User Tag List

First 456

Results 51 to 52 of 52

Thread: Ne in Academia

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2015


    Quote Originally Posted by RobinSkye View Post
    Are Ne doms typically the types that naturally grab on to new material/concepts but then do so-so because they lack the desire to go back and review material? I feel like all these years if my Si just kicked in more frequently, I would probably be a straight A student.
    So you figured out that you are an INTP. Do you start with details and expand out to larger truths?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    Everything is type related. We just don't understand types fully.

  2. #52
    Honeyed Water thoughtlost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013


    Quote Originally Posted by Xann View Post
    Absolutely, and it is obviously type related. The entire education system as it presently sits is completely favoring Si + Te (and in some areas/levels of study Fe) users, the inherent injustice being that intuitives (Ne doms are most vulnerable IMO) are capable of doing the Si + Te type work, but expecting an Si user to quickly grasp the subject material the same way an interested and invested Ne user could is akin to expecting a miracle, and hence everything is taught and graded in a way that supposedly favors everyone while not realizing the sheer levels of pain inflicted upon high stimulation-seeking N users when they are forced to adopt the SJ timeline and expectations. Not only this, but the subject matter itself is inherently Si favoring in pretty much all disciplines of study, even those that should definitely not be (psychology - behaviorism, anyone?). Don't expect much support for your point of view on this here though, it goes against the SJ groupthink. (To them it is as if Ne doesn't really exist, they cannot see it in others either or its merits, and nor do they want to, because if there was a bias in the system that favored them their egos couldn't handle it.)
    1.) In academia, you do have to quickly grasp concepts. This is not undergraduate education where they will go over an algebra equation twenty billion times so you can do your physics homework that has one problem repeated many times but asked using a different scenario.

    2.) I think what you mean is that Si types DO understand concepts (btw, you make SJs sound as if they are totally stupid and can't learn ANYTHING ...when of course, that's not true at all's like saying SJs never learn how to tie their shoes). Also, not only do they understand them, then are good at creating hypotheses from their theories and then testing them (and then using statistics that favor the theory that they like *cough* jkjk but some do that). They are good at understanding concepts and they can apply them to situations that fit the theory This is what academics do (although it's not the only thing that one can do in academia). Is this creative? NO. In fact, I find this approach to academia VERY boring. I am actually struggling to pay attention in my courses because this is all we do. It's very narrow-minded (not in the immoral way ...just in general).

    3.) Also, even with this narrow minded approach to science, they need to be entrepreneurial in some. They have to sell their ideas to get funding or sell their ideas to get a patent. So not all aspects of an academic is strictly tied to Si thinking.

    4.) On the vain that being an academic doesn't mean that you have to be a certain type of way to fit into the environment of academia, there are academics who can challenge the groupthink (meaning people who don't sit there and think that history is simply about remembering facts). In fact, my friend (she is in graduate/PhD land), and her purpose for being in a PhD program is to challenge the education system in the United States. @RobinSkye ...who hated history, was not allowed to see history in a more holistic light. All he saw was "facts" that allows us humanity to continue along the path we're going now. They paint industrialism as "good" and ignored how biased the laws were to one mode of thought.

    Same with behaviorism. We think we can simplify human behavior and remove the human aspect of it.... by saying we are humans that animals that can be trained just like a bird can. Although to some degree, I do not think that we're independent of our conditioning (if we were completely independent ...then we couldn't reset our circadian rhythms).

    What I am saying to you, I wouldn't have realized before I got into the graduate program I am in. (I am quite lucky because ...from what I am hearing from some of my fellow graduate school-mates, most graduate schools are pretty shitty and do expect you to fit into a particular mode of thinking).

    So I do agree with you, @Xann, when you say that due to certain atmosphere, there are those who won't get to fit into graduate school.

    ....but I am not quite done with my thought. I gotta go... but I shall explore this more when I don't need to catch the bus.
    You are so arbitrary.
    Likes Xann, RobinSkye liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Teaching Emotional Intelligence In Academia
    By Solar Plexus in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-08-2014, 03:07 AM
  2. finding little poetry in academia
    By velocity in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-16-2010, 06:54 PM
  3. Career in Academia
    By Azseroffs in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-25-2009, 09:38 PM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-06-2008, 11:31 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
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO