User Tag List

First 2161697071727381 Last

Results 701 to 710 of 984

  1. #701
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    66

    Default

    I have created a theory where each perception function is described using simple words and all people use all 4 perception functions.
    When i say known info i mean info that are inside your memory
    When i say unknown i mean the opposite.

    So...

    Ne:Takes unknown info from outside(exploring etc)
    Ni:creates unknown info from inside (imagination etc.)
    Se:sees outside known info (experiencing stuff, because Se users may know how an experience feels but want to live it again )
    Si:sees inside known info (retrieving from memory etc.)

    So since all people use al 4 perception functions that makes sense

  2. #702
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    I asked for an example of a real person. Are you saying that all Muslims who pray to Mecca are Ni dominant?
    No. I wasn't talking about Ni-dominant personalities in the post that started this back-and-forth, I was trying to clarify the nature of Ni in general - I'm speaking abstractly. I probably wouldn't use "totemic" to describe a person anyway, it comes off differently to what I'm trying to get at.
    Hello

  3. #703
    © So Much Deeper™ Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    8,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkMagician View Post
    A fun way to look at Ni, based off general behaviour rather than the actual definition:

    Ni is overindulging in food, sexual activities, drugs, and other forms of sensual pleasure or completely abstaining from all such things; it also means can manifest as an becoming over obsessive over one's surroundings or getting anxious over petty details, or becoming completely isolated from the physical realm and removing all subjective meaning from one's surroundings.
    Woah woah incorrect man. That's inferior Se fighting off Dominant Ni. To say that is generally Ni is superfluous to its general definition.
    No time is ever wasted.
    Likes ChocolateMoose123 liked this post

  4. #704
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ISFp Fi
    Posts
    757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever View Post
    Woah woah incorrect man. That's inferior Se fighting off Dominant Ni. To say that is generally Ni is superfluous to its general definition.
    well I used "Ni" (in its ego form) because it essentially is also inferior Se, at least to me :P I am aware that it is generally an unhealthy state to be in, and I should have emphasized the fact that it was, indeed, not the strong, healthy state of Ni/Se.

  5. #705
    © So Much Deeper™ Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    8,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkMagician View Post
    well I used "Ni" (in its ego form) because it essentially is also inferior Se, at least to me :P I am aware that it is generally an unhealthy state to be in, and I should have emphasized the fact that it was, indeed, not the strong, healthy state of Ni/Se.
    I see. Well not everyone sees Ni as assumed to have Se backed within it. :P I see them work with each other, not exactly the same though.
    No time is ever wasted.

  6. #706
    Vulnerability Eilonwy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sp/so
    Posts
    6,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    And significantly enough, here:
    "That's why INTPs and INTJs are often in conflict."

    Ti wants "to hammer in the stakes of a tent that offers the best shelter for others" [i.e. in my own way of framing it "This is the TRUTH (T), and since I realize it (i), then I think others would want this truth as well" ("subjective" perspective projecting onto others)], but the Ni type is "usually cutting a hole in the side of a tent to peer into the dark and make out something else that's moving on a distant landscape."
    Personally, I think you're leaving out an important data point when you're directly comparing INTPs and INTJs: INTPs are Ji-dom and INTJs are Pi-dom. I think if you fail to take that difference into consideration, you'll end up misinterpreting how the judging function is integrated into the whole function stack--how it's being used. I think a better comparison would be Ti-dom to Te-dom. That would eliminate the influences of Ji-dom vs Pi-dom and maybe highlight a purer difference between Ti and Te.

    This is speculation on my part. I'm a Pi-dom. I've sat here at the computer reading this forum for years now--observing, taking in what people write. Yes, sometimes I throw out judgments, and sometimes I get very attached to those judgments, but as long as I keep observing to see whether my judgement holds water in the real world, and then keep comparing and refining my inner concepts, then I might come up with something that appears to be insightful.

