User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 117

  1. #91
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,575

    Default

    I am no expert on Jung or function theory, but the following two statements seem contradictory:
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra
    [Thus an Ni=dom:] inherently suppresses Se the most of any function in order to use Ni.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra
    This is why Beebe calls Si the demonic function of Ni doms, and vice versa. It is the single most ignored function in an Ni dom's mind.
    Most function discussions seem to agree on the first 4 functions, what we call dom, aux, tert, and inferior, but then diverge as to how the other 4 play out. So which is it: using INTJ as an example, is our inferior Se suppressed more than Si? What do you think happens with those other 4 that have the opposite attitude of the first 4?
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  2. #92
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I'm not even saying that I think there's absolutely no truth to what she's saying -- in the sense that she's pointing to something.

    I certainly think there's something she's pointing to, and even something that could readily be seen as bullying.

    I just think that, if you actually observe my total forum behavior since I've been here: I'm actually not a bully.

    I get in arguments with people about what is true and what is not true.

    I don't go around picking on people for no reason whatsoever.

    I don't go around trying to find the weakling in the pack so that I can pick on them.

    I get in arguments with people and don't care about social harmony when I'm debating the truth or untruth of their position.

    I would be perfectly content with allowing all those who think I have "bullied" them to line up and accuse me of such.

    What you'd find is that not many would make the claim, and that, if any do, I was likely just having an argument.
    I would not use the term bullying. Your purpose is different as are your sparring partners, for lack of a better term. I have observed, however, that your word choice and manner of expression sometimes generate more heat than light. I am not bothered by it, and am used simply to stripping such noise out of posts to get at the actionable content. I can understand why some people take offense, though, while at the same time I know they could take the same approach, bypassing the sound and fury to focus on the true significance of the tale.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  3. #93
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Most function discussions seem to agree on the first 4 functions, what we call dom, aux, tert, and inferior, but then diverge as to how the other 4 play out. So which is it: using INTJ as an example, is our inferior Se suppressed more than Si? What do you think happens with those other 4 that have the opposite attitude of the first 4?
    Se exists for the INTJ (and is suppressed); Si doesn't exist for the INTJ.

    Memory exists, understanding of and reference to the past exists, but the specific kind of processing that is called "Si" doesn't. Where some other person would be collating memories, we'd be connecting abstractions. And if called upon to interact with the world, we approach it as direct input and consider it to be momentary and passing, and after a time we'd prefer to go back to connecting abstractions.

    Saying Si doesn't exist is not the same as saying we have no memory, or that we never directly address the past. Possibly, since those activities are (as far as I know) things of Si, one could say there is some vestigial Si, but it seems like it'd be a waste of a function name. Si is a processing of memory into another kind of structure, not a mere remembering.

    /might not be true.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  4. #94
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,575

    Default

    Do you think the same is true of Ne, Ti, Fe?
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  5. #95
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I am no expert on Jung or function theory, but the following two statements seem contradictory...
    That's because I'm delineating a distinct difference between suppression and ignoring.

    There's also a third type that is something like suppression and something like ignoring, I'm not sure what to call it, perhaps "rejection".

    We can decide on different words for these and what not -- although, I think suppression is a very good one for what happens between the dominant and the inferior -- but what really matters is what's going on under the hood; so long as we understand that, then we just create/find some terms to best fit what is going on.

    So here are the three things:

    1. By "taking up" the dominant as dominant, we must suppress the inferior (i.e., taking up Ni as dominant implies suppression of Se)
    2. By "taking up" the dominant as dominant, we reject the opposite personality (i.e., taking up Ni as dominant implies rejection of Ne)
    3. By "taking up" the dominant as dominant, we ignore the demonic/the opposite's inferior (i.e., taking up Ni as dominant implies ignoring of Si)

