sculpting
New member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,148
Where's uumlau?
Maybe he'll want to actually come back and post again since the forum isn't boring as shit anymore.
I think he will be here shortly.....
Where's uumlau?
Maybe he'll want to actually come back and post again since the forum isn't boring as shit anymore.
But I'm hungover, and considering I'm half Asian and lack the enzyme to break down alcohol like you, I think I'm doing a half decent job at making coherent thoughts whilst my brain is pounding like a garage house janky ass speaker with far too much bass.This really needs to be reworded.
There's truth there, obvious truth, but...
You ever seen those movies where the child, or character (the character is always essentially in the role of a child in this situation), is in a dark, murky forest and is looking around, feeling like the eyes of the forest are all looking at it, knowing what is happening, while the child does not.
Well, for Ni-doms, Ne-doms are like that child, and the Ni-dom is the forest.
For the sake of clarifying the analogy, Ne-doms obviously aren't going around fearful, that is not the point.
But they are that child, walking around the forest, and the connections they're making while looking outward are vastly finite relative to the forest looking in at them.
Admittedly, I have read very little of this thread, until I saw something, and then had to put my two cents in.
But, I dunno, Ne + Ti makes sense to me, (when I have the interest to read it )
Though, I have very little use of my Te, and regarding thought processing, I use Ne, Fi and Ti.
Some INTJs say shit and I'm like, holy fuckasaurus, you know what's up, and other times I'm like...
If only Ni types (actually just NTJs, once again, NFJs aren't half as arrogant) would accept that Ni is still just one perspective, not the meta-perspective synthesizing all other perspectives that you want it to be. I understand that that's what you're trying to do; the problem is that you vastly overestimate your own success rate with it. A lot more of you are "crackpot, bottom of the barrel conspiracy theorists" than are able to recognize it about themselves.
Truly brilliant NTJs (Kalach, uumalu, etc.) tend to come off as very humble because they possess the depth of perspective to recognize how much they don't see. It's just the poorly developed ones who come off as arrogant pricks because they think they've got it all figured out and that everyone is a complete idiot totally unworthy of their presence (*cough*, Lex Tali-retard, *cough*.)
Truly brilliant NTJs (Kalach, uumalu, etc.) tend to come off as very humble because they possess the depth of perspective to recognize how much they don't see. It's just the poorly developed ones who come off as arrogant pricks because they think they've got it all figured out and that everyone is a complete idiot totally unworthy of their presence (*cough*, Lex Tali-retard, *cough*.)
The biggest one is how you guys consistently fail to understand how anyone could be looking for different things out of life than you are. I get really tired of the implicit "LOL THAT GUY IS A RETARD, HE HAS NO ECONOMIC INFLUENCE OR OVERARCHING POWER AT ALL ROFL" whenever NTJs want to belittle someone, as if you're completely incapable of recognizing that most types aren't even trying to build that and are totally uninterested in devoting their lives to it.
That's not their primary goal and you continually evaluate others' performance in life as if it is. Listen to NTJs talk about "stupid people"--listen to the values implied by the way they deride people they consider lesser than themselves. It's almost always based on this economic power/influence elitism, and very few of you will openly admit it.
The biggest one is how you guys consistently fail to understand how anyone could be looking for different things out of life than you are. I get really tired of the implicit "LOL THAT GUY IS A RETARD, HE HAS NO ECONOMIC INFLUENCE OR OVERARCHING POWER AT ALL ROFL" whenever NTJs want to belittle someone, as if you're completely incapable of recognizing that most types aren't even trying to build that and are totally uninterested in devoting their lives to it. That's not their primary goal and you continually evaluate others' performance in life as if it is. Listen to NTJs talk about "stupid people"--listen to the values implied by the way they deride people they consider lesser than themselves. It's almost always based on this economic power/influence elitism, and very few of you will openly admit it.
But I'm hungover, and considering I'm half Asian and lack the enzyme to break down alcohol like you, I think I'm doing a half decent job at making coherent thoughts whilst my brain is pounding like a garage house janky ass speaker with far too much bass.
SAY WHAT?!!?!!!!!?!!!
You just essentially declared that Ni is the sentient world, and that Ne is a wholeheartedly ignorant child.
I'm astounded by your lack of understanding of Ne, and by your RIDICULOUS ASSLOAD OF CONDESCENSION AND ARROGANCE.
First of all, all of our perceptual capacities are finite, and limited in some regard.
And secondly, Ni is the forest looking at Ne, your metaphor hardly makes sense at all, but I still get the gist, which is the fact that you think Ni is vastly superior to, um, everything?
Analyzing people's behavior is a significant part of typology. Every type has a number of annoying things it tends to do as a result of overvaluing its own perspective--analyzing people's behavior might be one of those things for some of the NT types, in fact.