    Anyone can compare things, but from what you're saying, you do the comparing once you've already perceived the data, in order to extenalize it (in this case, doing something with it; which fits what I mentioned above). You don't have to compare in order to do the perceiving to begin with. That's what I was trying to say. (And again, the process of comparing the bowls sounds a bit too conscious and rational, to the point that I can even identify with them in my Ne/Si perspective, but then, maybe that's another one of those analogies that shouldn't be taken too literally. Either attitude of N is about the "concept of" things, but again, Ne will be more external focused [the things themselves], while Ni, as described, is "the concept of the concept" [ i.e. "meta"]).
    Yes, of course, anyone can compare things. We all have perceiving and judging functions in our stacks. That is too general, too big-picture. Processes are processes. Pi is Pi, Ji is Ji, etc. So, to tease out the differences, to see what Ni is, I think you can look at Si to see the same general big-picture process, which should take away some of the mystery. Then, the difference will be in the details: what data does Ni focus on? And there's the difficulty. We all have a function stack to help us deal with the world, so I can focus on the more concrete data with my inferior Se, which makes it difficult to say where the demarcation is between abstract and concrete, since we all can perceive both types of data and our perceptions are influenced by all sorts of things like culture and family, so we most likely have different levels of function development within one type.

    To address your bolded, if I'm interpreting you correctly, I think that what you're saying goes back to what I wrote about Pi-dom vs Ji-dom. I think you're seeing that difference: that Ni perceives first, and you're comparing it to your own process of Ti evaluating first, rather than seeing a difference between my Ni and your Ne. Again, speculation. Personally, I think successfully isolating and comparing an internal and external function is going to prove to be difficult without some sort of base knowledge which is missing at this point.
    Johari / Nohari

    “That we are capable only of being what we are remains our unforgivable sin.” ― Gene Wolfe

    reminder to self: "That YOU that you are so proud of is a story woven together by your interpreter module to account for as much of your behavior as it can incorporate, and it denies or rationalizes the rest." "Who's in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain" by Michael S. Gazzaniga

  7. #707
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    13,694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    As a side point, all of this are more good examples of why Ni/Se would be termed "Realizing" and Si/Ne would be "Inquiring" (or as I put it, involve more "comparison"), to use Berens/Montoya's new terms.
    So I'll have to think more on this. Perhaps I can find the simpler alternative to "unconscious" I've been looking for from it.
    Read the Graham Wallas model. Perhaps some of it can be braided into your understanding.

    https://www.brainpickings.org/2013/0...wallas-stages/

  8. #708
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,553

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eilonwy View Post
    Personally, I think you're leaving out an important data point when you're directly comparing INTPs and INTJs: INTPs are Ji-dom and INTJs are Pi-dom. I think if you fail to take that difference into consideration, you'll end up misinterpreting how the judging function is integrated into the whole function stack--how it's being used. I think a better comparison would be Ti-dom to Te-dom. That would eliminate the influences of Ji-dom vs Pi-dom and maybe highlight a purer difference between Ti and Te.

    This is speculation on my part. I'm a Pi-dom. I've sat here at the computer reading this forum for years now--observing, taking in what people write. Yes, sometimes I throw out judgments, and sometimes I get very attached to those judgments, but as long as I keep observing to see whether my judgement holds water in the real world, and then keep comparing and refining my inner concepts, then I might come up with something that appears to be insightful.


    To address your bolded, if I'm interpreting you correctly, I think that what you're saying goes back to what I wrote about Pi-dom vs Ji-dom. I think you're seeing that difference: that Ni perceives first, and you're comparing it to your own process of Ti evaluating first, rather than seeing a difference between my Ni and your Ne. Again, speculation. Personally, I think successfully isolating and comparing an internal and external function is going to prove to be difficult without some sort of base knowledge which is missing at this point.
    The INTP vs INTJ example was given to me by someone (an INTJ, in fact), and I threw it in because it was an INTJ who was questioning what I was saying.

    So it was a general description of how Ni works vs how Ti works, and yes, the understanding was that both in that case are the ego's main perspective. "hammer in the stakes" conveys a rational assessment (judging) of the situation, while the Ni exmple of "cutting a hole in the side" is to try to gather more information. In fact, what you're doing, is exactly what the person was describing to me regarding Ni: "looking for what's been left out".