    When you understand the first two, the third makes a lot more sense, cuz, it's like, you don't even "take up" the opposite (which, for an Ni-dom, is Ne), so there's no need to even suppress its inferior (which, for Ne, is Si), and, as such, it's more or less the most absent function from your psyche: it's not suppressed, it's not rejected, it's just ignored. The inferior, on the other hand, is not really absent; it's there, it's just being suppressed (and, as such, tends to make its way into your psyche, often in hidden, unconscious ways, and also during moments of stress, and somewhat compulsively). The demonic function, on the other hand, is just practically not even there. As such, it'll tend to find itself among the weakest 1-2 functions in a cognitive functions test of the particular types for which it is the "demonic". Not to be too much of a typist, but I respect INTJ's ability to more accurately self-report on a cognitive functions test than most other types, and this hypothesis bears itself out rather readily in the cognitive functions thread I started a while back for INTJs (LINK). You'll see from those results that Fe and Si, the theoretical 7th and 8th functions for INTJs, pretty consistently find themselves among the weakest 1-2 functions (maybe 2-3) of INTJs. There's more I could say about this, but I'll leave it at that for now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    So which is it: using INTJ as an example, is our inferior Se suppressed more than Si?
    I'm assuming this question was adequately answered?

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    What do you think happens with those other 4 that have the opposite attitude of the first 4?
    Umm... I answered some of this above.

    If you want to continue discussing, I'm down to do it here, vm, pm, or by starting another thread.

    Just let me know.

    ETA: Kalach's description is good, but I prefer to go less far than him when he says "it doesn't exist". But I used to not be of the position that I described above, and, as I got deeper into function theory, I realized it more and more to be the case. Still, if you look at my blog, I have occasional experiences that are best described as me reversing the polarity of my dominant function (i.e., embracing my opposite personality: Ne), and I very well could be engaging Ti when I do, based on my behavior, so... yeah, I don't exactly think it's correct to say that the shadow functions "don't exist" for us. I just think they're not very often utilized (but there's even caveats to this -- for example, as I described in my long post to Aphrodite [or was it in the INTJ-ENFP thread?], I think I probably utilize Ne in controlled bursts in order to stave off Ni tunnel vision [as I think would be a likely explanation for any Ni-dom who doesn't suffer from teh tunnel vizions]).

  6. #96
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    That's because INTJs balance there Ni with Te.

    That's what makes us more objective than INFJs.

    That's why INFJs are the ones who are "up on the moon, in their imaginary spaceship".

    "Stating your own truth as you know it"?

    Are you kidding me?
    I think it's as good a place to start as any. You would have that I adhere to Beebe's function theories even when I don't feel like that represents my function usage? Just because he is published and an 'authority?'

    And I don't find any type objectionable, per se, even INTJs. I find unhealthy assholery objectionable. Infer what you will from that.

    You think that's the mark of a Te-user?!?
    ?!? You are, with one statement, attacking and ridiculing the fact that in my sig I say I am a Te user? First, I am not an aux Te user, like yourself. Of course, my flava of Te will be different than yours. Second, do you even know what Te in an infj would look like? I doubt with your flippant mindset, you've even given it much thought because Beebe, et al, doesn't expressly say it should happen. Third, I don't really like to discuss my personal function usage with someone who is attacking me, from a defensive standpoint. It reminds me of Sim's style, that. I don't discuss things that way.

    That's the mark of a Ti-user!
    I lived with a Ti dom for 20+ years. Are you so cavalier as to think I don't know what Ti looks like, or is? Are you so ready to tell me and everyone else, based on the limited amount of quick encounter you observe on this forum that you know better than someone who has studied her own function usage in depth?

    And the fact that you don't get this is why no matter how much contemplating of your own functions or function theory you have done, you obviously still don't know what you're talking about. I'm not saying this to be mean, but you accurately understanding Te and Ti is not congruent with that statement and your signature.
    You're opinion. Which tells me you don't know as much as you think you know.



    It regulates my Ni!

    That's what you don't get.

    Ni can come up with all kinds of bizarre shit.

    Te and Se are what keeps an INTJ grounded in reality.
    I also know Te untethered with enough N or S also leads its user to think he is the expert on something. Since this is how you repetitively come off on this board (not just to me), I see a pattern of that most likely being the etiology.

    For you, it's Fe and Se (hence your going around making ethical judgments and your strong sexuality).
    Ti and Se are usually my most undifferentiated functions. If I'm introverting a lot, Ti moves up a bit. But, yeah, I'd say Se is my relief function and sneaks in at times.

    But you are a Ti-user! I told you that when you first asked me, and I'm telling you again.
    Well good. I'm glad my T usage is obvious in both attitudes then.

    Ti and Fe are two sides of a coin. As are Te and Fi.
    I don't buy that malarkey, sorry. Never have, never really will.

