User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 13

  1. #1
    Member Bnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    MBTI
    IXTX
    Enneagram
    4 sp
    Socionics
    entj Ni
    Posts
    65

    Default are NT's prone to convergent thinking or divergent thinking

    so I watched divergent,related that experience with my experience at personality cafe,among the NTs there I'm pretty much...unliked...my threads or most of my threads are entertaining like gold comedy but yeah I'll not get into that too much as an INTJ with weaker %s I:50-70% N:30-50 T:20-40 J:20-40 and being a E4x3,its quite HARD understanding who and what i really am
    so yeah i was diagnosed with mild schizophrenia few years ago and as we all know through the latest of research that people diagnosed with mild schizophrenia are prone to developing and nurturing divergent thinking, from the other intjs I'm pretty unique and my way of thinking is pretty unique too,ranging from visual prowess to connecting the dots with the Ni-Te loop and coming up with these outworldly theories,its just crazy...

    well I wanna know is ,are other intjs prone to convergent thinking or divergent thinking?

  2. #2
    Member 00c's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Enneagram
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Divergent; NT are among the rarest as a whole and the more divergent among the NTs would be NTJs as a result of Fi and all of their other more aggressive and assertive functions in place rather than those of NTPs.
    Convergent thinking is clearly much more characteristic of SJs. In time all SJs follow what NTs produce and only then does it become convergent thinking, everything they first held with such blind skepticism becomes something they refer to day in and out.
    tumblr
    It's no fun to lose.

  3. #3

    Default

    Convergent thinking is more of a J thing. Divergent a P thing.

    I think NTs are well equipped with both, although some may go too far in the P direction or too far in the J direction.

    Balance is key.
    "A negative mind will never give you a positive life." http://bosniannames.com/

  4. #4
    @.~*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 00c View Post
    Divergent; NT are among the rarest as a whole and the more divergent among the NTs would be NTJs as a result of Fi and all of their other more aggressive and assertive functions in place rather than those of NTPs.
    Why would Fi and aggressive be divergent? Wouldn't it rather suggest more focus since there's an internal impulse driving the car? You've also got Te pulling things together and organized it externally.

    Ne is the proverbial "arrows radiating from a central point" function. That's divergent. You're pinging off things freely and seeing where they take you (in any direction), versus trying to take a bunch of randomly bouncing particles and trying to organize them somehow.

    Convergent thinking is clearly much more characteristic of SJs. In time all SJs follow what NTs produce and only then does it become convergent thinking, everything they first held with such blind skepticism becomes something they refer to day in and out.
    I see.
    "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

  5. #5
    Member 00c's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Enneagram
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Why would Fi and aggressive be divergent? Wouldn't it rather suggest more focus since there's an internal impulse driving the car? You've also got Te pulling things together and organized it externally.

    Ne is the proverbial "arrows radiating from a central point" function. That's divergent. You're pinging off things freely and seeing where they take you (in any direction), versus trying to take a bunch of randomly bouncing particles and trying to organize them somehow.



    I see.
    Fight me, you're just trying to make INTPs the most special little snowflake. Fe is group-harmonizing, it doesn't care for ones own goals as much as Fi which has a much more personalized agenda.
    Ne is convergent because it's common and so is a commonality between the majority of peoples thinking, therefore convergent. Si is cautious and cares about the past, which is typically not as useful and innovative as present thinking except in the arena of writing memoirs or the like and Ti likes to skew things to fit their own definition like you're trying to right now.
    tumblr
    It's no fun to lose.

  6. #6
    @.~*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 00c View Post
    Fight me, you're just trying to make INTPs the specialest snowflake.
    Uh, excuse me? You don't even know me, but your first response is to launch a personal accusation.

    I don't give a shit about special snowflakes, I just care that what you say makes sense, and I explained why I had trouble seeing that your explanation made any sense. So yeah, I'll disagree with you until you give me a substantial explanation that makes sense.

    Fe is group-harmonizing, it doesn't care for ones own goals. Ne is convergent because it's common and so is a commonality between the majority of peoples thinking dubbing it convergent.
    Ne is convergent because it is common? What does that have to do with anything? and the second part of that sentence seems to be self-referential logic.

    Still waiting for an actual answer.
    "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
    Likes Hard, Bknight liked this post

  7. #7
    Member 00c's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Enneagram
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Uh, excuse me? You don't even know me, but your first response is to launch a personal accusation.

    I don't give a shit about special snowflakes, I just care that what you say makes sense, and I explained why I had trouble seeing that your explanation made any sense. So yeah, I'll disagree with you until you give me a substantial explanation that makes sense.



    Ne is convergent because it is common? What does that have to do with anything? and the second part of that sentence seems to be self-referential logic.

    Still waiting for an actual answer.
    Well if you can't interpret for yourself and not be spoonfed then I guess you won't be getting another answer. Divergent thinking is straying from the common thinking which is referred to as convergent, it's not difficult to grasp. If we're to talk about self-referential logic you should take your own post into account which wasn't needed since the explanation was clear enough unless you need a step-by-step instruction which would only be a reiteration of what I already said in different words. The answer is right there and if you can't understand it, whoops, that must really suck since you feel the need to reply to every reply.
    tumblr
    It's no fun to lose.

  8. #8
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,980

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 00c View Post
    Well if you can't interpret for yourself and not be spoonfed then I guess you won't be getting another answer. Divergent thinking is straying from the common thinking which is referred to as convergent, it's not difficult to grasp. If we're to talk about self-referential logic you should take your own post into account which wasn't needed since the explanation was clear enough unless you need a step-by-step instruction which would only be a reiteration of what I already said in different words. The answer is right there and if you can't understand it, whoops, that must really suck since you feel the need to reply to every reply.
    First of all, you're being a complete jerk (and it completely came out of nowhere too), and insinuatint that you know it all and that Jennifer is stupid (the latter of which is through and through not true). You're not going to get productive discussions this way.

    Second, Ne is well known and regarded as divergent and tangential. That is how it operates. It considers information, expands upon it, and keeps building off an original point. That is, by definition. The rarity of a function has no meaning towards this. Further, rarity isn't a factor at all. You're just shouting "You're wrong, I'm right, and there isn't, anything you can do about it". That's not fair, and you haven't offered anything substantaiting to back up your assertions, where as Jennifer has. Aka: your explination was not clear, good, and was quite well shown to be incorrect. She meant no ill will by this, but by being so hostile at the get go, she responded definsively and pushed back (which is a completely fair and reasonable response).

    Finally, its rather silly, and ironic to (wrongly and unfairly) chastize Jennifer for promoting rarity and special snowflakeism, when you yourself say that NT's as a whole are the rarest. So what? Rarity doesn't matter.

    Honestly, it just seems like you want an excuse to be nasty to someone. Which, quite frankly, isn't ok.
    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari


  9. #9
    @.~*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 00c View Post
    Well if you can't interpret for yourself and not be spoonfed then I guess you won't be getting another answer.
    To clarify: it's not "spoonfeeding" for you to actually EXPLAIN your thinking in a discussion.

    You did sneak more into your post, though, since my response -- tricksy of you, but I'll read it anyway to see if illuminates anything further (since, hey, I edit my posts a few times too to get things right):

    Si is cautious and cares about the past, which is typically not as useful and innovative as present thinking except in the arena of writing memoirs or the like and Ti likes to skew things to fit their own definition like you're trying to right now.
    Yeah, you hate INTPs, don't you? (Don't ask me why I think that.) Anyway, kind of irrelevant.

    Divergent thinking is straying from the common thinking which is referred to as convergent, it's not difficult to grasp. If we're to talk about self-referential logic you should take your own post into account which wasn't needed since the explanation was clear enough unless you need a step-by-step instruction which would only be a reiteration of what I already said in different words. The answer is right there and if you can't understand it, whoops, that must really suck since you feel the need to reply to every reply.
    Do you realize this paragraph has no actual content except to criticize my intelligence? Get a grip, please.

    I don't think you know what convergent and divergent mean.
    DIVERGENT
    1. tending to be different or develop in different directions:
    2. (of a series) increasing indefinitely as more of its terms are added.
    CONVERGENT
    coming closer together, especially in characteristics or ideas:
    In other words, divergent spreads out / develops in different directions, becoming more indefinite. Convergent coalesces and pulls together.

    Based on those definitions, you should be able to understand why I bought up the example of arrows radiating outwardly from a starting point. It's not hard to grasp, even if you disagree. I think your attempt to equate coalescence with SJ traditionalism is just plain sloppy, but hey, go ahead and try to sell that -- maybe you'll find someone out there to snooker.
    "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
    Likes Hard liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bnova View Post
    among the NTs there I'm pretty much...unliked...my threads or most of my threads are entertaining like gold comedy
    Because you're not an INTJ.

    Quote Originally Posted by 00c View Post
    Divergent; NT are among the rarest as a whole and the more divergent among the NTs would be NTJs as a result of Fi and all of their other more aggressive and assertive functions in place rather than those of NTPs.
    Convergent thinking is clearly much more characteristic of SJs. In time all SJs follow what NTs produce and only then does it become convergent thinking, everything they first held with such blind skepticism becomes something they refer to day in and out.
    Keirsey temperaments are meant to identify a person's type by directly observing how they behave, it can't be counted on to gage their cognitive processes. From what I know, the rationale behind it is that Sensing defines your appearance, so Se is most plainly visible, Si has a moderate but subdued presence, and Intuitives are harder to observe by sight and are divided into NF and NT based on what they do, while SPs and SJs are categorized by how they show it.


    I think it's more closely related to Ti vs. Te, I'll see what @Jennifer thinks.

Similar Threads

  1. [Fi] are Fi doms prone to paranoia?
    By prplchknz in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-06-2012, 02:08 PM
  2. Which personality types are prone to drug addiction?
    By hotmale in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: 01-05-2010, 12:43 PM
  3. [NT] Do NTs have tend to have abstract or concrete feelings/values?
    By Athenian200 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 10-14-2009, 12:03 AM
  4. Are intuitives more prone to perfectionism?
    By Snow Turtle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-07-2009, 07:08 PM
  5. Are strong "Thinkers" prone to being a risk to themselves?
    By swordpath in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 09:07 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