User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 127

  1. #71
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    The Feeling function(s) can still deal with things in scientific terms, it doesn't have to be people/emotion based, it's just that the nature of Feeling is such that it tends to be better than Thinking at dealing with such things (i.e. people/emotions).

    So, the interactions of matter with matter can still be Feeling, if it is viewed in Feeling terms. Fe is useful in chemistry for instance, where there is a focus on attraction/repulsion and chemistry of particular bonds forming or not forming.

    I think of Feeling as more holistic in how it determines its judgements, and Thinking as more component based. As mentioned, this makes Feeling more apt for dealing with people, and Thinking more apt for dealing with objects, but there is crossover.
    I don't think that's “Feeling”. That seems more like projecting our own Feeling onto mechanical processes such as “attraction/repulsion”. When we hear those terms, we think of our own attraction or repulsion to something, which is true “Feeling”, because an actual judgment (in this case. “good” or “bad” or “like/dislike”) is being made. (Remember, that's what Feeling is).

    An impersonal object being attracted or repulsed to another isn't a “judgment”. Only “personal” entities (egos) can make judgments. A personal entity can look at the objects attracting or repulsing, and make a “true” or “false” judgment from it, which would be “Thinking”. If the objects personally affect him, he can also make a “good/bad” judgmentfrom it, which would be Feeling. (I like the definition someone once gave, that with T, our emotions telh us about the object, an with F, our emotions tell us about “the subject”; either us or someone else. Impersonal objects interacting by themselves have no emotions, and thus can't make a judgment; they can only be drawn along according to the physical laws of energy and forces).
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

    "PERSONALITY MATRIX" on Facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/Personality...6272699654735/
    Likes Luminous liked this post

  2. #72
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I don't think that's “Feeling”. That seems more like projecting our own Feeling onto mechanical processes such as “attraction/repulsion”. When we hear those terms, we think of our own attraction or repulsion to something, which is true “Feeling”, because an actual judgment (in this case. “good” or “bad” or “like/dislike”) is being made. (Remember, that's what Feeling is).

    An impersonal object being attracted or repulsed to another isn't a “judgment”. Only “personal” entities (egos) can make judgments. A personal entity can look at the objects attracting or repulsing, and make a “true” or “false” judgment from it, which would be “Thinking”. If the objects personally affect him, he can also make a “good/bad” judgmentfrom it, which would be Feeling. (I like the definition someone once gave, that with T, our emotions telh us about the object, an with F, our emotions tell us about “the subject”; either us or someone else. Impersonal objects interacting by themselves have no emotions, and thus can't make a judgment; they can only be drawn along according to the physical laws of energy and forces).
    Well... in a fractal kind of way, the divisions inherent to typology also structure the world around us, at least if we want to view it in those terms. So we could model reality by talking about matter, and relations between the different components of matter, etc. and use the functions as a way of labelling that and describing it.

    And besides, I was speaking about our understanding of things. I was saying that physical processes can be understood in Feeling terms just as they can be understood in Thinking terms, although there is quite certainly an inequality in terms of which is more likely to be useful for doing so.

    Without a mind, there is no Thinking or Feeling or Intuiting or Sensing, but we can describe the way that a mindless body acts by projecting those states onto it.

    I don't get what you mean about T being about the object and F about the subject, because extroversion is objective and introversion is subjective, in the sense that introverted functions deal with the way we are personally viewing or impacted by something, whereas extroverted functions, although still being used by a subject, intend to deal with things in a way which is independent of viewpoint. There is of course at any time an interplay of the subjective and the objective.

    But really... if one physical object can be influenced by another physical object, such as a ball bouncing off a wall, then it is an open question as to whether this may require both bodies to have some kind of consciousness/awareness in order for such a process to take place, and thus may have a basic form of Feeling etc.
    the lone star flies alone

  3. #73
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,592

    Default

    “physical processes can be understood in Feeling terms” might be somenhing like “LED's don't like the current reversed”. Now, you're basically personifying them as having likes and dislikes, which would be Feeling if they were persons. But since they're not; it's not a true F judgment; it could be called “quasi-F”. (I don't even think it's true that an F type would even necessarily be more likely to express it in those terms. T's do that all the time).