But uh, if you only see deprecation in my posts then you don't really read them. You must be looking for negativity if you can't recall reading anything positive about various types in my writing,
Uh huh, and also a search for finding ways to compliment people. The idea is to understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of each archetype. If it makes you happy I can make a post detailing all the positives about each function attitude; I just happen to be discussing negatives in this particular thread.
I think your Fi is offended that I'm insulting people's individuality by slandering the negative aspects of certain types.
Once again I'm kind of surprised you don't remember reading any analysis of the positives of any type in my writing. Are you really paying attention?
Zara and I just got into a heated discussion.Z I am with silly here-use caution not to mix the childlike innocence of Fi with Ne. NeFi will give us the look of that child at times, but often we stopped looking at the forrest long ago...we are seeing far, far beyond the trees at that point to things no longer on the plane of the forrest. Jung says Ne is objective in that it is prompted by a physical object of interest...however we very quickly move away from the object in front of us. By n=20, our Ne is no longer anywhere near that prompting object anymore.
Inference is the process of drawing a conclusion by applying heuristics (based on logic, statistics etc.) to observations or hypotheses; or by interpolating the next logical step in an intuited pattern. The conclusion drawn is also called an inference.
The process by which a conclusion is inferred from multiple observations is called inductive reasoning. The conclusion may be correct or incorrect, or correct to within a certain degree of accuracy, or correct in certain situation
Sim, you must admit that what he says about you here is true, I've heard you state it over and over, how much you can't stand Fi.I've been paying attention to this thread, which is what I'm referring to. Not your long history of posting; but if I recall correctly you even toted a bias against Fi oriented people around in my first thread around 6 months ago.
Intuitive abilities were quantitatively tested at Yale University in the 1970s. While studying nonverbal communication, researchers noted that some subjects were able to read nonverbal facial cues before reinforcement occurred.[20] In employing a similar design, they noted that highly intuitive subjects made decisions quickly but could not identify their rationale. Their level of accuracy, however, did not differ from that of nonintuitive subjects.[21]
I love these threads. Full of huge retards.
Taken from here...
Introverted Intuition
^See, I get this feeling too, a lot, I dunno if it's because of my Fi, or that I also have quite a bit of Ni.
But the fact remains, as humans we are fallible.
It is true in that it is possible for someone to have some capacity to know things despite having proof, or knowing why they know.
Interestingly enough, the aforementioned description of Ni is something I can identify with a lot, however, I will hold the belief in my head, or often vocalize it, and whaddya know, what I just knew, was actually right.
Let it be known that this "power" or "gift" of mine works best with people, I am and have always been a ridiculously good judge of a person's character, from a brief encounter I can and do conjure a lot of information about this person, I think there is something to it though, perhaps I have an exceptionally good processor/decoder when it comes to non-verbal human communication.
This also happens in other situations, where I just know something before I have "real" evidence for knowing it.
If one studies intuition outside of typological/MBTI definitions this makes a lot of sense.
But, I do believe that there is a transcendent reality that no one has the capacity to completely know and understand.
Also, I have been wrong about people before, very wrong, (whenever this happens I become fascinated with the subject, they are "special" and need extra attention, they don't fit any of my preconceived molds/models of human behavior, I love when this happens ) though, I'd say over 90% of the time I tend to be right about someone, i.e. I know when someone is a shit bag, when they are lying, when they are sincere, when they are intelligent, when they are sensitive, etc.
God, I lost my train of thought.
Anyhow, sometimes one just knows, and sometimes one is wrong.
When I was with my ISTP it took forever until he finally conceded that I had this gift, he needed evidence, and finally I turned a hardcore skeptic into a believer, (as in, he believed I was "exceptionally talented" in this arena).
But, it was comforting and agitating at the same time to have to prove my "irrational" beliefs to a Ti dom, it definitely made my head explode on occasion, but it certainly sharpened my ability to explain what I once thought was the unexplainable.
Sorry, I forgot where I was going with this.
^ Found around 2:15 pm.I just found something pretty fucking rad, for all you NFs out there.
Intuitive abilities were quantitatively tested at Yale University in the 1970s. While studying nonverbal communication, researchers noted that some subjects were able to read nonverbal facial cues before reinforcement occurred.[20] In employing a similar design, they noted that highly intuitive subjects made decisions quickly but could not identify their rationale. Their level of accuracy, however, did not differ from that of nonintuitive subjects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(knowledge)
(I swear on everything I value that I did not come across this tidbit of information prior to making my previous posts.)
Everything you say here is absolutely true...from an introverted perspective. The idea is to accept that there are situations where breadth is preferable to depth, rather than always letting introversion dominate your perspective/assuming that depth is always the best approach.
Obviously it goes both ways; if we always choose extroversion then we'll neglect depth, which is equally bad.
The problem is that if we insist on complete depth at all times, it becomes impossible to communicate our ideas meaningfully to others because they're so inseparable from our own subjective perspectives. Balance is the goal.
Actually it's both. Extroversion, by nature, sacrifices depth and specificity in order to achieve more practicality through broader applicability. "Accuracy of a statement depends upon the reasoning behind a statement" = introverted perspective. That's certainly true, but when we want to take an idea and apply it to a wider range of external situations, moving it outside the bounds of our own subjective interpretation requires the sacrifice of a certain degree of precision. That is the nature of extroversion, and failing to account for the value in this perspective is the #1 mistake I constantly see from all the introverts I discuss typology with on the internet.
Read up on extroversion vs. introversion and breadth vs. depth plz, kthx.
I'm not dismissing it. It's a valid point; it's just that it only takes one side of the coin into account. There are times when introversion's depth is clearly preferable, and other times when extroversion's breadth is.
And uh, coming from an introverted person implies that an idea is influenced most heavily by an introverted perspective (in most cases), as the introvert's dominant perspective is, by definition, an introverted one.
The same applies to extroverts; we have a natural tendency (at least in regards to our dominant process) to choose breadth over depth, and we have to work on the auxiliary to balance that out.
I am referring to those criticisms as "introverted" because I feel that they fail to take into account the value of extroversion/breadth and thus continually insist that no precision can or should ever be sacrificed for the sake of broader applicability.
The Ti+Ni ISTP from Per-C that I mentioned is largely against inductive reasoning. You can think of introversion as deductive (because it is precise, complete, and certain) and extroversion as inductive (because it sacrifices precision/completeness in favor of wider applicability.) I wrote a post about inferring the types of others based on their behaviors; he found this completely unacceptable as it required use of inductive reasoning.
He said something to the effect of, "Guessing is not certainty." That's certainly a valid point--the problem is, it's a purely introverted perspective that doesn't take into account the relative value of breadth. The idea is to get to a point where we recognize that breadth and depth are equally important, and that which is preferable is context-dependent.
Damn good post.You just told me that what I said was true, meaning that breadth can be found in introversion and depth can be found in extraversion. Yet you persist in your previous stance prior to that because you hold my statement captive as though you can't accept it.
The fact is that having depth means that you plunge the innards or deepness of a thing, which is quite possible in referring to external input (which is what extraversion is). Having breadth means that you can examine a broader range of input, which is also quite possible when you are referring to a more intrinsic or internal input.
What a crock of shit.
The accuracy of a statement is entirely contingent upon reasoning, whether you're referring to internal or external data.
What do you mean by "precision"? Certainly, one can formulate an idea in one's head until it is pristine and then communicate it with perfect clarity. The subjective bounds of another's' interpretation is what prevents that clarity from having an identical effect in their own psyche.
Note that undervaluation a perspective may not be the cause of introversion, but it may just be that's your perspective isn't correct.
Cute.
I've already addressed the reasoning you have here. All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
Note that undervaluing a perspective may not be the cause of introversion, but it may just be that's your perspective isn't correct.
All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
Bologna, never seen you much before, and as hilarious as I thought your comment about Sim's "awards" was, since then, based on all of your posts I've seen, you've come to seem like someone who's just disgruntled.
There are those who share knowledge to help others, and those who use it to push their own agenda.
All I'm hearing is you using typology as a scapegoat for evaluating what people have to say, which is laced in depth in many of your posts.
Orobas said:Is This because he is using his Ti system to describe Ni....which would be easier for you to innately understand given your tert Ti? (please assume no insult at all!!!! I just think of this comparison as I find INTJs much easier to understand due to my tert Te than INTPs for instance, and I will find their descriptions resonate more strongly as being closer to my perception of a situation)
Taken from here...
Introverted Intuition Ni is a way of knowing (or at least thinking you know) that bypasses reason, facts, evidence, the expected or intended interpretations of signs, or anything you can point to, simply giving you an awareness or belief that seems indisputably true to you, period. You can't tell by introspection how you got this idea. There is no thought process. There is only tuning into this form of awareness and just knowing.
You're right; you've rightfully called out on one of my blind spots with respect to this thread, which was fueled by frustration. My comment was uncalled for. It was a pretty harsh judgment. And, yeah, for that I totally apologize.
I'm not about to get personal about my own motivations here, but it's just sad that many, many posts are simply talking past one another.
The sentiments that I'm inclined to agree with are those like these:
And, because of that, I really want to understand what we're all actually trying to do in these discussions. Share or spread our own views? Come to a better understanding of typology systems? Share information in a meaningful way? Popcorn-level discussion? Nothing in particular (which, well, is also fine)?
If we're looking to develop a good, solid foundation for all of this typology stuff, I think we'd all be well-served to try to figure out where exactly it is that we as individuals are coming from. I think that, sort of ironically, we'd also fare better if we left others' individual types out of the discussion, because they're majorly clouding things up. Everyone is completely responsible for evaluating their own perspective.