User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 141

  1. #91
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    They are the scientists because they can hypothesize based on limited data, and follow the hunch. The scientific method, which you describe, is IMO very S (I agree on that point). It forces us to get significant amounts of data. That is through statistics ofc. The rest of your post only enforces that old thread I made -- the world favours S types. Literalism.

    My point is that Ns don't seem to need as much data before drawing conclusions. They go from part to whole faster -- the downside is that the whole pattern perception is often wrong! So yeah, they may not be collecting evidence properly, but that doesn't mean that their N won't tell them it's sufficient.
    Yes. All correct.

    A dumb an imbalanced N just assumes everything/ reads into everything without having any knowledge to back it up and is inaccurate half the time.
    A dumb S will collect facts all day and not be able to draw conclusions about them. Accurate, but slow on the uptake.

    A smart and balanced anybody should be able to do both. They will value both areas, the whole scientific process. (In even daily life decisions.) With a strength in one area or another.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  2. #92
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Yes. All correct.

    A dumb an imbalanced N just assumes everything/ reads into everything without having any knowledge to back it up and is inaccurate half the time.
    A dumb S will collect facts all day and not be able to draw conclusions about them. Accurate, but slow on the uptake.

    A smart and balanced anybody should be able to do both. They will value both areas, the whole scientific process. (In even daily life decisions.) With a strength in one area or another.
    I agree with that, but I personally think the preferences will remain distinct until well into one's 40s or 50s. Yeah there are rare cases that seem very balanced at a young age. Actually, I think you are like that (Edit: I mean this in the best way possible!). I seem to completely lack Te, on the other hand, even though it's my inferior. Because it takes time to achieve that balance.

    Perhaps the wisdom one is supposed to get as one ages is just... balance.

    Edit: I think as long as a hypothesis is made clear to be just that, it's fine. When stated as fact, it becomes a problem.

    Also. The problem with requiring data for everything, IMO, is that one's experience gets pitted against others' experiences. If you have contradictory experiences, you can't run a random sampled, double blind study to determine who is right! This is why I think experiences are important but are not everything. It's a tough balance.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  3. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Yes. All correct.

    A dumb an imbalanced N just assumes everything/ reads into everything without having any knowledge to back it up and is inaccurate half the time.
    A dumb S will collect facts all day and not be able to draw conclusions about them. Accurate, but slow on the uptake.

    A smart and balanced anybody should be able to do both. They will value both areas, the whole scientific process. (In even daily life decisions.) With a strength in one area or another.
    I have all your posts in a folder.
    I can't make heads or tails of them.

    (I had to put the I back to post in here)

  4. #94
    likes this gromit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Yes. All correct.

    A dumb an imbalanced N just assumes everything/ reads into everything without having any knowledge to back it up and is inaccurate half the time.
    A dumb S will collect facts all day and not be able to draw conclusions about them. Accurate, but slow on the uptake.

    A smart and balanced anybody should be able to do both. They will value both areas, the whole scientific process. (In even daily life decisions.) With a strength in one area or another.
    Yes I think it's true, anyone should be able to do both!
    Your kisses, sweeter than honey. But guess what, so is my money.

  5. #95
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    The norms were not even this way in 1998 when the book was written. The quotes I posted sound damn near Victorian. That's why I think it should be discredited; not because behaviours were changed, but because it was wrong even at the time it was supposed to be accurate.
    I would agree that Dr. Keirsey hasn't exactly had his finger on the pulse of modern society in the last 30 years or so. The original Please Understand Me was written in 1978, and even though there is much updated and expanded upon in the sequel 20 years later, he probably didn't properly update certain sections like the one on SJ sex that you cited. The stuff about SP slang is the same way, a lot of the examples he gives seem to come more out of the 50's and 60's. Still, I disagree with you that his not "getting with the times" as far as those specifics means that his whole book should be discredited.

    The point of anything is whether it's useful in practice, right? And the fact is that Keirsey Temperament Theory has been very useful to me and many other people for better understanding friends, relatives, romantic partners (there ya go), etc. Keirsey's son, who runs their forum, has worked with his father on updating some of the previous material, and the latest book, "Personology", I would say, does at least a decent job in doing so. Unfortunately, it takes a long time for updated material in books with low distribution to permeate the internet, so the most common Keirsey quotes will probably still be from the Please Understand Me books for a long time.
    But, like I said, I can laugh at certain passages as being a bit outdated and still recognize that the overall content is good, and really not any more stereotype-based than any other sociological system that is based on observation of human behavior.