    Both i/e and T/F have been associated with the common terms “subjective” and “objective”, (which of course can be confusing).

    One is dealing with an individual or environmental orientation, where only the individual (i.e. “subject”) is conscious of his own “soul”, and thus everything in the environment {including other people} become “objects”.
    The other is dividing all of reality directly between impersonal “objects” and personal “souls” {“subjects”; whether individual or environmental}, and making rational assessments based on which of these two categories we are reacting based on.
    (i.e. whether your emotions tell you about those objects, or whether they tell you about their affect on you or others' soul. Hence, in addition to "subjective", you also see "personal" used for both i and F functional perspectives).
    Last edited by Eric B; 07-23-2019 at 05:57 AM.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

    "PERSONALITY MATRIX" on Facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/Personality...6272699654735/

  4. #74
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    15,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Ni: forebodance
    I can't believe you, of all people, posted that.

    fore·bod·ing

    noun
    1.
    fearful apprehension; a feeling that something bad will happen.
    "with a sense of foreboding she read the note"
    synonyms: apprehension, apprehensiveness, anxiety, perturbation, trepidation, disquiet, disquietude, unease, uneasiness, misgiving, suspicion, worry, fear, fearfulness, dread, alarm; More
    Anyone can have a feeling something bad will happen and foreboding is hardly an adequate representation of Ni.

  5. #75
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,592

    Default

    Sorry to disappoint , but in the link, I explained my choice for that term:

    The definition of “forebode” is basically “foresee” (as Berens uses for Ni; but I felt was not specific to it; technically, Ne, Si and even Se can “foresee” something happening, via their own faculties, such as memory or the immediate senses). “Foreboding” carries more of a specific sense of the impression coming from within, and not necessarily about the future, beyond the [sequence of the] uncovering of the data
    I know these terms aren't perfect (and why I had avoided single words for so long), but that's what came up whenever I would think of Ni impressions (and part of this may be influenced by it being a shadow function for me). I'm sure there's a better term.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

    "PERSONALITY MATRIX" on Facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/Personality...6272699654735/

  6. #76
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    15,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I know these terms aren't perfect
    Then make them perfect. Or else.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    “Foreseeing”
    Better.

  7. #77
    FRACTALICIOUS phobik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    9,719

    Default

    I can't wait for AI to render all this postulation futile.
    To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.
    ~ Elbert Hubbard

    Music provides one of the clearest examples of a much deeper relation between mathematics and human experience.
    Likes Cellmold liked this post

  8. #78
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,592

    Default

    "Foreseeing" is better? Now I'm surprised! (That, as I mentioned, is what Berens/Nardi calls it!)
    I guess you're not saying it's "perfect", but I still think "forebodance" is more specific to the sense of it coming from within, apart from the environment, where "foreseeing", as I said, could be from other functions, and is specifically about the literal "future", which I'm trying to avoid as it greatly oversimplifies the function.

    Notice, I used "-ance" rather than "ing", (which doesn't even seem to be an official term), as I know the gerund "foreboding" carries a specifically bad connotation.
    On Merriam Webster, the definition of the root verb ("forebode") is "to have an inward conviction of (something, such as a coming ill or misfortune)". That too is adding the negative connotation as the example, but it doesn't seem to be integral to the meaning of the root (which is "feel a secret premonition"). It's just how it's come to be used, probably because it's a feeling that gets noticed more when there's a deep fear of something bad possibly happening. Otherwise, it covers perfectly what I'm trying to convey.

    (Maybe some form of "portend" is better?)
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

    "PERSONALITY MATRIX" on Facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/Personality...6272699654735/

  9. #79
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    15,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    "Foreseeing" is better? Now I'm surprised! (That, as I mentioned, is what Berens/Nardi calls it!)
    I guess you're not saying it's "perfect", but I still think "forebodance" is more specific to the sense of it coming from within, apart from the environment, where "foreseeing", as I said, could be from other functions, and is specifically about the literal "future", which I'm trying to avoid as it greatly oversimplifies the function.