    Says who? It's much more likely that a person is more comfortable introverting or extraverting the rational or irrational functions, imo, than flip-flopping them as you (and mainstream function theorists) suggest. Hell, even Jung himself is in line with what I'm saying. You *guys* can bastardize T and F in opposing attitudes and it's all okay in your world even though Jung himself stated in several places (admittedly unclearly, but still, if you read close you can get his drift) that the tertiary is in an attitude opposite the dominant (as with the other functions).

    Furthermore, this makes total sense! Maybe everyone won't do it that way, but I think most probably do, but just don't realize it, or study it. And tests are limited and test-bias is rampant.

    Since you last were a contributing member on this forum, I have done a lot of work studying this shit, and continue to understand it better each day. And I cannot tell you any more flatly: you are an Ni-Se user, and Fe-Ti user. Your comments about "stating your truth as you know it" are enough alone to show that you're not a Te-user. To us, truth is objective. It is not our truth, it is THE truth.
    I mostly lurk here. Why do you think you can say I don't use Te when you don't even see me irl. You don't see how I really am here, just as I don't see how you really are over there.

    I think forum members can get an idea of another member's dom and aux functions, yeah. But anything more than that is really stretching it, Zara. And you call that Te exactitude? I'm not quite so liberal as that I guess.



    I'm not even saying you're a moron.
    Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! I can sleep tonight!

    I'm saying that your functional theories are moronic.
    Oh. Forget what I just said.

    Lol. I don't really think they are moronic. But that is my own opinion obviously. They are based on observation and contemplation. How is that moronic? You think because you can point to a page in a book and say that is what you agree with, that is somehow more legitimate? *sigh* I don't understand that mentality. I didn't understand it in Sim and I don't understand it in you either.

    Everybody on here who has a strong grounding in functional theory thinks so.
    So, if you agree with the masses, you are more right.

    Okay.

    So if all the buffalo run toward the cliff.....


    Your Fe value judgment means nothing here.

    There is no objective truth to what you are saying.
    If you look closer, my Fe judgment is always laced with a deeper Te message. I don't just spout off Fe for Fe's sake, even though I know that is how you always see it. I just don't feel like taking the time to point your fallacious thinking out to you about that. I choose my Fe nuggets for you, and only spew them when I feel that you are off on your thinking, or exhibiting bullying, yes Bullying, behavior. Usually there is more of an agenda there though than just calling you out of your rudeness.


    Well, I didn't bring up your blog or your bra size, and as long as you keep going around dropping in on my discussions with other people and making your Fe value judgments, I see no objective reason why your signature is not fair game. Frankly, your signature could be fair game in any situation.
    One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong....

    Remember that song from Sesame Street? I think it's applicable here. :cookie:


    You seem to have boundary issues with your Fe value judgments.

    And I am by no means the only one who thinks so.
    Yay! Team Zarathustra!

    So, I infer from that, that because you have people repping you that I'm out of line, or making inappropriate Fe value judgments, that you are more right...

    Do you see the pattern here? Do you?

    If it's published and has many followers... If you have many followers.... It is more legitimate. Do you consciously think that way? Or does it just seep out from you unconscious?

    Interestingly, Solitary Walker talks about how INTJs need people to recognize and follow them--to understand their message. So I can see that that would be a necessary theme for you, naturally.

    And the more you know about typology, the more you know the tests are for shit...
    I know. But with contemplation, they can be somewhat valid.


    Yeah, well, there's good contemplation, bad contemplation, and everything in between.

    Based on the conclusions you've drawn, yours seems to be somewhere among the latter two.
    Why don't you read what you just said right there. It's disdainful and not even worthy of my comment.




    Especially considering, in this case, being a Jungian scholar would essentially mean having studied Jung and his offshoots enough to have an accurate understanding of what you're talking about.
    I don't think that is a fair, nor accurate, statement.


    Yeah, well, that's cuz you don't seem to understand the the dominant and the inferior are intrinsically linked: one does not exist without the other.

    - If your dominant is Ni, then your inferior is Se, as Ni requires the suppression of Se (it also has related effects on Ne and Si).
    I don't have a problem with that. And it's what I experience in myself.




    There's a similar, albeit different, relationship with:

    - Ne and Ni
    - Se and Si
    - Te and Ti
    - Fe and Fi

    But these are relationships of opposition, not dominant and inferior.

