User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 132

  1. #21
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Consider for instance reading a book. if you were to "use Se" to read a book, you'd be insanely bored within minutes. But if you were to have no sensing occur at all, you'd be blind. So, what really happens when you read a book?



    ps. watched about 10 seconds of the video, then the repression of sensing kicked in.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  2. #22
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    That the person attends little to extroverted perceiving, has a distaste for it in general, and controls it poorly has nothing at all to do with whether or not it occurs for them.
    Yes, I agree. Because INxJ's are unskilled with objective perception does not mean they don't perceive. This is what my argument hinges on, regarding their state of being Se-inferior - that INxJ's are simply bad at perceptive object-oriented thinking - or at the very least, do not wholly value the trait. I detailed some of my reasoning on the first page, and I'll touch again on it towards the bottom.

    Which is my argument to you, @Kamishi. I could have a thousand proclaimed INTJ's coming in reiterating their inability to efficiently function in their environment. It does nothing to convince me away from my position on why introverted intuitives are Se-inferior. Why would I take the butcher's word for it when I can stick my head up the cow's ass?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Consider for instance reading a book. if you were to "use Se" to read a book, you'd be insanely bored within minutes. But if you were to have no sensing occur at all, you'd be blind. So, what really happens when you read a book?
    When I study a reference work on physics, I can delve near one hundred percent into the realm of Se. Almost any physical science is the same, from geology to neurology to quantum mechanics. Much of science fiction is Se-oriented, at that - Michael Crichton, Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke. It is only when I get to more subjectively assertive matters (maybe a Rand novel) can I grow bored, because I do not generally view information as something to be idealized. It is something to be discovered, generated and propagated.

    Take an experience I had with an INTJ from the forum. Both of us shared an obvious taste for the King series "The Dark Tower". At the very first illumination of conflicting subjective beliefs regarding the themes of the story, I was pegged as being 'wrong', with the ensuing conversation meaning to serve the purpose of who was 'more right'. A user who values Se (or Ne, again) would be highly motivated to explore the variances in perception, it wishes to be shown contrary evidence just as much as it intends to do this for others. Being wrong is part of the sensationalist experience Se values. This is what makes him INTJ and me ISTP - he was closed off to the experience of reconciling beliefs, while my principle drive is to seek reconciliation. It is why NTJ's are valued and skilled as managers; they lack the conviction to reconcile themselves to their environment. Ni makes for very intellectually authoritarian peoples - Rand, Marx, Hitler, Osama, Paul Ryan, so forth. But perhaps I digress.


    Earlier I said I would touch back on the subject of Se-inferiority:

    "From an extraverted and rationalistic standpoint, such types are indeed the most fruitless of men... They lack reason and the ethics of reason, but their lives teach the other possibility."

    "Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel."

    "Reality has no existence for him; he gives himself up to fruitless phantasies."

    "His conscious attitude, both to the sensation and the sensed object, is one of sovereign superiority and disregard. Not that he means to be inconsiderate or superior -- he simply does not see the object that everyone else sees."


    These are all more examples of Se-inferiority. Se is the complete opposite - Se demands reality, demands objective experience, demands reason and demands logic. Ni doesn't. This is why Ni dominants are Se-inferior... not because they have the unfortunate existence of being operated by a dynamic parallel processing device largely ill-equipped to handle the complexity of modern existence, i.e. the human brain.

  3. #23
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by superunknown View Post
    Yes, I agree. Because INxJ's are unskilled with objective perception does not mean they don't perceive. This is what my argument hinges on, regarding their state of being Se-inferior - that INxJ's are simply bad at perceptive object-oriented thinking - or at the very least, do not wholly value the trait. I detailed some of my reasoning on the first page, and I'll touch again on it towards the bottom.
    Pffft, your argument hinges on subjective perception being objectively weaker to the extent the person fails to consume objective perception.

    Here's a mind-bender: where everyone says repressed, they mean converted. Repressing, or suppressing immediate sensory information is a key step in allowing other perceptions to arise. The strength then of Ni, or any "function", is, in effect, the extent to which they strip out every other kind of cognition available to the person. This however is impersonal cognitive mechanism, not personal choice. Lifestyles will likely arise as a result of these kinds of cognitive mechanisms, but if, say, a person happens to fuck up by giving in to their exaggerated distaste for participation in the outside world, that's different from saying Ni is teh fail. That'd be about the same as saying black isn't very good at white because it's not white.

    All people are subject to about the same amount of raw input, give or take according to biology and circumstance. They all convert that raw, impersonal input into something else. None of them attend directly to everything in the raw stream.

    let us pray.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  4. #24
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by superunknown View Post
    When I study a reference work on physics, I can delve near one hundred percent into the realm of Se.
    The realm, sure. But not the experience.

    Almost any physical science is the same, from geology to neurology to quantum mechanics. Much of science fiction is Se-oriented, at that - Michael Crichton, Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke. It is only when I get to more subjectively assertive matters (maybe a Rand novel) can I grow bored, because I do not generally view information as something to be idealized. It is something to be discovered, generated and propagated.

