User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 20 of 20

  1. #11
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    Well, when you say "logical analysis", "reasoning", "hard formulas", what I think of is Ti. There's a bit of Si e.g. focusing on past behaviour, sensory things, but more the Ti.

    About social anxiety... I'm not sure how social anxiety ties into the functions precisely, but I can say as an INFJ that I have pretty bad social anxiety. If you ask me which causes me more anxiety: people or logic? I would easily say people. I think people can be just... anxiety provoking, idk.

    But here's some evidence that Si causes you anxiety too:

    In your signature it says "I don't think it's so personal Anymore / I don't think it's irreversible Anymore". To me that is an elegant description of overcoming the difficulties associated with Fe (personal) and Si (irreversible). I can say as someone who has Si in the 8th position, that Si causes me a lot of anxiety, and the concept of "irreversible" seems tied into that anxiety. For me though it's having a bad reaction to being reminded of the past. A memory will come to my mind, and it won't necessarily be a bad memory, but it will cause me anxiety just being reminded of it. Whether I made a mistake or something bad happened in the memory or not, I will feel that I/it did.

    Regarding people as blank noise... I think that's more of a low-Feeling trait than social anxiety. But I think it's consistent with Fe being in the tertiary. The tertiary is perhaps the most neutral function, in that we kinda identify with it but not strongly, kinda want to distance ourself from it but not strongly. I suppose I can be like that with logical analysis. I tend to be quite logical, but if it becomes the focus I just don't care. I can do it but I don't necessarily like doing it unless I have a specific interest in the issue being analysed. Whereas with something Se related like sports, while I can sometimes enjoy that, I am usually very reluctant to engage with the physical world. I for the most part just don't like sports, or physical challenges or the like. Being made to react in the moment to incoming data is generally anxiety provoking, which is one reason I can socialise online but often not in person, because online is less "real time".

    Regarding approaches to learning, I don't know enough about the example you provided to say what's going on there, but I associate Si with rote-learning. Si is the most capable of taking in a large amount of data and processing that data for regularities, so they are good in subjects where there is a lot of information to take in as opposed to subjects where the theory is paramount. From what I understand chemistry can be approached from either a factual or a theoretical angle, and it probably does depend on the kind of chemistry as to which is more likely to be appropriate - though I suspect that both would need to be incorporated to really excel.

    I guess questions to think about regarding Si...
    Do you like / are you good at rote learning?
    Do you like / are you good at repetitive tasks?
    Are you someone with good "attention to detail"?
    How do you feel about looking back at the past?

    That's all I can think of for now.

  2. #12
    Now with less salt. Methylene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    639 so/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Whereas with something Se related like sports, while I can sometimes enjoy that, I am usually very reluctant to engage with the physical world. I for the most part just don't like sports, or physical challenges or the like. Being made to react in the moment to incoming data is generally anxiety provoking, which is one reason I can socialise online but often not in person, because online is less "real time".
    This part stroke the opposite to me. While I can engage in the physical world and can enjoy pleasurable stimuli, I used to be really reluctant with people. Something I've never been interested in is the silent rules of human interacting. I mean, I've forced myself to understand them from a Ti and Si perspective (analyzing, then placing everything in a framework confirmed if the same actions happened again under the same circumstances), but I've always struggled and didn't feel like interested in applying them. Until I moved here, in a new city, and decided that I didn't want to make the rest of my uni years even harder by having problems with socializing.
    Regarding approaches to learning, I don't know enough about the example you provided to say what's going on there, but I associate Si with rote-learning. Si is the most capable of taking in a large amount of data and processing that data for regularities, so they are good in subjects where there is a lot of information to take in as opposed to subjects where the theory is paramount. From what I understand chemistry can be approached from either a factual or a theoretical angle, and it probably does depend on the kind of chemistry as to which is more likely to be appropriate - though I suspect that both would need to be incorporated to really excel.
    I agree on rote learning and Si. I'd say that the kind of chemistry which is more Si is analytical chem: very little to elementary theory, tons of statistical work, based on hard facts and data (mainly different kind of titolations), more practice than theory. I actually was decent at it, I could adapt to the mindset needed without many problems.
    I had tried to give examples of two theoretical branches (organical as opposed to physical, in fact).

