Thread: Can you give some examples of multiple perspective?

1. A possible approach is to look at the problem as a whole. Then break it down into causes. Once you understand the causes, you then have some flexibility to consider multiple possibilities.

If you source externally for solutions, better to break down those solutions too, so you can ensure they're a good fit.

2. Originally Posted by INTP
next day can start when clock hits the 00:00 or it can start when you wake up.

night starts technically when the sun goes down, but there can also be a set time when people usually consider night to start. like it can get dark here in finland at 3pm in the winter, technically the night starts at that time, but people dont usually think that 3pm is when the night time starts.

my intj friend simply cant see that there can be different perspectives to these two things, he says that the next day starts when clock hits 00:00 and there is set time when night starts, because night cant start at 3pm.. so i dont really think intjs are masters of looking things from different perspectives. they may try to find a solution to problems from different perspectives tho, but there is only one correct answer, due to the all mighty all knowing Te.
Well speaking technically night starts at 6:00 PM (since night is the darker half of a day and 6:00 PM - 6:00 AM is the darkest 12 hours in general) and The day ends/starts at 00:00, a time set to supposedly be the middle of night, when the sun is directly opposite. The other interpretations are perhaps colloquially valid as ways to make terms based on perception (therefore night starts when the sun goes, which can change depending on season, and the day starts when the person begins to experience it) but they are not technically correct.

3. I am not analyzing a traffic issue.

Here is what you do. Work the problem from back to front. What are all the possible outcomes? Any possible thing that could possibly happen in this scenario.

Then look at the situation and what the common threads are between all possible solutions. This is the base issue, that all solutions are contingent upon.

Then fill in the blanks starting with the most desired outcome, and maybe the next three preferred. That way if the ideal doesn't work you aren't back at square one. You are halfway to a different solution.

So you look at what you are working with, where you need to get to, and what are the flexible middle guts.

So to answer the question. It starts with analyzing all possible solutions, then prioritizing them. This objectivity leads to more well rounded practical solutions.

4. The above sounds like a Ne-based approach. As a Ni-dom, I more frequently step back from the whole problem to see a bigger picture. For the traffic example given, I might ask questions like: is traffic here really a mess? In what sense? Are the phenomena people are including in the designation "mess" really negative? What undesirable aspects are most critical to address? I then look for the seeds of solutions within the problem and its context directly, often with deliberate disregard of other instances. I don't want my internal brainstorming clouded by what others have done or what's happened elsewhere. After generating some ideas this way, I will then consider comparable situations and the solutions of others.

5. Yeah okay.

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•