User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 181

  1. #51
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Creativity by definition means coming up with original entities. Intuitors tend to discover novelties pertaining to the mind more than of the earthly things and sensors--vice versa.

    There are two conventional definitions of creativity, adaptive and innovative.

    Adaptive is about working with variables that already exist to create a more congenial concrete environment. This kind of creativity is usually utilized to the end of bringing stability to society. The innovative creativity is more in line with the conventional definition of creativity. The ability to generate abstract ideas. An entity does not need to be abstract in order to be considered an idea, as we see that creative sensors often come up with ideas pertaining to the concrete world. The reason why the latter is called innovative and the former does not because the latter is contingent upon the mind for creation of ideas, yet the former on the physical world. Neither of the two is any more 'original', and in the conventional sense of the word, neither is original, because they both depend on an extraneous variable for stimulation. Adaptive creativity is often not considered creativity at all because it is clear that it depends on something else for stimulation, whereas it is much less clear that the same is the case for the innovative creativity.

    In short, neither the sensors nor the intuitors are 'creative', yet with Sensors this is easier to notice.
    Well I know S and N are information-gathering functions.

    We all know that S prefers to gather information with the five senses (empirical), but the way it's worded with N, with gathering information from "possibilities and meanings." Would this be something like understanding through discussion or reading since neither of those involves direct experience?

    Some sources, though, say that E prefers experiential knowledge, while I prefers conceptual knowledge, but to me, that seems to make more sense when in the S and N dichotomies, since experience is concrete, while concepts (which are attained through reading since it deals with symbols and interpreting of meaning) are abstract and not directly perceived by the senses. Conceptual knowledge is also big picture oriented.

    Can someone help me out here?

  2. #52
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nocturne
    S: Concrete, Common Sense, Matter-of-fact, Reliable, Always right
    N: Flakey, Nonsensical, Rambling, Can write whole paragraphs without saying anything
    Thank you! (Though I don't know about the "always right" part. )
    See what I mean? Paragraphs and paragraphs of writing, and what for? Nothing, absolutely nothing.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  3. #53
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Can someone help me out here?
    The three core views;

    E/I:

    MBTI - Determines dominance of rational/irrational functions (Ne-Ti vs Ti-Ne)

    Jung - Is the primary characteristic of the other traits (Te is really Et, if that makes sense.)

    FFM - Is essentially surgency, the desire for environmental feedback.

    N/S:

    MBTI - S pulls direct information, ie A to B to C... N pulls indirect information, ie: sum_, INT. Effectively Ns look for ways things relate to each other, how the information impacts on other information - such as how things lead to other information/impacts, often into the future without a direct correlation to the information presented. Big picture stuff... forest for the trees. Better explained in Jungs original work;

    Jung - Essentially intuition is seeing the whole while sensing seeing the parts. The scope of "whole" is simply different. Intuition should be the crossover point where intuitives begin pulling more information than is presented in the immediate situation ie: pulling information from a nebulous location.

    FFM - N Is essentially openness, the willingness to be change/adpot knowledge, feelings and values and the willingness to fantasize and explore new activities. Despite sounding very different, they are significantly correlated.

    Strictly speaking, Ns are not more 'creative' than Ss. They are simply more intuitive, giving them the general aptitude in seeing more than what is presented. This is not an inherently positive thing, since it can result in the ghosts and shadows of bad information. For example, it is generally Ns that will assign stupid views onto MBTI types as they read more and more into types than actually exists. The Ss are typically more accurate in their ability to apply systems since they don't draw on outside biases.

    The main advantage of being an N over and S isn't understanding or application - it is a side effect of being more open to refining their knowledge and changing when they are wrong (MBTI expresses this as a need to be consistent, which really means that we change what we know to fit our views, where Ss believe things are fixed as a side effect of measuring tangibles).

    --

    As for the OP, I explain it as either the N/S Jung view above, or the FFM view.

  4. #54
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Well I was looking at this sample report and it seems that iNtuition is more related to "learning for the sake of learning" rather than learning for a practical outcome.

    It's said that a Sensor is well-grounded in reality, so would a strong iNtuitive preference be more likely to become isolated from reality?

    And since a Sensory preference is one that's more socially acceptable, are iNtuitives more likely to be labeled as "eccentric" or "crackpots" because of their preference to go against mainstream norms?

    Personality Page says that the INTJ type may be unaware (or uncaring) of how people on the outside world perceive me (and this is true of me). Is this because of a dominant Introverted iNtuition?

    I have a feeling I'm making these things more confusing than they ought to be.

    And the modern Myers-Briggs functions seem be quite devious from Jung's original functions, since modern MBTI tests consider Introversion and Extraversion more or less as social inclinations (Extraverts are gregarious, Introverts are reserved).

  5. #55
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Well I was looking at this sample report and it seems that iNtuition is more related to "learning for the sake of learning" rather than learning for a practical outcome.
    It's an assumed trait, yes.

    It's said that a Sensor is well-grounded in reality, so would a strong iNtuitive preference be more likely to become isolated from reality?
    The better way of putting it is that iNtuitive would see things that aren't there.

    And since a Sensory preference is one that's more socially acceptable, are iNtuitives more likely to be labeled as "eccentric" or "crackpots" because of their preference to go against mainstream norms?
    Subjective; but yes, in general. I don't find that it matter that much, unless you are unhealthy in some way (ie: seeing things that really aren't there!)

    Personality Page says that the INTJ type may be unaware (or uncaring) of how people on the outside world perceive me (and this is true of me). Is this because of a dominant Introverted iNtuition?
    It's because of where you stand on every trait. But yes, in a word, it is because of dominant Ni. Just as SJs (Si) don't really care what people 'think', they very much care about following the standards they have. It just so happens that the standards can be reduced to people's impressions of them. You can see Si easier in religion than with cultural standards. Ni care about their vision, if you will, and less about the people around them.

