User Tag List

Page 403 of 701 FirstFirst ... 303353393401402403404405413453503 ... LastLast
Results 4,021 to 4,030 of 7007

Thread: Mistyped TypeCentral Members

  1. #4021
    Senior Member Array UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,039

    Default

    @whatever is obviously intj and just doesn't want to admit it
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  2. #4022
    not to be trusted Array miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    19,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    @whatever is obviously intj and just doesn't want to admit it
    Were I eating I would have choked to death...
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  3. #4023
    Starcrossed Seafarer Array Aquarelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,531

    Default

    Guys, I'm pretty sure Lark is an N. Heres why:

    Lark and I have discussed our personal belief systems at length, and I actually think his is much more a result of critical thought, and less about tradition, than it may appear on the surface.

    Also, here's an S vs N example from the real life laboratory of Aquarelle's household: I see concepts, whereas my ESFJ spouse sees details. He notices when it's 95 degrees, vs 98 yesterday. To me, its just hot. I could care less about the numbers. To him, our car is a Chevy Equinox. To me, it's a white SUV. More than once I've gone up to the wrong car and waited to get in, only to hear him say "wrong car!"

    As far as I can tell, Lark notices and remembers both details and concepts, but overarchingly I think he's more of a concepts guy. I have other reasons for believing he's an iNtuitive as well but I'm using my phone and don't feel like going rambling on anymore.
    Masquerading as a normal person day after day is exhausting.

    My blog:
    TypeC: Adventures of an Introvert
    Wordpress: http://introvertadventures.wordpress.com/

  4. #4024
    Senior Member Array UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,039

    Default

    ^I agree. Religious Ns are just different. I've seen it before so it doesn't surprise me.
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  5. #4025
    my floof is luxury Array Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquarelle View Post
    Guys, I'm pretty sure Lark is an N. Heres why:

    Lark and I have discussed our personal belief systems at length, and I actually think his is much more a result of critical thought, and less about tradition, than it may appear on the surface.
    Since when has being a sensor meant one is incapable of critical thought?
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth


    #phreephobik

  6. #4026
    Starcrossed Seafarer Array Aquarelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    Since when has being a sensor meant one is incapable of critical thought?
    I never said sensors are incapable of it. Obviously they are. But it's my understanding that sensors TEND to base their opinions on tradition and past experience, more than against an internal gauge or reflection.
    Masquerading as a normal person day after day is exhausting.

    My blog:
    TypeC: Adventures of an Introvert
    Wordpress: http://introvertadventures.wordpress.com/

  7. #4027
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Array Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquarelle View Post
    I never said sensors are incapable of it. Obviously they are. But it's my understanding that sensors TEND to base their opinions on tradition and past experience, more than against an internal gauge or reflection.
    Everyone is a product of past experience though. When we talk, for example, we use the words we learnt from those we experienced around us growing up. I would base my opinions on past experience if that experience was relevant. Of course the argument could be made that it is the relevancy which is important as a sensor might, based on your understanding, believe that every past experience is relative. But then again this brings into issue the point that every individual would presume their past experience to be a justified source of information, otherwise they wouldn't say it in the first place, hence why it is an opinion.

    Ive always thought that sensing is about informing the world of what it is through our sensory input, which is then filtered down into that complex network called the human brain. This is then used to conceptualise sensory information into intricate acknowledgments of the environment. Afterall our senses KNOW something exists....just look, feel, taste, clearly it is there.

    Where as intuition is about escaping the world in some manner, not delusion or denial but a constant need to jump to another moment another here or there, potential or idea. Whether that idea be sudden or a built upon concept, it always has it's roots in a distortion of what our sensory input tells us it must be. It actually wishes for more checks, so what if taste, smell, sound, touch and hearing inform us of somethings inherency, what check do we have to explain this to be true? Outside of just the senses themselves?

    But this is just my idle idea, not really related to the functions.

    As an aside ive noticed it is much more common for an individual's T to come under question than someone's F. Is it because F is more often confused for T rather than the other way around? But if statistics on type mean anything the split is roughly 50/50 between T and F, so why the heavy beat down on mistaken T?