    I guess questions to think about regarding Si...
    Do you like / are you good at rote learning?
    Do you like / are you good at repetitive tasks?
    Are you someone with good "attention to detail"?
    How do you feel about looking back at the past?

    That's all I can think of for now.
    1. I struggle with rote learning, as I need to find some kind of reasoning and pattern behind what I'm studying. But I actually kind of resort to it if I'm in a hurry and I don't have time to truly understand everything.
    2. My answer to this one is ambivalent. I'm more than good at repetitive tasks which need precision. If the main goal is particularly important (ie: an exam, a lab report, whatever), I'd always go for the safe, repetitive, way (and that's why I argued with another ENTP in lab lately). If I'm by myself, maybe doing something just for the sake of it and I don't have a particular goal, I can sometimes experiment.
    3. Again, it depends by the situation. And once again, if I have a main goal I get super attentive about small details, as I want everything to be perfect. If I'm not I could easily not see them. But I've been told I'm actually decent at noticing changings in the environment from what I've been accustomed to, so it's complicated.
    4. I do have some good memories, especially related to the senses (ie: the smell of plastic immediately makes me happy because I think of when, as I child, after asking for a console for years, I had received my first Nintendo DS), but I also do fall in the trap of the "it's always been like that, it's never gonna change" related to bad things.
    I don't think that it's so personal
    Anymore
    I don't think that it's irreversible
    Anymore
    Sometimes I feel like I'm a sentimental trooper.

    6w5 - 3w4 - 9w8 so/sp
    RLUEI
    Chaotic neutral.
    LII-Ne.

  3. #13
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Methylene View Post
    This part stroke the opposite to me. While I can engage in the physical world and can enjoy pleasurable stimuli, I used to be really reluctant with people. Something I've never been interested in is the silent rules of human interacting. I mean, I've forced myself to understand them from a Ti and Si perspective (analyzing, then placing everything in a framework confirmed if the same actions happened again under the same circumstances), but I've always struggled and didn't feel like interested in applying them. Until I moved here, in a new city, and decided that I didn't want to make the rest of my uni years even harder by having problems with socializing.
    I have my own problems with socialising; to me, it's not about rules of interaction (well, I like to think it's not) but rather the Fe is in the attitude of being caring towards others, helping out and not encroaching on their individuality, but I come at Fe from an Ni/philosophical perspective rather than rules.

    But I am aware that there are rules and I don't know what these are really either, so I tend to freeze up, not knowing what the appropriate action is.

    As long as I conduct myself ethically, that's what counts.

    I agree on rote learning and Si. I'd say that the kind of chemistry which is more Si is analytical chem: very little to elementary theory, tons of statistical work, based on hard facts and data (mainly different kind of titolations), more practice than theory. I actually was decent at it, I could adapt to the mindset needed without many problems.
    I had tried to give examples of two theoretical branches (organical as opposed to physical, in fact).
    Off-topic, but I have a book on chemistry that I really liked when I was in senior years of high school called "Chemical Bonding" by Audrey Companion. It goes quite a bit into the different orbitals like s, p, d etc. and I found those shapes really interesting.

    I had assumed that the writer would be an N, but when I looked back at it to apply textual function analysis, I noticed that the author seemed to start each section with a miniature history lesson, thus probably being ISFJ!


