wrldisquiethere
New member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 233
- MBTI Type
- xSFJ
- Enneagram
- 2w1
Give me some ideas. As an NT, what are some good conversation topics that you find particularly stimulating?
That's NT conversation pr0n if I've ever seen it.given the predicted food shortages, water shortages, etc. that are near-universally predicted by experts, what do you predict the global state of affairs will look like in 30 years? It stands to reason that within a few short decades there will be a distinct shift in the priorities of many nations, and likely far more global conflict over resources than there currently is. With different priorities comes a more distinctly different world. I imagine a sort of lightning-fast Darwinian evolution of careers being fueled by the new environmental needs and constraints--far quicker than what happens naturally.
What are your thoughts?
I prefer topics dealing with "how and why" rather than "who and what".
You can abstract a conversation about a mechanical pencil as far as I'm concerned.
I think I am with you on this. Abstract notions never interested me, I need things more deeply rooted to reality.
I think I am with you on this. Abstract notions never interested me, I need things more deeply rooted to reality.
I branch between abstracted topics and concrete ones. (Sort of the difference between philosophy vs engineering, which can both be NT-style areas of expertise.)
Concrete ones can be really interesting, if it's the sort of topic wherein you can use logic + imagination in order to build connections and drag in ideas and data from other disciplines to help you form an explanation or solution. NTs seem to enjoy making rational connections that run outside the box (and therefore help expand it).
I still don't understand what an abstract conversation is vs a concrete one. How do you distinguish between the two? Oftentimes it's dependent on someone's sphere of knowledge...if they know about something then they can talk about it but if they don't then what quality of abstractedness and/or concreteness would enter the conversation regardless of the content or topic? The only thing I can think of is the "how" and the "why."
I think it's sort of like being able to talk about things in terms of objects/concepts (and still deal with them as rational and specific entities in themselves) vs on the level of concrete detail. Sensors commonly go back to the tangible detail and have to speak on that level, rather than in terms of the larger, vaguer object, as the building blocks for their knowledge; intuitives shuffle the objects around, almost like speaking in algebra.
Some people can't generalize out to the general objects/concepts from the concrete details, then speak in terms of the general objects themselves as if they were tangible details.
(Sort of like in computer programming, if you are comparing object-oriented programming design to the old traditional styles of programming like Fortran or Basic.)
OK, well the first thing that popped in my mind regarding this is reading restaurant reviews or maybe some other type of review and seeing what aspects of the dining experience people concentrate on and how it's described.
And then I can see what reviews I thought were most helpful to get the information I find pertinent. Is it something like this?
OK, well the first thing that popped in my mind regarding this is reading restaurant reviews or maybe some other type of review and seeing what aspects of the dining experience people concentrate on and how it's described.
And then I can see what reviews I thought were most helpful to get the information I find pertinent. Is it something like this?
Give me some ideas. As an NT, what are some good conversation topics that you find particularly stimulating?
Set theory and logic language (I took it in late high-school / early college) is another way to describe the intuitive process of dealing with general concepts as if they were the specific details -- the concepts can provide the basic level of granularity, rather than being seen as vague. Objects can be mentally grouped, and yet the nuances are preserved.
See my revised post.
(note: Never quote my post until 4 minutes have passed, I always edit it 2-3x after saving -- doh!)