned.
    I believe what I was referring to with what I said was the idea of an INTP misunderstanding a point because of their given analysis on what is said in difference to what was trying to be conveyed. So an INTP will believe something is understood when in fact, it was not what the one with the message would be saying. Such would be because of the lack of preciseness of that individual. So it's not necessarily not understanding and clarifying an understanding as you had said, but rather understanding another thing and the conversation falls to confliction. And then the INTP argues his point against what he thought the other individual said and the other individual doesn't understand what is going on.

  8. #18
    The Eighth Colour Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    Aeon
    Enneagram
    10w so
    Socionics
    LOL
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post
    I believe what I was referring to with what I said was the idea of an INTP misunderstanding a point because of their given analysis on what is said in difference to what was trying to be conveyed. So an INTP will believe something is understood when in fact, it was not what the one with the message would be saying. Such would be because of the lack of preciseness of that individual. So it's not necessarily not understanding and clarifying an understanding as you had said, but rather understanding another thing and the conversation falls to confliction. And then the INTP argues his point against what he thought the other individual said and the other individual doesn't understand what is going on.
    Ah, I could see how that could be a problem. Is this not a common problem facing all types though? We can only understand other points of view by attempting to mirror them, but in doing so we mix in our own set of experiences and our own understanding of what others are trying to say.
    Last edited by Octarine; 09-16-2011 at 10:20 PM.

  9. #19
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post
    Goodness, a rather old thread. Unsure of my thoughts on it at the current moment though I'd assume similar.


    I believe what I was referring to with what I said was the idea of an INTP misunderstanding a point because of their given analysis on what is said in difference to what was trying to be conveyed. So an INTP will believe something is understood when in fact, it was not what the one with the message would be saying. Such would be because of the lack of preciseness of that individual. So it's not necessarily not understanding and clarifying an understanding as you had said, but rather understanding another thing and the conversation falls to confliction. And then the INTP argues his point against what he thought the other individual said and the other individual doesn't understand what is going on.
    You are disregarding some things that make the system work properly. INTP doesent add to the meaning with the Ti analysis(unlike INTJ with Te), but removes from the context that you communicate using T(what is it) analysis(creates what is not type of analysis). because INTP is P type, he will mainly add to the context from perception of what you say.
    -> what you say is taken in fully(every word you say), but the parts that doesent make sense(contradict what you said earlier or i experienced earlier(Si) or is illogical(Ti)) is removed from what you say and isnt taken into further consideration.

    These contradictions in your thinking(what you communicated) are pointed out
    -> "why do you say that?"
    if you cant give me a reason for contradictions, you lack something in your thinking
    -> "you are wrong because of X"
    if you can explain the contradiction, i lacked something in my perception that would had an effect to my thinking(this usually happens because the other party didnt communicate some central point in his argument
    -> "i was wrong because i lacked X"

    dunno if you know this, but quite many INTP descriptions say that usually when INTP comes to false conclusions, its not because of poor logic, but because of overlooking details.

    This same thing can happen when talking with people, but the 'overlooking details' part comes from the other person not communicating some central point to the context that you try to communicate. its either missing in his thinking(he is wrong), its there but not communicated(his communication is flawed) or im missing something that i can use to combine what seems illogical to other info to make it logical(im missing some info or had wrong info about something).

    Then ofc there is the differences in communication between Ni dom and Ti dom. INTJ communicates abstraction(things that seem relevant) about his internal perception, INTP communicates abstraction of logic(central points that can be used to build logical understanding).
    Also these abstractions are made from different elements. with INTJ the internal perception(Ni abstraction) is built from details and facts from external world, INTJ also uses abstraction of worth(Fi) which tells what is worth to be takwn into the abstraction. with INTP the logical bastraction is built from worth of things in external world(Fe, including what some info is worth/is it worth taking into consideration) and big picture perception(Ne), INTP also uses abstraction based of what is(Si).

    And degree of worth abstraction(Fi) in INTJ changes based on the external perceptions(Se) and external facts(Te). same with INTPs Si abstraction, but it changes on principles of Fe and Ne.

    What you said about INTPs drawing false conclusions(thinking he understands, but in reality doesent) is true in communication if you fail to communicate properly. but what way more annoying is that INTJs are prone of doing the same thing, but when gathering information freely from a source. because what INTJ is doing is sort of reprogramming his whole thinking about the subject and will communicate things that are simply not true, but the INTJ will be convinced that it is. thats because of Fi is doing the rational abstractions -> he thinks that some info thats not even true is relevant to his conclusions and he wont let go of his false conclusions, because the whole system of thought would fail and ego doesent want that to happen.

    From what i have noticed INTJs are the worst type to communicate properly AND worst type to give reasoning for thought, also one of the most stubborn type to change conclusions, even tho their thought has been totally debunked.. even my mentally ill INFP is doing so good on this that i got no problems on communicating with him properly(he gives sufficient reasoning if i ask for it or changes his perception if he cant reason, except ofc when it comes to matter of worth), no problems with ENTP(he does seem to be able to communicate with INTJ better than me). also INFP and INTJ(who are room mates) have hard time communicating properly.