    Take an experience I had with an INTJ from the forum. Both of us shared an obvious taste for the King series "The Dark Tower". At the very first illumination of conflicting subjective beliefs regarding the themes of the story, I was pegged as being 'wrong', with the ensuing conversation meaning to serve the purpose of who was 'more right'. A user who values Se (or Ne, again) would be highly motivated to explore the variances in perception, it wishes to be shown contrary evidence just as much as it intends to do this for others. Being wrong is part of the sensationalist experience Se values. This is what makes him INTJ and me ISTP - he was closed off to the experience of reconciling beliefs, while my principle drive is to seek reconciliation. It is why NTJ's are valued and skilled as managers; they lack the conviction to reconcile themselves to their environment. Ni makes for very intellectually authoritarian peoples - Rand, Marx, Hitler, Osama, Paul Ryan, so forth. But perhaps I digress.


    Earlier I said I would touch back on the subject of Se-inferiority:

    "From an extraverted and rationalistic standpoint, such types are indeed the most fruitless of men... They lack reason and the ethics of reason, but their lives teach the other possibility."

    "Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel."

    "Reality has no existence for him; he gives himself up to fruitless phantasies."

    "His conscious attitude, both to the sensation and the sensed object, is one of sovereign superiority and disregard. Not that he means to be inconsiderate or superior -- he simply does not see the object that everyone else sees."


    These are all more examples of Se-inferiority. Se is the complete opposite - Se demands reality, demands objective experience, demands reason and demands logic. Ni doesn't. This is why Ni dominants are Se-inferior... not because they have the unfortunate existence of being operated by a dynamic parallel processing device largely ill-equipped to handle the complexity of modern existence, i.e. the human brain.
    Dude, please. An INTJ judged and now it's time to trash the type? Come out of the closet, ENTP!
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  5. #25
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Pffft, your argument hinges on subjective perception being objectively weaker to the extent the person fails to consume objective perception.
    You are correct, the subjective perception can be very strong in terms of utility regarding a wide range of subjects.

    Here's a mind-bender: where everyone says repressed, they mean converted. Repressing, or suppressing immediate sensory information is a key step in allowing other perceptions to arise. The strength then of Ni, or any "function", is, in effect, the extent to which they strip out every other kind of cognition available to the person. This however is impersonal cognitive mechanism, not personal choice. Lifestyles will likely arise as a result of these kinds of cognitive mechanisms, but if, say, a person happens to fuck up by giving in to their exaggerated distaste for participation in the outside world, that's different from saying Ni is teh fail. That'd be about the same as saying black isn't very good at white because it's not white.

    All people are subject to about the same amount of raw input, give or take according to biology and circumstance. They all convert that raw, impersonal input into something else. None of them attend directly to everything in the raw stream.
    Perhaps we will arrive at a philosophical crossroads, soon, for Jung predicts the exchange far in advance:

    "Thus, just as it seems incomprehensible to the introvert that the object should always be decisive, it remains just as enigmatic to the extravert how a subjective standpoint can be superior to the objective situation."

    let us pray.
    Pray for what?

    Dude, please. An INTJ judged and now it's time to trash the type? Come out of the closet, ENTP!
    All I have done is post some quotes from Jung, characters from celebritytypes, and related a personal experience. It's not like I've really made anything up out of spite. I've got more experience to share, should you not be satisfied. I am free being any type whoever wishes me to be, from ENTP to ISFJ.

    For your opinion, as was stated prior, I don't believe many to be caricatures of the ideas expressed. They are that, caricatures.

    Oh, except the managing thing. I don't know what to say, NTJ's drive horses well.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    All people are subject to about the same amount of raw input, give or take according to biology and circumstance. They all convert that raw, impersonal input into something else. None of them attend directly to everything in the raw stream.
    Disagreed. It's not about convertion. The data never transforms and why would it? The actual nature and impression of the chair is never going to be anything but a chair. Instead, I would argue it is more about the interpretation or focus on the data, how one spends the most energy to understand it. How do we understand the chair? The data is simply a source of various possibilities to be interpreted.

    Quote Originally Posted by superunknown View Post
    Yes, I agree. Because INxJ's are unskilled with objective perception does not mean they don't perceive. This is what my argument hinges on, regarding their state of being Se-inferior - that INxJ's are simply bad at perceptive object-oriented thinking - or at the very least, do not wholly value the trait. I detailed some of my reasoning on the first page, and I'll touch again on it towards the bottom.

    Which is my argument to you, @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/member.php?u=16405" target="_blank">Kamishi</a>. I could have a thousand proclaimed INTJ's coming in reiterating their inability to efficiently function in their environment. It does nothing to convince me away from my position on why introverted intuitives are Se-inferior. Why would I take the butcher's word for it when I can stick my head up the cow's ass?
    Proclaimed, huh? I never once intended to argue the point that inferior Se types are not able to efficiently function in the sense world by the way. Knowing myself and who I am, putting value on the sense world is the least likely thing I would do, especially as a type 5 I think. Ni and 5-ness kind of go together. I can imagine how to operate perfectly in the sense world but once I need to translate this knowledge into anything practical it tends to just fail beyond belief. I don't know how to translate what I'm seeing in my mind and apply it properly in the actual sense world. There are other aspects as well of course, such as forgetting where I put my keys or my phone (nevermind my inability to remember to charge my phone and have my family members try to call me several times and asking if I'm alive), remembering to eat, slight sense of hypochondria (especially that which is capable of invading the body e.g. parasites) and I don't know what else. The world of inferior sensation is just a strange one. I rather just not think of it at all.