    1. I struggle with rote learning, as I need to find some kind of reasoning and pattern behind what I'm studying. But I actually kind of resort to it if I'm in a hurry and I don't have time to truly understand everything.
    2. My answer to this one is ambivalent. I'm more than good at repetitive tasks which need precision. If the main goal is particularly important (ie: an exam, a lab report, whatever), I'd always go for the safe, repetitive, way (and that's why I argued with another ENTP in lab lately). If I'm by myself, maybe doing something just for the sake of it and I don't have a particular goal, I can sometimes experiment.
    3. Again, it depends by the situation. And once again, if I have a main goal I get super attentive about small details, as I want everything to be perfect. If I'm not I could easily not see them. But I've been told I'm actually decent at noticing changings in the environment from what I've been accustomed to, so it's complicated.
    4. I do have some good memories, especially related to the senses (ie: the smell of plastic immediately makes me happy because I think of when, as I child, after asking for a console for years, I had received my first Nintendo DS), but I also do fall in the trap of the "it's always been like that, it's never gonna change" related to bad things.
    What I gather from 1 is that Si is not one of your stronger functions, because there are certain requirements (Ti in this case) for it to operate. And I also gather that you're adept at using Si; it's not really a weak-point for you, but something you see as important, at least in certain circumstances, and feel capable of doing.

    That doesn't mean it's not the inferior function though. I'm quite confident that you're ENTP but I don't know how to make a compelling argument apart from the sequential function order approach, but that approach requires a lot of interpretation.

    Feeling that things not changing would be bad might indicate inferior Si, but I can sometimes feel that the future is very daunting, though often this is tied to fearing the resurfacing of negative elements of the past. So I guess it's complex.

  4. #14
    Now with less salt. Methylene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    639 so/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    I have my own problems with socialising; to me, it's not about rules of interaction (well, I like to think it's not) but rather the Fe is in the attitude of being caring towards others, helping out and not encroaching on their individuality, but I come at Fe from an Ni/philosophical perspective rather than rules.

    But I am aware that there are rules and I don't know what these are really either, so I tend to freeze up, not knowing what the appropriate action is.

    As long as I conduct myself ethically, that's what counts.
    It's both. Fe's the ability to both understand and put in practise those rules, and what you've said.
    The first part's always been a problem to me, the second is something I've learned to engage in during teen years. I may not be the best at understanding people from an emotional perspective (I've known plenty of ExTPs who can actively do that just with a little effort, it's not their main focus, but it's still something they can actively do without many problems), but I'm fine with helping from a logical one. I've learned that's one of the very few ways I can try to avoid complete isolation. Even if it's something I used to look for, I've been through enough during middle and high school to understand I need to find a common ground.
    That's a difference I've noticed from TJs, even ExTJs. They don't care if they already have a very small circle, or they don't care at all.
    While I myself can go into very strong Te streaks and I actually easily switch between Te and Ti during arguments and on the workplace, and I had some streaks about evaluating things from an ethical perspective (while usually my main focus, as soon as I get in any kind of info, is "is this bullshit or not?"), I'm pretty sure I'm not on the Te-Fi axis. Also, Ni's by far one of my worst functions, I perceive it as bs and too much narrow minded, I've really like never engaged in it. Se's been one of my major triggers in high school, I used to panic every time there was some kind of power game involved and just get the fuck out from there.


    Off-topic, but I have a book on chemistry that I really liked when I was in senior years of high school called "Chemical Bonding" by Audrey Companion. It goes quite a bit into the different orbitals like s, p, d etc. and I found those shapes really interesting.
    I had assumed that the writer would be an N, but when I looked back at it to apply textual function analysis, I noticed that the author seemed to start each section with a miniature history lesson, thus probably being ISFJ!
    OT: one thing that blew my mind when I first studied phys chem is that the shapes you usually study are really approximative. For instance, a 2s orbital has a radial node (zone where the probability of finding an electron is zero, shaped like a shell) inside. So it's more like two spheres one inside the other.
    Care about that. I've never seen a book, worst if entry level, without some kind of historical section when introducing a new chapter. Also because science history's not a subject, and you need to know where those discoveries came from. I don't think that's enough to type anyone, it could easily be just something to get the reader more accustomed to the subject. And well, for instance, without studying decently Bohr's model, it would be much harder to understand what came later.


    What I gather from 1 is that Si is not one of your stronger functions, because there are certain requirements (Ti in this case) for it to operate. And I also gather that you're adept at using Si; it's not really a weak-point for you, but something you see as important, at least in certain circumstances, and feel capable of doing.