    Anyways cba to write more now
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #20
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post
    There seems to be a common thing between many INTPs. Every word within a debate with them would end up analysed in which case the INTPs may often get confused to what people mean. It's never an "I know what you mean" with them when other's find it hard to properly express their opinions. The INTPs seem to expect perfect accuracy in other people's wordings which can get irritating as it may take up another whole conversation about what the message conveyed really meant.

    The ENTPs seem prone to getting confused but they still figure out what you mean quickly. ENTPs are different to INTPs in the sense that when they understand what someone means they may use their wordings against them within the debate. This would most likely lead to other conversations much less serious than the one that was being talked about as causing chaos in the debate rather than going through with it may start to become the ENTP's interest. It becomes an social experimental game.
    I think one thing you are seeing is the difference between Ne and Ti being in charge. Ne is a big-picture perspective and is seeking to find broad patterns of similarity among things, connecting them together. Maybe that is the best word for it -- it is a "connecting" perspective, just as it is used in brainstorming to leap from one idea to another that has SOME aspect in similar to the prior one. So Ne in discussion/argument will use this connective style to both form a tighter bond between ideas (if they are working to agree with you) or else use it to surprise you (to win a point / get the upper hand) or even explore a completely new region of the discussion that was being ignored.

    Meanwhile, Ti is a "precision" function. It describes the exact relationship of one idea to the other; it is not interested in showing loose connection, it needs to show exact connection and it also shows flow since logic is sequential. As such, it actually ends up describing the differences more than the similarities (since everything outside the nuanced logic of what is being described is less correct/precise).

    If you are building a watch, or the Space Shuttle, or a skyscraper, for example, you cannot afford to not be precise; if the system does not fit together precisely, then something will not function efficiently or perhaps even not at all. You will have cogs that do not mesh nor fit inside the casing; you will have a space vehicle that is not air-tight and that might not even fly or could even explode when taking off; you will have buildings with gaps in the foundation, ruining their structural safety. Even a small deviation can cause huge errors. Likewise, T is used to "architect ideas" to the same degree of precision, and the wings of a butterfly fluttering on one side of the world might create larger deviations in air currents elsewhere.

    (For example, something as trivial as a specific date gotten wrong in a history discussion could change the entire context of what a particular fact means, thus misrepresenting the statement and leading to an untruth or a lesser truth. Or a particular word used in the wrong place would put stress on the wrong part of the logical statement, altering its meaning... and that mistake in meaning could magnify to result in a bad assumption later in the argument.)

    So that's the issue. This is why ambiable ENTPs often seem to be engaging conversation and moving it along, whereas INTPs can seem to drag down the pace of the conversation and get hung up on small items that seem irrelevant to those painting with a broader brush but to the INTP can seem very crucial to the accuracy of the argument. And if something is inaccurate, then it is undependable and arbitrary and can't be used for anything, so why even bother?

    That, I think, is the typical reasoning being used.

    I am unsure if INTJs in general experience the same problem. INTJs however seem to understand what people mean. They may often see the flaws yet they would usually disregard it and continue the debate. Occasionally they may also copy the ENTPs but at a lesser extent. I would think this would happen from an INTJ appeal towards the ENTPs way of social experimentation. But it would happen when the INTJ is not particularly feeling serious.
    I'm not sure about that; and really, you're an INTJ so of course you understand them, while I typically can read an INTP's comments and understand exactly what they're saying and why, even if I disagree with it because I think they've overlooked something or have wrongly emphasized something.

    To be honest, NTJ's kind of confound me; I can't "see into you" and see how you got to where you are and thus understand it, because you don't typically explain your logic. I do typically have NTJs nod and smile when I talk to them and explain, and they sound like they get what I'm saying and/or agree, but I don't get back that explanation in turn so I can see and follow their own thinking and see that we are in sync.

    ENTJs seem to be the ones prone to other people playing with their words yet the least interested in analysing each word in the sentence. Perhaps the most consistent when it comes to staying on topic. They understand quickly what other people are trying to say without getting confused by their wordings. This is good as this avoids floating away from the issue discussed however an ENTJ and INTP debating with each other may get the INTP confused often about what the ENTJ means and the ENTJ may get irritated from the depth of the analysis of the INTP with their words.
    I'd agree with the last. I have trouble understanding what ENTJs mean because they don't explain anything at the level where I know they understand what I'm saying, and I'm sure they often think I say too much. I've tried to pursue a few friendships with ENTJs anyway, but it's funny to me how they seem to think we're communicating fine and happy with things, while I'm usually unsure of what's going on in their heads and need more clarification of their ideas and the things we are relating to each other about.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] NTs and their Perception of the Golden Rule
    By CuriousFeeling in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-11-2010, 02:48 PM
  2. [MBTItm] NFPs and Debating, or, Get Your NT on.
    By Charmed Justice in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-25-2009, 12:13 PM
  3. [NT] Nts and spatial perception?
    By Lexlike in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-24-2008, 04:20 PM
  4. [NT] NTs and the Wallstreet bailout/debates
    By BlackOp in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 03:40 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