    The point I was raising is that you were making the claim that Se has nothing to do with the sense of "being in the moment" which I attest from personal experience is simply not true, especially because of how obviously it stands in contrast to Ni as a dominant perspective that is anything but being aware of the present moment. I'm more aware of drawing patterns of observed phenomena in the past and telling what will happen in the near to far-away future than I am telling what is going on right now. Having to consciously focus my perspective this way is clearly painful and it's only in childish moments of inferior eruption where I can enjoy such occurrences. I think perhaps even moreso because of Fi is also supporting inferior Se. This video may be exaggerated but it still captures the positive experience of inferior Se with Fi quite well. Notice its childish and archaic nature:


    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  7. #27
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by superunknown View Post
    You are correct, the subjective perception can be very strong in terms of utility regarding a wide range of subjects.
    lol.

    The lurking "but" there is the anti-Jung.

    Perhaps we will arrive at a philosophical crossroads, soon, for Jung predicts the exchange far in advance:

    "Thus, just as it seems incomprehensible to the introvert that the object should always be decisive, it remains just as enigmatic to the extravert how a subjective standpoint can be superior to the objective situation."
    Sadly, I didn't say the subjective viewpoint wins. I said all viewpoints are compromised, but that none of them therefore fail. They definitely fail to be one another. They definitely fail to encompass the strengths of viewpoints they are not. But they don't in general fail. None of the "functions" are defined so hopelessly compromised that they cannot function in their own right.

    But there's more. They all actually do do something adequate with respect to available reality. And wherever anyone manages to include that axiom in their understanding of functions and functioning, they've got their Jung right.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  8. #28
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    Disagreed. It's not about convertion. The data never transforms and why would it? The actual nature and impression of the chair is never going to be anything but a chair. Instead, I would argue it is more about the interpretation or focus on the data, how one spends the most energy to understand it. How do we understand the chair? The data is simply a source of various possibilities to be interpreted.
    Same difference maybe? As soon as you say "chair", you're no longer dealing with raw data.

    There has to be some transformation of data. There's some jump between impersonal processes such as you find in the nervous system and personal processes such as you find in a cognitive system. Once the "data" is registered in consciousness, or even in the unconscious, it surely is something different--qualitatively, at least--from any raw content of the nervous system.

    or not. Maybe it just appears different.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #29
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Same difference maybe? As soon as you say "chair", you're no longer dealing with raw data.
    Then what is data? In order to successfully communicate we need labels, but the labels themselves don't need to actually be transformation of meaning because they can still infer to the primary impressions or ideas, again, depending on how you interpret the label. "Chair" is by itself meaningless, just like the word "data" is. There are many ways I can describe a chair and people will still be able to infer that it is a chair I am describing. Why? Because I am referring to an idea that we can collectively understand even if this understanding of the idea is still personal to a degree. You can in my opinion, always infer to the raw data at hand no matter what you call it.
    There has to be some transformation of data.
    Why transformation instead of re-interpretation? Transformation suggests that the data as is is no longer, and I don't think this is true. We clearly extract meaning from the objective world, but the way we understand the objective world seems to for most of the part, be subjective even if an extrovert might disagree.

    There's some jump between impersonal processes such as you find in the nervous system and personal processes such as you find in a cognitive system. Once the "data" is registered in consciousness, or even in the unconscious, it surely is something different--qualitatively, at least--from any raw content of the nervous system.
    Why must it be? Again, it depends on how you define data to begin with.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  10. #30
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Well... dunno.

    But the assertion that there is something independent of us that we all partake of similarly is an article of faith. Probably a good article of faith. It would seem that models of cognition fall apart conceptually if there is no such article. But what's the reason for asserting a direct relationship? Why would the content of cognition and the content of the real world have some direct relationship? For as long as the relationship is consistent and reliable, it doesn't have to be direct at all. And conceptually speaking, it seems a fairly long journey from impulses in a nervous system to conscious cognition.

    It seems like the only way to ensure any kind of direct relationship between the content of the mind and the shape of the outside world is to have Se operate independent of other cognition. No transformation. No additional input. No human.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] INJs and Extraverted Sensing
    By Martian Manifesto in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 02-10-2017, 04:38 AM
  2. Video: Inferior Extraverted Sensing in Dominant Intuitives
    By highlander in forum Typology Videos and RSS Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-21-2016, 01:31 PM
  3. [Se] Ni Doms, Inferior Extraverted Sensing and Incorrect Conclusions
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-28-2015, 12:59 PM
  4. [JCF] Extraverted Sensing and Introverted Sensing - Se vs Si
    By Domino in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 07-28-2014, 12:36 AM
  5. [Se] Understanding and Developing Extraverted Sensing
    By wolfy in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 12:38 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