    Thus, an Ni-dom:

    • inherently suppresses Se the most of any function in order to use Ni.
    • he also introverts his iNtuition, thereby rejecting his opposite personality, an Ne dom (thus forming the "shadow").
    • he then "chooses" a judging function: in healthy development, it will be an extroverted function.
      • if it's Te, then he will become an INTJ, and suppress Fi (albeit to a lesser extent than Se, thus making it his tertiary).
      • if it's Fe, then he will become an INFJ, and suppress Ti (albeit to a lesser extent than Se, thus making it his tertiary).
    • by "choosing" either the TeFi axis or the FeTi axis, he inherently rejects the other (much like he "rejected" Ne for Ni).
      • hence, the consistent disagreements b/w INFJs and INTJs.
    • eventually, we learn to let go of the suppression of our tertiary and inferior a bit, and can start developing them. When we confront our Jungian shadow (this time, using "shadow" to refer to the tertiary/inferior), we have a realization of the axis: that there is an inherent relationship between our two most dominant functions, and the two functions that we actually suppress the most (our tertiary and inferior). By recognizing this (whether we understand the terminology or not -- when I first recognized it, I did not know the terminology), we gain a new level of awareness (that of our shadow [once again, referring this time to our tertiary/inferior]), and can work on reconciling the two (in an INTJ's case: recognizing when his Te judgments are actually tinged with Fi judgments [et al]; and recognizing that his Ni vision is limited in scope to what his Se has had the opportunity to perceive [et al]), as well as developing those which we have previously been suppressing.
    Yeah. I don't really see it that way. Yeah. I understand it and I've studied it and read it and listened to it on here.

    But it conflicts with my reality and my own theories regarding genetics. And my own theories regarding pairing of functions. And environmental factors.

    I should throw out what I feel sound about to adopt someone else's theory that is far-fetched and grounded in....what? Just another opinion? Just saying does not make it so, no matter who is doing the saying.

    Plenty more can be said about typology, but I'd highly recommend learning that model, and learning it well, before making an assertion as ridiculous as Ni and Si both being your top two functions.
    How is that ridiculous? Can you use words to describe it? Without just spouting more rote function theory babble?

    By definition, essentially, those two functions cannot be your top two functions. I was just explaining this to @earthtrekker1775 on his wall yesterday. I recommend you read those posts[/quote]

    Read them. Disagreed.

    so you can see why this is the case. One settles on a single way of looking at things (the conventional/proven way, as they see it), and the other rejects the conventional/"proven" way, and tries to make something entirely new, looking at things from a new perspective. These two do not go together. If one dominantly uses one, he/she inherently, by definition, does not use the other.
    Again, says who? I cannot buy something that makes no sense to me.

    This is why Beebe calls Si the demonic function of Ni doms, and vice versa. It is the single most ignored function in an Ni dom's mind.
    Then Beebe does not know what he's talking about, if he says that.

    Why do you think almost any SJ would've told you that you're being fucking ridiculous with your decision-making a year or two ago? Your Ni was going crazy, coming up with all kinds of unconventional ideas. If Si were so high up in your function order, there's no fucking way you would've thought what you were doing was a good idea!
    Perhaps you are thinking about Si with Te...I have more Si than I realized. It's become apparent to me as of late. Perhaps you cannot see it over there on the other side of the forum. It's an archaic, internal process that is difficult to understand. I don't know how much or how little I use, but I use it enough that I've decided to pay more homage to its usage in me.

    Sometimes short-term mistakes are the price we must pay for the correct long-term goal. Your marriage seemed over, and you needed to start anew. Yeah, you made some dumb decisions to gain that freedom, but you got the freedom that you needed.)
    You just should not do this, Zara. Blog posts and subjects and issues need to stay in blogs, not be used as ammunition, or examples for your Te on the general forum. I think most others would agree with me on this. Contrary to what you think, it is not fair game, and approaches ad hominem status. Not to mention you are being judgmental again, and I disagree with your assessments, though I know you are trying to be nice. *wince*

    Anyway, hopefully you realize that I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just trying to offer you the truth (not just my subjective take on it, but the actual objective truth).
    This is the crux of your weakness. You think you are being objective with your rampant Te, but you are not. I just re-read Jung in this regard. Te and Fe might seem objective, and can be objective, but it's tricky business, and the Te and Fe user must be aware of their own biases in interpreting data from it. You are more subjective than you realize, and I don't think it's because you have too much Ni making you subjective. I think it's just rampant unchecked Te making you too judgmental.

    I am tired of responding. Perhaps I will tackle the rest tomorrow...
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  7. #97
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Perhaps I will tackle the rest tomorrow...
    A respectable post thus far.

    You're wrong in places, and your theory is bunk, but still a respectable effort.

    You also agreed about Ni-Se, but then conveniently left out how this extends to Si-Ne, Te-Fi, and Fe-Ti.

    Rather ironically, I think it's your lack of Te that is making you think you have Te.

    Oh, well... c'est la vie...

  8. #98
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Do you think the same is true of Ne, Ti, Fe?
    Yeah, I think so. It's easier to believe if you make a distinction between cognition and behaviour--or more exactly, between cognition and the effective result of cognition. For instance, an INTJ can respond in the moment, pulling options and possibilities out of the air, but to then say he has just demonstrated the presence of Ne in his cognitive makeup is to give an inadequate description of cognition.

    Cognition as functions is cognition as it tends toward consciousness. It has character and orientation. But this character isn't some effect that comes into existence when it hits the air just outside your head. It's the product of some whole to which it is connected. There is therefore some kind of basic inability to switch between one function and its opposite. You'd have to reverse nearly all of your unconscious.


    /might not be true ("some whole" is what whole?)
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #99
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redbone View Post
    I know two INTJs. One, I have been very close friends with for over 15 years. The other I know well but I only talk to him occasionally now.

    self-confident and sometimes seen as arrogant

    I don't see her as self-confident or arrogant. I see it more as she knows what she is doing and does it. If she doesn't know, then she will learn about it, quickly and well. If a goal comes to her, she places herself in that stream to get to the destination. I don't even know if she stops and thinks about whether she can or cannot. She just does it.

    The other INTJ, hmm. I think he probably comes across as highly arrogant and an ass. To me, it's not that big of a deal.

    perfectionists
    Yes.

    may reject authority
    Yes.

    hard-working and reliable
    Very much so.

    information gatherers
    Yes. But unlike me, she is more prone to doing this in order to gain or master skills rather than pure interest.
    The other one shows very little interest in information gathering unless he can use it.

    imaginative

    She can be.
    He is not. Got sick of him asking, "Where do you get all these ideas from? How did you think of that?"

    insightful
    Yes.
    Him, yes but also quite clueless at times.

    ambitious
    In her own way, yes.
    Him, extremely so. Owns a successful software company.

    often spend a lot of time in their own minds
    Yep.

    not emotionally demonstrative
    This is a little hard to answer. Her, I would probably say yes.
    Him a little less because he is prone to nervousness around people. He compensates by being extremely blunt or dismissive. I think to some this would be interpreted as anger.
    Mostly due to the description on just a couple points, your male INTJ friend sounds more like an ISTJ.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

  10. #100
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Se exists for the INTJ (and is suppressed); Si doesn't exist for the INTJ.

    Memory exists, understanding of and reference to the past exists, but the specific kind of processing that is called "Si" doesn't. Where some other person would be collating memories, we'd be connecting abstractions. And if called upon to interact with the world, we approach it as direct input and consider it to be momentary and passing, and after a time we'd prefer to go back to connecting abstractions.

    Saying Si doesn't exist is not the same as saying we have no memory, or that we never directly address the past. Possibly, since those activities are (as far as I know) things of Si, one could say there is some vestigial Si, but it seems like it'd be a waste of a function name. Si is a processing of memory into another kind of structure, not a mere remembering.

    /might not be true.
    Sounds about right to me. Ne, Ti, Fe and Si are ignored by the INTJ until they switch to a more "extroverted" mode of processing, wherein they basically become like immature ENTPs.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] INTJs - Do you suffer from a recurring sense of loneliness?
    By INTJMom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 03-11-2014, 10:31 AM
  2. [INTJ] INTJs - Do you think by way of images more than words?
    By highlander in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-30-2013, 11:23 AM
  3. [INTJ] INTJ Do you think by way of images more than words? Is there a name to this thinking?
    By FEELMETOUCH U in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-30-2013, 03:01 PM
  4. [INTJ] INTJ: Do you consider finding the perfect relationship #1 of your priorities?
    By jcloudz in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-19-2011, 04:15 PM
  5. [INTJ] INTJs, do you gain more pleasure out of feelings or thoughts?
    By DigitalMethod in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 06:09 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