    And the modern Myers-Briggs functions seem be quite devious from Jung's original functions, since modern MBTI tests consider Introversion and Extraversion more or less as social inclinations (Extraverts are gregarious, Introverts are reserved).
    Yup, MBTI traits have become more and more like the factor analysis traits in FFM.

  6. #56
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Well I was looking at this sample report and it seems that iNtuition is more related to "learning for the sake of learning" rather than learning for a practical outcome.
    Yes, and was one reason that I discounted my Step II and Geier results as being INTP. I would say that INJs (and possibly ENJs) would need some practical value from learning something for it's own sake, but I know that SPs would never learn anything without some realistic benfit. A good example is learning about type was to give me guidelines on career matters. Since the system is really not beneficial for a lot of practical purposes (IRL), then it is understandable why most sensing types steer clear of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    It's said that a Sensor is well-grounded in reality, so would a strong iNtuitive preference be more likely to become isolated from reality?
    The one thing that I have a disdain for is, MBTI generally looks at types in healthy stages. You find very little information on how the type acts when using less than their two dominant functions. IRL, very few people can maintain a constant sense of healthiness. So, to answer your question, alot of sensing types use intuition, because they are in unhealthy state of mind.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    And since a Sensory preference is one that's more socially acceptable, are iNtuitives more likely to be labeled as "eccentric" or "crackpots" because of their preference to go against mainstream norms?
    I wouldn't say that is totally true, since SPs can have their integrity questioned by doing things outside of the norm.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Personality Page says that the INTJ type may be unaware (or uncaring) of how people on the outside world perceive me (and this is true of me). Is this because of a dominant Introverted iNtuition?
    I agree with Pgat, but reference back to my original example, in that for both ITJs, the auxiliary is used to filter out information that does not coincide with the dominant functions beliefs. Ergo, it's less of their not caring and more of being unconscious to their appearance. I made a similar inquiry on the INTPC board some time ago, as to whether introverted types are truly conscious of appearance, thus how they use their auxilary or any other extraverted function.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    I have a feeling I'm making these things more confusing than they ought to be.
    Absolutely not Uber. These are the questions that should be asked because they help introverted types deal with real life issues better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    And the modern Myers-Briggs functions seem be quite devious from Jung's original functions, since modern MBTI tests consider Introversion and Extraversion more or less as social inclinations (Extraverts are gregarious, Introverts are reserved).
    And let us say AMEN!! Just responding to your example of the E/I dichotomy, I would think that the average person is more amibiverted, therefore find it quite arduous to pigeonhole themselves into a forced choice. Similarly, each type function is used fluidly, therefore will be used as necessary (as referenced in a post earlier). That is why I think it becomes a bit non-sensical to make comparisons when we use all functions. Clearly, the Fe will get me in more trouble, because I suspect of having to put on a facade to exist in the daily world. I would prefer to allow my work to speak for itself, however inter-office politics precludes me from obtaining desired results (ie, promotions and raises).

  7. #57
    Senior Member Blackwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ERTP
    Posts
    454

    Default

    You could also say that Intuitives are always charging in, guns blazing, too eager to connect the dots to a great whole even in cases where there is no justification for such a connection.

  8. #58
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackwater View Post
    You could also say that Intuitives are always charging in, guns blazing, too eager to connect the dots to a great whole even in cases where there is no justification for such a connection.
    Yes you're right, that's why I NEED my S friends to bring me to the facts of the matter. I had a very long conversation with one of my IxTJ friends about an incident I am absolutely sure meant something. It's taken me a few days to finally come around to the idea that it may have only been what it was, nothing more nothing less.

    One thing I noticed, I'm more able to convince my S friends of the hidden meaning of something than they are able to convince me that something means nothing or not what I think it is. I also notice with my other N friends it's harder to convince them to change their interpretation of the hidden meaning or connections between an event. We seem to tenaciously hold on to what we believe to be the true significance of something (which could be completely wrong).

  9. #59
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackwater View Post
    You could also say that Intuitives are always charging in, guns blazing, too eager to connect the dots to a great whole even in cases where there is no justification for such a connection.
    And you don't think that ESP types do this? Otto Kroeger's slogan for ESTPs, "When all else fails, read the instructions", epitomizes shooting from the hip. They're also noted for responding before having all of the information, because Se allows them to instantly size up a situation, with very little information. That is definitely a Se trait, however since Ne and Se can look superficially alike it's understandable that those using Ne would resonate with that type behavior, especially ENTPs.

  10. #60
    @.~*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 "?" View Post
    And you don't think that ESP types do this? Otto Kroeger's slogan for ESTPs, "When all else fails, read the instructions", epitomizes shooting from the hip.
    I see ESxP's regularly do this. They are good at determining action based on the flow around them (i.e., reacting in real-time) but they seem to be weak at least early on in life with determining the SIGNIFICANCE of the things happening around them.

    The conclusions they generally draw often seem to be erroneous because they are based on a limited understanding of the possibilities.

    As long as they just take the events unfolding at their face value, they are very effective in finding the best response to deal with the situation right in that moment.
    "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

Similar Threads

  1. [SP] An SP in a house full of Ns.
    By Tiny Army in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 02-04-2009, 06:23 PM
  2. We need good descriptions of functions
    By Into It in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-14-2008, 06:08 AM
  3. Very interesting description of Dostoevsky's personality
    By Sniffles in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-12-2008, 03:08 PM
  4. From the Horses' Mouth: Jung's Root descriptions of the Functions.
    By Eric B in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 08:05 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