User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 65

  1. #21
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    It's a mistake to automatically presume that a Thinker is without impressive emotional range, consequent to his cognitive preferences. Compassion and justice are variable ideals; individually-resigned to shades of the same coin...

    Conversely, some of the greatest strategists I've encountered were Fs. Lao Tzu is perhaps a historical example of a brilliant NF (INFP) tactician.

    For my dime, the ideal framework is a balanced incorporation of both theatres to arrive at an assemblage free from the constrictions of generic Type convention. That is to say, I don't find much credibility with the implied if/then algorithim that commonly divides a T from an F.

    Think of it like chemical covalence - protons and neutrons combining into subatomic particles. From these interactions, all matter is possible...(Hilbert space...!)

    Neither is ultimately independent, as both unify towards advanced thought.
    I feel the approach of a discussion on something similar to Hegelian logic... aufhebung and what not...
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  2. #22
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    I think we should start a thread to really flesh out these distinctions in MBTI typing.... I know they've been discussed, but there's more work to be done... there's always more work to be done... so much work.
    Unfortunately I have yet to fully comprehend these distinctions myself. It would be the blind leading the blind...

  3. #23
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    I feel the approach of a discussion on something similar to Hegelian logic... aufhebung and what not...
    You're a quick study.

    Theory and practice; Onyx and midnight.


    Perennial elocution is without form here; I don't think circle-speak really works, if you catch my drift.

  4. #24
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    I get the impression that you are still using the term "feeling" to mean "the experience of emotion". From what I have read of Jung, the "experience of emotion" is actually called "affect". And yes, I would agree that *everyone* experiences and are affected by emotions.

    But this has nothing to do with feeling as a cognitive process, which is a judging function that may or may not have anything to do with momentary emotions (most likely not, from what I understand).
    Please reread my concise description of what exactly it means/signifies to experience Fi.



    Have you ever come across the concept of emotional intelligence? Or mindfulness?

    I believe that Fi doms are, or tend to be, at least, incredibly emotionally intelligent.

    And for what it is worth, I'd bet the farm on the fact that you are an NT.

    Aren't the intuitive functions (Ne/Ni) present in both NF's and NT's?
    Yup.

    Thank you for responding .
    No problem! I enjoy participating in threads like this!
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  5. #25
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Also, the issue with using what Owl said about value judgments... it raises some questions... a "thinker" ultimately needs to have some sort of a value system... what is 'right'? What sort of thinking is correct? What axioms does one use? Thinkers have to deal with masses of unproven statements to base their arguments off of. Thinkers have to make gut-feel decisions, if only at the beginning, in order to continue... everyone needs a value system... even physicists must accept large numbers of empty concepts or circular arguments off of which to build more elaborate and fleshed-out systems (what exactly are mass and force? gravity?)
    I agree. Everyone needs a value system. I'd say the "gut-feel" the pure thinker, (and I doubt there has ever been such a thing), pays most attention to is that thinking is capable of making distinctions--between A and non-A, between being and non-being. In the beginning, for the thinker, any system of logic that does neither of these things is not thinking: without these assumptions there is no logos, no ability to speak a meaningful word. Can this be proven? Not positively, but it can be negatively. For to even ask that this be proven requires the inquirer presuppose the normativity of these axioms to even raise the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Yes, this is what I thought. However, many definitions of thinking as a cognitive process associate it more or less absolutely with logical systems. The problem is- we haven't even been able to fully systematize the many ways that humans reason. So how can we reason from systems that are (or have yet to be fully) derived from the way we reason?
    Any system we derive from reason is less basic than the reason that we use to derive that system. Is that basic reason somehow defunct? Can we not rely on it to inform us of anything? If it can't inform us of anything, then how can we rely on the systems we derive from it?

    Is anything clear? What truths need be in place before we can even say that we reason in such a way that we can derive systems from that reason?

  6. #26
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    *Resists the urge to succumb to my female vs. male, competitive instinct to debate and assert that Ne is a far more intellectually enlightening function/process than Ti is, or will ever be*

    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  7. #27
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    *Resists the urge to succumb to my female vs. male, competitive instinct to debate and assert that Ne is a far more intellectually enlightening function/process than Ti is, or will ever be*

    Why resist?

    I'd be curious to hear this baseline - flawed though it is...



  8. #28
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Any system we derive from reason is less basic than the reason that we use to derive that system. Is that basic reason somehow defunct? Can we not rely on it to inform us of anything? If it can't inform us of anything, then how can we rely on the systems we derive from it?
    I agree. I never said that basic reason is unreliable, or somehow less reliable than systematized reason (that would be an absurd statement). All I was saying is that to define Ti/Te as functions that rely on logical systems is not very precise because we only know what logic is because of logic. The "logical systems" are derived from a more basic kind of reasoning, so how can we principally use these systems when they do not even fully capture what it is to reason?

  9. #29
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Why resist?

    I'd be curious to hear this baseline - flawed though it is...


    Lol, since I am an in a particularly insomnimaniacal eNErgetic mood, I'll indulge you with my "flawed" baseline to my theory.

    Ne sees and processes a whole lot of everything in a whole lot of "things", so to speak.

    Ne fosters insight whereas Ti fosters "proof" of Ne's insight.

    And, honestly, I ever so humbly thank you, Ti dom guys, for we, (Ne doms), appreciate all the hard, excruciating, meticulous work that you do.

    Keep up the good work guys!!

    I see the universe in a zygote, the truth in a tree...

    And you guys provide me with all the facts about mitochondria and leaves!!!

    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  10. #30
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Please reread my concise description of what exactly it means/signifies to experience Fi.
    This is where I got the impression that when you said "feeling" you really meant "emotion".

    Most people engage in both thinking and feeling experiential processes, on a daily basis, I'd confidently argue.
    I agree with this statement.

    And for what it is worth, I'd bet the farm on the fact that you are an NT.
    I probably am...I just really really like NF's, so I am in denial!

Similar Threads

  1. Confused about type
    By Capricorn Moon in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-28-2012, 04:35 PM
  2. confused about type, need patient people's feedback
    By mcfly2309 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-01-2011, 04:20 PM
  3. Oh Look! Another person needing YOUR help on typing :)
    By streetlightfancy in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-22-2010, 12:34 AM
  4. I'm Confused about my Type
    By nickia in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-12-2009, 03:51 PM
  5. Confused About Your Type?
    By Wonkavision in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-25-2009, 07:07 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