    No. I advocate instead that people strive to avoid enforcing heteronormative standards (especially with a section like "Different Drummers" at the front of the book). How hard is it to use phrases like "romantic partner" or better yet, "sexual partner"? Why is it necessary to point out repeatedly that the partner "is" of the opposite sex?
    Well, we'll just have to disagree about that. I don't think there's anything wrong with "heteronormative standards" so I fail to see it as something that needs to be avoided. As you say, it's not much relevant to the main point.

    This isn't my main point about invalidating Keirsey, it was more of a side...annoyance, we can say. That said, I think this post has shown your true colours. Helpful. ("Fuck them, they're just a minority! Yeah, who cares about them, right?")
    Once again, not something I said. I'm not putting words in your mouth, try not doing it for me.

    Yes. Si causes SJs to maintain standards, because standards are externally verifiable, reliable, and known. That is far more accurate than surrounding it with all this bullshit. Si descriptions. Oh wait, Keirsey doesn't advocate the function theory. That's a problem for me.
    I personally think function theory works as a good supplement to KTT. He doesn't advocate it, but that doesn't mean that people can't use what works for them. I mean, heck, Carl Jung himself would probably be rolling around in his grave if he knew how his stuff has been twisted and used by all kinds of people to mean whatever they wanted it to mean, but if you get something out of his stuff, and some from somebody else, then awesome. I certainly don't believe in trying to limit myself to one person's ideas in my own understanding of people.

    Also, I find it rather sickening that one has to be a 'feminazi' to be upset that Keirsey compares women to cattle. (Why buy the cow when the milk's free? -- puke)
    Well, sorry, but the word "heteronormative" sounds like it comes out of the feminazi handbook, that's why I said that. And Keirsey was quoting a commonly used phrase by a lot of fathers. Surely you've heard similar sayings in your time from parents trying to influence their kids' behavior in some way? Dr. K himself was not stating that women are cattle.

    Bullshit. I don't fit your stereotypes, so what? Learn what Se is instead of relying on Keirsey's SP descriptions, and perhaps you would reconsider, not that I care if you do. (Cue "you don't want to be touched? you're just a frigid bitch!" comments.)
    I've learned quite a bit about "Se", thank you very much. I don't "rely" on Keirsey's SP descriptions, I am capable of observing plenty on my own. I think it's verifiably true that some people can and have used Keirsey's work to advance stereotypes, but the fact is that people have used function theory for the same purpose as well. There's posts all over this forum with people doing so. I think the fact that a ton of the people who spend time spouting things about functions don't really know much about them leads to a lot of confusion among people when it comes to their type. And I think the fundamental difference in the way that Sensors and Intutives take in information is a big part of that. Both try to squeeze something into a box it doesn't fit into. The thing I like about Keirsey is that it's simplified and a lot harder to confuse (you know, unless you try to. )


    Keirsey is as much of a threat to MBTI/JCF as a five year old tee ball player is to an MLB all-star. To date, I've written 5 or 6 posts discrediting Keirsey -- only two of which have reached this length. I've written over 400 posts, then, advocating the cognitive functions. So no worries, I'm definitely advocating for the better system.
    Cool. More power to ya. There are others who have regularly posted here who seem to make it their lifelong quest to bash Keirsey. (A few of them have been banned, but some still persist.) I'm glad you're not one of them.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  6. #96
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    I've decided I don't want to get banned from this forum, so I'm choosing not to respond.

    I knew it.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  7. #97
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Actually, never mind. Just a quick question for you, Jeffster. Since you seem very proud of your opinions (correct me if this isn't the case)... would you mind if I posted the following phrase from your above post in my signature?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    the word "heteronormative" sounds like it comes out of the feminazi handbook
    IMO, it's totally sig-worthy.

    (This section of the forum is viewable by non-members, so no concerns about that.)

    Thanks.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  8. #98
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    Actually, never mind. Just a quick question for you, Jeffster. Since you seem very proud of your opinions (correct me if this isn't the case)... would you mind if I posted the following phrase from your above post in my signature?
    Not at all. Go for it.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  9. #99
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    Not at all. Go for it.
    Cheers. Thanks.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  10. #100
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfy View Post
    I have all your posts in a folder.
    I can't make heads or tails of them.

    (I had to put the I back to post in here)
    I'm not sure how I feel about this.......
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] So any other ENTPs get along with the SPs or feel more like them???
    By Chilichimichanga in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-05-2017, 11:57 AM
  2. [SP] Any other SPs like this game lol
    By Rainne in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-06-2010, 09:04 PM
  3. [INFP] Do any other INFP's feel like this?
    By Soar337 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 07:08 PM
  4. [NT] Do any other NTs(INTPs) act this way?
    By Nizy in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 09-18-2009, 01:08 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Do any other N's replay events?
    By Matt22 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-21-2007, 07:53 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