Jaguar
Active member
- Joined
- May 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,647
That's not even a good comparison. Now go to school.
An SJ is religious.
Ergo, all SJ's are religious.
Mal's school for stereotypical thinking. Sign up for classes, now.
That's not even a good comparison. Now go to school.
An SJ is religious.
Ergo, all SJ's are religious.
Mal's school for stereotypical thinking. Sign up for classes, now.
You're projecting your own cognitive errors.
Jim, when you go to paraphrase someone else's thoughts it is always advisable to be extremely accurate, wouldn't you agree?
Point one is way off base. But I'll let that one pass because I know you're driving toward a different point.
Point two: my argument was intended to show that hypersensitivity is not "correlated" with introversion, not always and not even at times. And inferior Se has nothing to do with any of this.
Point three: obviously the test is about introversion and that was the original point at dispute. That her son is hypersensitive was stated by the OP. Hypersensitivity corresponds with an introverted trait. But even then, the test requires 15+ "true" responses to diagnose introversion.
And please try to quote me correctly. Nowhere did I state that the test was 'proof that introversion and hypersensitivity are the same thing.' Please try not to project your cognitive errors. What I said was,
Point four: The test contains a question concerning hypersensitivity, and by the way I knew you would go to all lengths to try to knock it down as a valid point on my side.
Point five: You never named any logical fallacy I may have committed. But you used some scientific language about "correlations" incorrectly.
Point six: thank you for granting me this opportunity to clarify your errors in more detail, Jim.
Oh good, so now I'm an Introvert?
I'm glad you're such an expert. What would the rest of us do.
In Jungian terms I'm giving you causation, not correlation. Thats the thrust of my argument and why her child is INTJ.
I recommend that you retract the argument: 'theres a correlation of a single query in the introversion test and hypersensitivity' therefore the child is ISTP argument, that is an explicit cognitive fallacy of mistaking correlation for causation.
"He has a very strong reaction to smells and noise." Sensing and Perceiving.
"Strong reaction to smells and sounds." I would call that introverted.
no new information, now admits he has said hypersensitivity = introversion after complaining he didn't, now is throwing out stereotyping even though no-one else has brought it up to avoid his erroneous conclusion.
Entirely vertical shoulders.
An SJ is religious.
Ergo, all SJ's are religious.
Mal's school for stereotypical thinking. Sign up for classes, now.
Jim, please try to pay closer attention to the thread:
"now admits he has said hypersensitivity = introversion"
Please stop wasting my time knocking down your bizarre accusations against me. Perhaps you have a forum reputation to uphold as being "smart"? It was based on a false premise to begin with.
mal said:and you can see from that short comment that I only connected "hypersensitivity" with introversion. The test page changed my mind about the "sensing and perceiving" comment I had made in the previous post. That's where I had originally formed the ISTP call. The second post quoted above indicates that I had changed my mind about linking "hypersensitivity" to sensing and perceiving. But since I never elaborated on this in the second post, I can see where you might have become confused. Obviously I had changed my mind about it, after all, I challenged you on your tertiary Se idea. And that's what started this debate rolling.
Fair point. My technical concerns regarding the typing you have done are still *live* as were.
Whatever. Originally, I was trying to avoid boredom, and now you're just accomplishing that for me.
I have no personal dislike or distaste for you, you proposed an idea which didn't make sense and lots of people have stated they disagree. Stop sulking and playing for a pity party mixed with stating everyone is doing what you want anyway. I have no interest in either doing what you want or not doing what you want.
I'm just doing what seems the most technically right and to help discuss an informed opinion. If you can put forward a technically more sound argument I'd be happy to change my mind if it at least made Jungian, MBTI or Keirsey or Socionics or any other sort of Typology sense. The OP is 'Type my son' after all.
I'm just doing what seems the most technically right and to help discuss an informed opinion. If you can put forward a technically more sound argument I'd be happy to change my mind if it at least made Jungian, MBTI or Keirsey or Socionics or any other sort of Typology sense. The OP is 'Type my son' after all.
I saw where you were coming from with the Se inferior idea. Assuming, let's say, her son is an INTJ, then that indeed leaves Se as inferior. From this you may infer all kinds of ad hoc conclusions, all of which are cast down in light of the established fact that hypersensitivity is a common trait of introverts.
What you said is very interesting. The lazy vs. gold digger is very much him. I will have to read the ISTP descriptions, because I don't think I know any ISTP's.
( Although instead of lazy, I would say it's more, "let me get to the end result as quickly as I can without expending too much energy." It's slightly different than actual laziness, because it shows some intelligence.)
Hypersensitivity is a trait of the introverts who have Se in the inferior position only aka INTJ or INFJ (in theory). This provides causation for hypersensitivity.
An ISTP would be Ne sensitive. I've seen ISTPs blow up when an ENTP comes along and starts throwing ideas about which they can't reconcile. An entirely different phenomenon.
It's how people interpret laziness. Too lazy to not work at all to get anything done is pure laziness. Looking for the shortest possible way to get something done is not (and is also somewhat of a Ti trait). Ti s do tend to feel a bit lazy if the labour is hard and the fruits are minimum. So that would be interpreted as laziness by some. But some would disagree, especially TPs and out of all the TPs the ISTPs.