User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 132

  1. #81
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    No, they are not tools. They are perspectives that we view the world through and they help to define our ego structure since it is through the lens of the dominant that we understand the world.
    There it is again, a thing behind the thing--functions as perspectives that we sit behind. What's the "we"? The ego?

    Why must they be different?
    Because Jesus died for your sins.

    Oh yes, it does.
    next you'll be telling me there are gaps in Ni for Se to fill.

    You don't understand it does because I highly doubt you are an actual INTJ cognitively.
    I shall live with the shame.

    Perhaps I wouldn't come across that way if you actually attempted to seriously consider what I am trying to convey to you and you fully understood this.
    Oh, I don't know. You might be mean even if I tried really hard. If it turned out I was really dumb, it's better not to know.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  2. #82
    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
    There it is again, a thing behind the thing--functions as perspectives that we sit behind. What's the "we"? The ego?
    "We" obviously refers to the collective sense of humanity as in every individual who is capable of performing some kind of cognitive action. By action I mean thinking itself, and possess some kind of conscious awareness that one is indeed thinking. I honestly fail to see what is so difficult for you to understand about this subject. You are nitpicky about the choice of words, but you fail to understand and grasp the concepts being presented behind these words. Doesn't speak strongly for you being an intuitive type.

    Because Jesus died for your sins.
    Because that is a perfectly valid and legit way of refuting my points.

    next you'll be telling me there are gaps in Ni for Se to fill.
    No, I won't, since they are complementary functions that provide exactly the same kind of perspective within the ego but with a slightly different focus on the content of content depending on if Se is egoic or if Ni is egoic.

    I shall live with the shame.
    Go ahead, won't stop you.
    Oh, I don't know. You might be mean even if I tried really hard. If it turned out I was really dumb, it's better not to know.
    I think this conversation says all there is to know about this subject.

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

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

  3. #83
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    "We" obviously refers to the collective sense of humanity as in every individual who is capable of performing some kind of cognitive action. By action I mean thinking itself, and possess some kind of conscious awareness that one is indeed thinking. I honestly fail to see what is so difficult for you to understand about this subject. You are nitpicky about the choice of words, but you fail to understand and grasp the concepts being presented behind these words. Doesn't speak strongly for you being an intuitive type.
    Help a poor S out, this "we", is a person or an appearance of a person? When "we" "choose" "a perspective", it's not a person at work in there, right? No ghost in the machine? There's some mechanism, some "ego defense" construction, that turns the wheels and cognition rolls onward. "We" essentially have things done for us but it appears to "us" that we did it. Right?

    Because that is a perfectly valid and legit way of refuting my points.
    Hey man! I'm the dum guy and I have to answer the philosophical questions too? I wouldn't expect good answers if I were me.

    No, I won't, since they are complementary functions that provide exactly the same kind of perspective within the ego but with a slightly different focus on the content of content depending on if Se is egoic or if Ni is egoic.
    Well now see if I were trying to corner, you know, someone, I'd have to wonder aloud how complementary perspectives end up repressing one another, especially when their focus is only slightly different. But first I would have been flummoxed by what "egoic" might mean.

    This "ego" seems to play some central role... in something.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  4. #84
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    yeah, the we, the us, the consciousness of cognition, you can model the hell out of it--egos, complexes, structures of all sorts, mechanisms like defenses, relationships between functions, type order, repression, regression--none of it describes where the quality of conscious cognition comes from.

    Conscious cognition alone seems unlikely to be the key to anything. It's too individual, too personal. It does not show how cognition in general comes to exist. But, whether a by-product or a driver, conscious cognition shares something with unconscious cognition. An interface of some kind exists. And without a description of that interface, pretty much anything anyone says about "cognition" is a lie of some kind.

    Particularly for some stupid subject like "inferior extroverted sensing". There, knowing about that interface is... vital?
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  5. #85
    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
    Help a poor S out, this "we", is a person or an appearance of a person? When "we" "choose" "a perspective", it's not a person at work in there, right? No ghost in the machine? There's some mechanism, some "ego defense" construction, that turns the wheels and cognition rolls onward. "We" essentially have things done for us but it appears to "us" that we did it. Right?
    You still don't get it after I explained it several times to you. Still getting hung up on the use of the word "we", not seeing the idea I am trying to convey that goes beyond the use of the word "we". I even explained to you what I meant here by "we", which is a reference to humanity as a whole in a collective sense, all those people capable of performing cognitive thought and actions. That is "we". It is ironic that you keep interpreting this in a literal sense as if "we" refer to actual people or things. You're not seeing your own cognition for what it is. I never intended to refer to actual people with word choice "we", but this seems impossible for you to understand.
    Hey man! I'm the dum guy and I have to answer the philosophical questions too? I wouldn't expect good answers if I were me.
    How do you expect to have a meaningful philosophical discussion when you can't even grasp the fundamentals of what I am saying?