    I suspect it might be because T is often more admirable online and away from the world. Distance seems to accentuate what it is and it's useful brilliance, whereas in the normal arena's of life F holds more sway, especially Fe, because it is more expressive and observable.

    The crying child garners more attention than the child making a quiet, but well discerned, observation.
    'Consciousness is not simply a sensory-perceptual affair, a matter of mental imagery, as the contents of our mind would have us believe. It is deeply enmeshed with the brain mechanisms that automatically promote action readiness' - Jaak Panksepp

  8. #4028
    my floof is luxury Array Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquarelle View Post
    I never said sensors are incapable of it. Obviously they are. But it's my understanding that sensors TEND to base their opinions on tradition and past experience, more than against an internal gauge or reflection.
    Hmm. I feel that's a little bit of an oversimplification of Si as a process. It without question makes reference to tradition and past experience, because it is about anchoring oneself in what is known. But if you have a guy like @Lark who's well-read, and has managed to amass a fairly respectable bank of knowledge the knowncan encompass a great deal. Especially since Si lends the ability to recall one's bank of knowledge with a great deal of care and accuracy.

    So, to me, your anecdote about him doesn't prove very much, because it hasn't disproven the idea that Lark's beliefs and viewpoints aren't Si derived. My own observation of him on the forum is that he seems to use books as a way to "push back the darkness" as it were, and when confronted with new information he'll refer back to information that's he's already mapped out as a way to make an assessment of what's in front of him. Again, when you have a person with a lot of information at their disposal, that can be a fairly rich process, but it's still quintessentially Si.

    That is very different than what you or I do as Ni-users. Ni is less about contextualizing (which is Si's m.o.), and more about conceptualizing. When presented with something new, it's Se that allows us to appreciate the thing for what it is, and Ni that allows for us to then manipulate the concept to generate possible meanings. I don't see that kind of play in Lark. He appears to take objects as they are, and his intellectual process seems to revolve around finding the correct shelf for them. The information he gathers appears to be used to crystalize definitions and positions as oppose to the odd unmooring thing that Ni does to the things it gets its hands on.

    I welcome Lark to point out where I might have misconstrued him, btw. And am also open to the idea that I could be completely talking out of my ass about how Si works (@EJCC, fire at will, darlin. ).
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth


    #phreephobik

  9. #4029
    my floof is luxury Array Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    Where as intuition is about escaping the world in some manner, not delusion or denial but a constant need to jump to another moment another here or there, potential or idea. Whether that idea be sudden or a built upon concept, it always has it's roots in a distortion of what our sensory input tells us it must be. It actually wishes for more checks, so what if taste, smell, sound, touch and hearing inform us of somethings inherency, what check do we have to explain this to be true? Outside of just the senses themselves?
    +1

    Well put.


    As an aside ive noticed it is much more common for an individual's T to come under question than someone's F. Is it because F is more often confused for T rather than the other way around? But if statistics on type mean anything the split is roughly 50/50 between T and F, so why the heavy beat down on mistaken T?
    Honestly, I think it's cause it can be obnoxious when someone consistently dresses up subjective opinion as objective fact, and while everyone's guilty of it from time to time, mistyped Feelers are pretty notorious about that shit. You get the double whammy of bullshit "logic", and then the person's inability to take criticism when you call them on it.

    And I think that that's why mistyped feelers are more likely to catch flack. When I'm being conscientious like that, I do try to be accomadating of the fact that you can't play as rough with feelers as you can with other T's, and I'll moderate my behavior accordingly. But when someone rolls up on you with a label that says "I can play", and you throw the first punch and they go feeler on you it just makes you go .

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's just safer, particularly on a site like this, to be a mistyped T than a mistyped F. Then again, I'm sure the feelers would be just as unforgiving if there was ever a fox in the hen house...