    But I don't see any real dispute; I was just covering one aspect of a Ti vs Ni difference.

    Yes, of course, anyone can compare things. We all have perceiving and judging functions in our stacks. That is too general, too big-picture. Processes are processes. Pi is Pi, Ji is Ji, etc. So, to tease out the differences, to see what Ni is, I think you can look at Si to see the same general big-picture process, which should take away some of the mystery. Then, the difference will be in the details: what data does Ni focus on? And there's the difficulty. We all have a function stack to help us deal with the world, so I can focus on the more concrete data with my inferior Se, which makes it difficult to say where the demarcation is between abstract and concrete, since we all can perceive both types of data and our perceptions are influenced by all sorts of things like culture and family, so we most likely have different levels of function development within one type.
    When I talk about "anyone can do", I'm not talking necessarily about the functions in "the stack". When we see immediate concret data (associated with "Se"), you do not have to necesarily access the "inferior" (And for me, it would be the "7th" function, which is the shadow of the tertiary). To remember something; I don't have to "use" the tertiary (and for you, it would be the shadow of the inferior). That's why I say the "stack" is about the "ego-states" that focus on the respective data for each type.

    But outside the ego states, we can all either take data directly, or compare things. So when I speak of "comparing" or not, typologically (i.e. Inquiring vs Realizing); I'm referring to the ego states, and in saying "anyone can do it", was only clarifying that yes, it may "sound" too general, but has to be taken in the context of the differentiated type stack (via the ego states).

    So Se obviously takes emergent concrete data as is.
    Ni takes directly from impressions from the unconscious, like the sense that something's been "left out".
    Si compares it to what has been taken in before.
    Ne compares external objects (patterns, etc.) according to a "big picture".

    That was all I was pointing out.
    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
    Likes Eilonwy, windoverlake liked this post

  9. #709
    Member morganelise48's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    64

    Default

    I'm an Ni dom, and I hardly understand it. People often refer to it as "images," but that's never how it works for me. It's like a feeling that you need to sit on until it emerges You know the saying "it's on the tip of my tongue"? I have that feeling about a million times a day. Depending on the situation, I either start talking about an idea that pops into my head, and then all of the sudden new idea's flow out of my mouth, and I shock myself with how insightful it is. Other times, I can't even think properly when trying to generate my intuition if people are around me, but once I'm isolated, I realize what it was that I was trying to think/say. Sometimes, an idea is in my head but I don't know how to say it with words.

  10. #710
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by morganelise48 View Post
    I'm an Ni dom, and I hardly understand it. People often refer to it as "images," but that's never how it works for me. It's like a feeling that you need to sit on until it emerges You know the saying "it's on the tip of my tongue"? I have that feeling about a million times a day. Depending on the situation, I either start talking about an idea that pops into my head, and then all of the sudden new idea's flow out of my mouth, and I shock myself with how insightful it is. Other times, I can't even think properly when trying to generate my intuition if people are around me, but once I'm isolated, I realize what it was that I was trying to think/say. Sometimes, an idea is in my head but I don't know how to say it with words.
    Definitely yes to the bold. I often think "faster" if I don't "try to think" too hard. If something puzzles me, it usually isn't because the reasoning I'm applying is incorrect, but because I'm "missing a piece of information". Relaxing my mind helps me figure out what that pieces of information is.

    And yes, sometimes it's like you didn't know that you knew something until you thought about it. And yes, very often, there is no good way to fit the idea into words. It's like trying to describe how an apple tastes.

    As for images, plenty of types think in terms of images, so that doesn't really differentiate anything. I know that I think in terms of images to a degree, because I can get these huge 3-d diagrams in my head that describe a system. But it's a fuzzy diagram. I don't know what is at a particular point on the diagram until I "zoom in on it" and then see the details appear. This isn't what most people mean when they think in terms of images.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes VagrantFarce liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] What the hell is an INTJ?
    By Haphazard in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 06:04 PM
  2. Naomi Klein: What the hell is her problem, anyway?
    By pure_mercury in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-21-2009, 05:37 PM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-28-2009, 12:55 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