    Well now see if I were trying to corner, you know, someone, I'd have to wonder aloud how complementary perspectives end up repressing one another, especially when their focus is only slightly different. But first I would have been flummoxed by what "egoic" might mean.
    Of, pertaining to the ego, obviously.

    This "ego" seems to play some central role... in something.
    Yes. It is your sense of self. If you read and understood Jung you would know this.

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

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

  6. #86
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    You still don't get it after I explained it several times to you. Still getting hung up on the use of the word "we", not seeing the idea I am trying to convey that goes beyond the use of the word "we". I even explained to you what I meant here by "we", which is a reference to humanity as a whole in a collective sense, all those people capable of performing cognitive thought and actions. That is "we". It is ironic that you keep interpreting this in a literal sense as if "we" refer to actual people or things. You're not seeing your own cognition for what it is. I never intended to refer to actual people with word choice "we", but this seems impossible for you to understand.
    So that's a "yes"? The mechanisms you're talking about are impersonal and universal? Good to know.

    How do you expect to have a meaningful philosophical discussion when you can't even grasp the fundamentals of what I am saying?
    It does seem difficult.

    Of, pertaining to the ego, obviously.

    Yes. It is your sense of self. If you read and understood Jung you would know this.
    Oh, I don't know. I've heard that INTJs synthesize concepts a lot. They abstract existing ideas and recombine them in novel ways, sometimes bringing in otherwise quite unrelated imagery to gain a new perspective, but in the end zeroing in on what hadn't been seen before. Like you, for instance. You're using "ego" and "ego defense" in what looks like a novel way. It behooves the pitiful not-N to ask the genius where her ideas may differ from l'originale, or even to wonder, albeit ineffectively, to what it is she really refers.

    Not that reactive judgment games can't be fun. But, like, everyone does those.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  7. #87
    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
    So that's a "yes"? The mechanisms you're talking about are impersonal and universal? Good to know.
    No? They are clearly very personal mechanisms since it is the individual who gives rise to them, nor are they universal since it only again, applies to those capable of cognitive thought as I clearly expressed in my previous post. I don't necessarily share Jung's idea of collective unconsciousness.
    Oh, I don't know. I've heard that INTJs synthesize concepts a lot. They abstract existing ideas and recombine them in novel ways, sometimes bringing in otherwise quite unrelated imagery to gain a new perspective, but in the end zeroing in on what hadn't been seen before. Like you, for instance. You're using "ego" and "ego defense" in what looks like a novel way. It behooves the pitiful not-N to ask the genius where her ideas may differ from l'originale, or even to wonder, albeit ineffectively, to what it is she really refers.
    I keep explaining to you what I mean. There is only so much explanation that can be done. If one does not understand after that point, then it is perhaps so that one is not capable of understanding.

    Not that reactive judgment games can't be fun. But, like, everyone does those.
    Also, if you and I actually genuinely shared cognition, we wouldn't be sitting here and not getting anywhere. Case in point, I can communicate with uumlau just fine and we can make sense to each other but I cannot, seemingly, ever seem to make sense to you. It says a lot about your cognition.

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

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

  8. #88
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    No? They are clearly very personal mechanisms since it is the individual who gives rise to them[...]
    OH MY GOD! WILL YOU STOP DOING THAT!

    I keep explaining to you what I mean. There is only so much explanation that can be done. If one does not understand after that point, then it is perhaps so that one is not capable of understanding.
    This could be true.

    Also, if you and I actually genuinely shared cognition, we wouldn't be sitting here and not getting anywhere. Case in point, I can communicate with uumlau just fine and we can make sense to each other but I cannot, seemingly, ever seem to make sense to you. It says a lot about your cognition.
    Well, yeah, but he knows the love languages. He's like a savant whisperer.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #89
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    For as long as the unconscious exists, all conscious determination is a lie, except for when it isn't. The rule then is not to describe will, because by default the unconscious controls will and not the other way around. The rule is, describe how, when, and why will is what it says it is. Which seems to me likely almost never. Inferior sensing then isn't some one function that doesn't work very well. It's something else.

    I call it, "your mother".

  10. #90
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamishi View Post
    The only reason you don't think my point of view is informative is because you do not share my type of cognition and this is why this discussion is going nowhere.
    I think you two are talking past each other and I'm not sure it has to do with types of cognition you share.

    I am curious @Kalach, how well-developed do you think your Te auxiliary is? Is it something you intentionally choose not to apply when you express yourself here?

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

    Tri-type 639

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