    Talking more big picture, though, I can see how a guy might not want the label. But it strikes me as more a function of ignorance as to what it means to be a Feeler, than how desirable or undesirable the label might actually be. It's just like all this bullshit about people not wanting to Sensors. People treat it like they've been called a squib or some shit and it's just not right. All of this type coveting is just utterly ass backwards to me.
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth


    #phreephobik

  10. #4030
    Senior Member Array Lark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    19,208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    Hmm. I feel that's a little bit of an oversimplification of Si as a process. It without question makes reference to tradition and past experience, because it is about anchoring oneself in what is known. But if you have a guy like @Lark who's well-read, and has managed to amass a fairly respectable bank of knowledge the knowncan encompass a great deal. Especially since Si lends the ability to recall one's bank of knowledge with a great deal of care and accuracy.

    So, to me, your anecdote about him doesn't prove very much, because it hasn't disproven the idea that Lark's beliefs and viewpoints aren't Si derived. My own observation of him on the forum is that he seems to use books as a way to "push back the darkness" as it were, and when confronted with new information he'll refer back to information that's he's already mapped out as a way to make an assessment of what's in front of him. Again, when you have a person with a lot of information at their disposal, that can be a fairly rich process, but it's still quintessentially Si.

    That is very different than what you or I do as Ni-users. Ni is less about contextualizing (which is Si's m.o.), and more about conceptualizing. When presented with something new, it's Se that allows us to appreciate the thing for what it is, and Ni that allows for us to then manipulate the concept to generate possible meanings. I don't see that kind of play in Lark. He appears to take objects as they are, and his intellectual process seems to revolve around finding the correct shelf for them. The information he gathers appears to be used to crystalize definitions and positions as oppose to the odd unmooring thing that Ni does to the things it gets its hands on.

    I welcome Lark to point out where I might have misconstrued him, btw. And am also open to the idea that I could be completely talking out of my ass about how Si works (@EJCC, fire at will, darlin. ).
    I think its been useful that you've posted this because what you describe as S, the contextualising vs. conceptualising, is definitely not me, in fact I've met more than a few people who fit that frame and who've complained about how conceptual my thinking is.

    Its a little tenuous, I believe, to interpret book smarts in the way you do actually to, its possible I suppose, but are you really going to go down the road of suggesting that there, as opposed to being types in and of themselves, types which only have the appearence of a type because they are well read? I mean you'll reach the point eventually of suggesting there's no extroverts, just well connected or networked introverts, things like that.

    Using books to "push back the darkness" really?

    Yeah, it was interesting meeting Aquarelle in person because we were able to more or less "compare notes" about people appear online, the attitudes of forum users to other forum users and what informs all that, I'm pretty sure that there's a lot of people here who have strong opinions about who and what I am formed on the basis of views about comments I've made on specific topics which miss the bigger picture. In a big way.

    For instance, the suggestion that I'm SF and I think corresponds to the idea that anyone who is "right wing" is a "concrete thinker" and "emotive", Lark thinks supposedly "right wing" things ergo he's a "concrete thinker" and "emotive" ergo SF. I think this evidently underpins your own analysis there because you suggest that in light of "new information" my response is to find from my banks of knowledge, vacarious experience from books, I'll find a way to resist any revision of my views, well, I'm unsure of any individual who revises their views every time they are presented with fresh information without processing it, its almost a parody of the "progressive" mindset.

    If you need any evidence of that, and the whole "pushing back the darkness" style appraisal isnt sufficient, there's the frequent anti-religious cartoons which were thrown up in the other "what I imagine you look like" thread a while back.

Similar Threads

  1. TypeCentral Members Psychoanalyze Your Avatar for Free
    By ThatsWhatHeSaid in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 6673
    Last Post: Today, 01:17 AM
  2. Replies: 126
    Last Post: 03-22-2016, 08:15 AM
  3. TypeCentral Members- Casting Call as Disney Characters
    By CuriousFeeling in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 260
    Last Post: 03-06-2016, 03:10 AM
  4. TypeCentral Members- Cast them as musicians
    By CuriousFeeling in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 201
    Last Post: 09-21-2015, 04:35 PM
  5. It's a mystery. (moved from Mistyped MBTIC Members)
    By entropie in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-31-2008, 06:24 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
  •