    Notice, I used "-ance" rather than "ing", (which doesn't even seem to be an official term), as I know the gerund "foreboding" carries a specifically bad connotation.
    On Merriam Webster, the definition of the root verb ("forebode") is "to have an inward conviction of (something, such as a coming ill or misfortune)". That too is adding the negative connotation as the example, but it doesn't seem to be integral to the meaning of the root (which is "feel a secret premonition"). It's just how it's come to be used, probably because it's a feeling that gets noticed more when there's a deep fear of something bad possibly happening. Otherwise, it covers perfectly what I'm trying to convey.

    (Maybe some form of "portend" is better?)

    From Linda's site:
    Cognitive Dynamics

    Ni – introverted iNtuiting

    Foreseeing implications and likely effects without external data; realizing “what will be”; conceptualizing new ways of seeing things; envisioning transformations; getting an image of profound meaning or far-reaching symbols. *Transforming with a metaperspective.
    Foreseeing implications is certainly preferable to engaging in dread and anxiety, no? And what am I missing here - do you have an aversion to using the word "future" when Ni is, in fact, future-oriented?
    Likes SearchingforPeace liked this post

  10. #80
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,592

    Default

    No, I don't define Ni in terms specifically of "the future" anymore; and yes, Berens is one who really pushes the whole "future" focus. (I thought I had remembered you being somewhat generally critical of her presentation of the concepts). Of course, it does often come in handy for getting a sense of the future, (but then so is Ne; the difference, that the latter is not as "sure" about it).
    I've since leaned more toward Lenore Thomson's discussion (and an Ni dom. herself).

    Descriptions from the chapters on the perception functions (all in terms of what they do wit our "sense impressions"):

    Se: "go with our sense impressions as they occur"
    Si: "stabilize our sense impressions by integrating them with ones we remember; facts we know to be consistent".
    Ne: "unify our sense impressions with their larger context, thereby creating new options for meaning and response"
    Ni: "liberate our sense impressions from their larger context, thereby creating more options for perception itself" (The example given is raising the question in one's mind of the possible reasons a suntan is valued by people today, when the original circumstances that gave it its meaning have changed).

    Notice, there's nothing about "the future". Especially in discussing something about a suntan, involving the past, rather than the future! When I saw this, and also read other NJ's discuss their perspective, I realized that whole "future" concept was really selling the function short! In our own correspondence, she had described Ni as "looking beyond the map" to get a sense of where something will go. (Where I, with Ne, would be looking at the map and trying to figure something from the objects that are there, including the "larger context" that is visible). That implies the future, but Ni is simply one means of doing that; not itself simply awareness of the future, as "foreseeing" implies. She in the book continues "For INJs, patterns aren't 'out there' in the world, waiting to be discovered [as they are for NPs]. They're part of us—the way we make sense of the rest of the information and energy impinging on our systems".

    This really shows what's "introverted" about it, where "foreseeing" in itself doesn't, and leaves you wondering what really makes it different from Ne. (though, again, the process can certainly include foreseeing). This is what I think has kept the meaning of the function so mysterious and hard for everyone to really understand.
    Berens herself covers it best in one of the books, when the example of Ni is a person choosing a dog having a "vision" of a dog barking and crying, and then realizing that they should get a dog that didn't mind being alone. This doesn't even have anything to do with any particular singular event being "predicted". It was a subconscious model of a situation that was referenced to inform a decision for the better, to avoid that template possibly being realized in a future event. This is what I was trying to cover through the term “forebodance”. So the "future" in this case is not something certain, being "foreseen", and neither is the negative conotation).
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

    "PERSONALITY MATRIX" on Facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/Personality...6272699654735/

Similar Threads

  1. Ideas for part time jobs that involve little social interaction?
    By DigitalMethod in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-03-2010, 04:03 PM
  2. Scarcity & Social Interaction
    By Eldanen in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 11:03 PM

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