User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 117

  1. #71
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    And the circularity of your argument reveals itself.
    It's not an argument, it's an observation containing a metaphor.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #72
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    It's not an argument, it's an observation containing a metaphor.
    It's an argument.

    The fact that you don't understand this is the case further reveals your deficiency.

  3. #73
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    It's an argument.

    The fact that you don't understand that this is the case further reveals your deficiency.
    Okay kids, recess is over!
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  4. #74
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    Okay kids, recess is over!
    Now that is lacking in substance.

  5. #75
    Senior Member Jack427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/sp
    Posts
    314

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    If you open the link in a new tab/window, it works. It just cannot be imbedded in the forum. Proof: It shows a hissing cat.
    Indeed, it is a hissing cat.

  6. #76
    As Long As It Takes.... Redbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,879

    Default

    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.

  7. #77
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Zara, I'm actually quite flabbergasted that a fellow dom Ni would criticize me for thinking out of the box and for stating my own truth as I know it. This is where your Te seems to trump your Ni. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but you come off sounding like you are the only one who knows the truth and everyone else (in this case me) is a moron. Because this is in reference to my very own signature, it makes it even worse. My signature, my blog, my bra size, are not subjects that are necessarily fair game in this thread. You seem to have boundary issues like that.


    I've tested my functions numerous times and contemplated them for years. Function 'theory' too. I've studied some Jung, and some others (the main ones). I've never claimed to be a Jungian scholar. But I don't have to be to know what functions I use or defer to. No theorist lives in my head. I would consider the opinions of anybody who knows me well and who knows function theory well to give me feedback on what functions I seem to use, etc., but I've always been forthright that I don't buy the whole function line-up like most people do, beyond the dom/aux functions. And those only if a person has had a reasonably safe childhood to develop them. Beyond that, environment plays too much of a role in people's lives to have rote orders. I got used to Sim putting me down for not adhering to function hierarchies, but you? And why do you assume that this makes your more right, and me ignorant?


    Sorry, but I trust my own guided contemplation over textbook theories. I'm responding not so much to argue, but just to let you know you are way off the mark with your previous response to me.


    G'day.
    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


  8. #78
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Actually, I don't exhibit bullying behavior at all.

    Nor am I a hypocrite.

    This is what you consistently fail to comprehend.

    And, a large part of the reason for that, is that you falsely think you're a Te-user.

    (Now you've even switched it up to you being an Ni/Si-dom, which is truly retarded.)

    (If you actually understood the theory, and weren't just making up your own as you go [hello, tertiary Ti], you would know this.)

    I value truth, and could give a shit about the social harmony aspect (i.e., I care about Te far more than Fe).

    You could give a shit about the truth, and you highly value the social harmony aspect (i.e., you care about Fe far more than Te).

    You call me a bully, but I don't go around here being mean to people at random, or because they are "weak".

    I get in arguments with people when I know what they're saying is bullshit, and then I show why it is so.

    You, however, as someone who values Fe and doesn't value Te, don't understand this.

    And as long as you keep deluding yourself with your bullshit theory, and don't learn the real ones, you never will.
    Actually, I'm not sure it has anything to do with her thinking she is a Te user at all or necessarily even use of Fe. I think Aphrodite is simply observing and making comments on objective behavior. That's how I see it anyway.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  9. #79
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Zara, I'm actually quite flabbergasted that a fellow dom Ni would criticize me for thinking out of the box and for stating my own truth as I know it.
    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?

    You think that's the mark of a Te-user?!?

    That's the mark of a Ti-user!

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    This is where your Te seems to trump your Ni.


    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.

    For you, it's Fe and Se (hence your going around making ethical judgments and your strong sexuality).

    But you are a Ti-user! I told you that when you first asked me, and I'm telling you again.

    Ti and Fe are two sides of a coin. As are Te and Fi.

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    There is nothing wrong with that per se, but you come off sounding like you are the only one who knows the truth and everyone else (in this case me) is a moron.
    I'm NOT saying everyone else is a moron.

    I'm not even saying you're a moron.

    I'm saying that your functional theories are moronic.

    Everybody on here who has a strong grounding in functional theory thinks so.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Because this is in reference to my very own signature, it makes it even worse.
    Your Fe value judgment means nothing here.

    There is no objective truth to what you are saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    My signature, my blog, my bra size, are not subjects that are necessarily fair game in this thread.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    You seem to have boundary issues like that.
    You seem to have boundary issues with your Fe value judgments.

    And I am by no means the only one who thinks so.

    I'm not the one who swooped in on a discussion you were having with someone else and decided to drop my evaluation of the behavior that was going on.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    I've tested my functions numerous times...
    And the more you know about typology, the more you know the tests are for shit...

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    ...and contemplated them for years. Function 'theory' too.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    I've studied some Jung, and some others (the main ones).
    And I urge you to continue...

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    I've never claimed to be a Jungian scholar.
    Nor would anybody (knowledgable) mistake you for one.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    But I don't have to be to know what functions I use or defer to.
    Well, all other things being equal, it probably wouldn't hurt.

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    No theorist lives in my head. I would consider the opinions of anybody who knows me well and who knows function theory well to give me feedback on what functions I seem to use, etc., but I've always been forthright that I don't buy the whole function line-up like most people do, beyond the dom/aux functions.
    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).
    - If your dominant is Se, then your inferior is Ni, as Se requires the suppression of Ni (it also has related effects on Si and Ne).

    Same goes for all the other functions, by definition.

    Just as Ni and Se are flipsides of the same coin, so are:

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

    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.


    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. 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 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. 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. 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! (And, fyi, I don't think you necessarily did the wrong thing. Your decision-making about a lot of the small things seemed dumb and clueless, but your decision-making was probably, in the long run, what you actually needed most. 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.)

    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).

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    And those only if a person has had a reasonably safe childhood to develop them. Beyond that, environment plays too much of a role in people's lives to have rote orders.
    Look, I agree with this, and, if you read my blog and what not, you'll see that I have always said as much (and will continue to do so).

    But these functions are defined in specific ways, and, while there's certainly something to be said about individual development (I totally don't think that individuals of the same type necessarily use their functions in the same way, or to the same extent, or don't develop their shadow functions differently -- trust me, I do), there's also a lot to be said about having a strong understanding of the dominant models and giving as much consideration as possible to them (if you were actually an Si-person you would be doing this more!).

    I was a lot more like you for awhile, but, after enough study, while I still hold onto a lot of the tenets of my personal take on typology, and I think they are meaningful things to consider when it comes to actual individuals, I do have a lot of respect for the dominant models that are out there.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    I got used to Sim putting me down for not adhering to function hierarchies, but you?
    Yeah, I know, it would seem pretty crazy.

    I bet I would still get in all kinds of arguments with Sim, but I've studied a lot of Eric B's shit, and, while I'm sure I'd argue with him about it too, there's a lot to be said for what's already been proposed. I know we Ni doms like to come up with shit ourselves, but the Si structure that's out there is already pretty good. I recommend learning it as best as possible, and having your own theories serve more as addendums to it, to cover things that the dominant models might not cover that well, as opposed to throwing their observations out completely, and starting completely from scratch. It's just not a wise thing to do, especially if you haven't first been that camel, and really come to understand the existing structure from the fundamentals up.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    And why do you assume that this makes your more right, and me ignorant?
    Because, based on everything I've seen you say about typology, you don't seem to have a very good grasp of the fundamental building blocks of the dominant models.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Sorry, but I trust my own guided contemplation over textbook theories.
    [I wrote these responses before most of the above, so... yeah, take them for what they're worth. They don't make much sense anymore]

    The problem is that your guide isn't good.

    I doubt you even know my arguments as to why your theory is problematic.

    And that's the problem: you don't have a good grounding in the theories to begin with.

    You like Nietzsche, and I know you've used this metaphor before: yellow camel first.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    I'm responding not so much to argue, but just to let you know you are way off the mark with your previous response to me.
    I'm not the one who dropped in casting her little judgments about another's behavior that had absolutely nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

    You were off the mark as soon as you came in and did that.

    The sooner you recognize this the better.

    *

    Per a recent conversation with an INTP about Alan Moore's MBTI type:

    "Yeah, but he's not one of those annoying INFJs who goes around judging everybody's conduct.

    He's one of the cool ones who just does his own thing and then provides us with amazing creations."

  10. #80
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Actually, I'm not sure it has anything to do with her thinking she is a Te user at all or necessarily even use of Fe. I think Aphrodite is simply observing and making comments on objective behavior. That's how I see it anyway.
    I don't think you're seeing it accurately.

    She shows absolutely no regard for the discussion taking place -- the ideas being discussed are completely irrelevant.

    Someone with a high preference for Te will put the ideas being discussed at the forefront, before any judgment of behavior.

    Because, to Te dom's/aux's, the behavior can generally only be judged when one accurately understands the content of the discussion.

    There is a slight caveat to that, in that a Te person might be willing to say, "yeah, that guy's kinda being a dick about it...", but they will generally not find the behavior particularly offensive, if what that person is saying is true (if what they're saying is not true, however, they will think the person an idiot, and a dick). There might also be a slight difference here w/r/t/ NTJs vs STJs (due to Si users tending to have more narrow, defined, and rigid codes of proper conduct than Ni users).

    For an Fe dom/aux, on the other hand, the truth content of what the person is saying falls almost completely to the back -- for them, regardless of the truth content, it's the behavior that matters.

    If you look at the history of Aphrodite doing this stuff to me, it's never about the truth content, it's always about the behavior.

    Hence, Fe judgment is occurring.

    Not Te.

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