    That doesn't mean it's not the inferior function though. I'm quite confident that you're ENTP but I don't know how to make a compelling argument apart from the sequential function order approach, but that approach requires a lot of interpretation.

    Feeling that things not changing would be bad might indicate inferior Si, but I can sometimes feel that the future is very daunting, though often this is tied to fearing the resurfacing of negative elements of the past. So I guess it's complex.
    More info: it's not that I'm always bad with the feelings things won't change. I'm often fine with it more than with change, don't get tricked by my signature. It depends on the moment. So I would agree that Si's not in the first block with the first two functions, but I feel like it's too developed and healthy to be my repressed function.
    I don't think that it's so personal
    Anymore
    I don't think that it's irreversible
    Anymore
    Sometimes I feel like I'm a sentimental trooper.

    6w5 - 3w4 - 9w8 so/sp
    RLUEI
    Chaotic neutral.
    LII-Ne.

  5. #15
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    OT: one thing that blew my mind when I first studied phys chem is that the shapes you usually study are really approximative. For instance, a 2s orbital has a radial node (zone where the probability of finding an electron is zero, shaped like a shell) inside. So it's more like two spheres one inside the other.
    Care about that. I've never seen a book, worst if entry level, without some kind of historical section when introducing a new chapter. Also because science history's not a subject, and you need to know where those discoveries came from. I don't think that's enough to type anyone, it could easily be just something to get the reader more accustomed to the subject. And well, for instance, without studying decently Bohr's model, it would be much harder to understand what came later.
    I feel like studying some chemistry. I was planning on it when I entered university but the first year subjects sounded rather boring and there was only a subset of the higher level subjects that sounded interesting. I majored in mathematics instead.

    That typing method is I believe a good one, because the type will shine through in the writings of a textbook even, it will show the sequential ordering. I've been able to type writers through that method but of course there is no confirmation that I'm write, only a belief in my methodology.

    Well I will say that there are Ni doms who are good with Se. Bruce Lee is supposedly INFJ, and there is the occassional other INFJ sportsman.

    So look for the sequential ordering, only then will you know.
    the lone star flies alone

  6. #16
    Now with less salt. Methylene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    639 so/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    823

    Default

    It's 5 am, I'm bored.
    Fuck this, I'm taking this other questionnaire:

    2) What do you yearn for in life? Why?
    I remember this one is the first questionnaire I've ever taken when I first joined the site, 3 years ago. That time I'm pretty sure I had answered something like gaining knowledge. I still do, but, 3 years later there's more. Now I yearn for freedom, being able to make my own decisions in life without having other people imposing their judgement, which I often find illogical, or too narrow minded.
    4) What makes you feel inferior?
    When I can't understand a concept. When it happens, I become extremely frustrated, because it normally is something that comes really easy to me. I'd feel like I have no other good qualities left to me.
    5) What tends to weigh on your decisions? (Do you think about people, pro-cons, how you feel about it, etc.)
    First step, instinctive, is evaluing how much "the thing" makes sense. This is immediate and I can't control it. Then, I'd check for how others and me would feel about it, and how I'd feel about it, but I wouldn't give an absolute value to it, just insert it in the overall pro-con list.
    6) When working on a project what is normally your emphasis? Do you like to have control of the outcome?
    I'm a lone wolf when working. I like to have control of the outcome because I like to work alone. This way, I'm responsible for any mistakes. I'm usually more thorough than most when following procedures, as I try to make sure that everything I do makes sense.
    So the emphasis is on the outcome, and how can I work to make it better.
    8) When you want to learn something new, what feels more natural for you?
    I'd look for resources, often books, and start reading. It'd be hard to put me at work at first as I'm easily distracted, but then I'd go into stakanovist mode.
    Probably hard sciences, or linguistics. Any field I have to reason more than memorizing cold facts (for example, in high school I was really bad at literature or history, yet really good in philosophy)
    9) How organized do you think of yourself as?
    Not much. My room is a mess, there's random things on the floor, and books at the end of my bed. But I'd say my mind is decently organized, it's just when I try to take ideas out that they get messed up. When following a line of reasoning (ie: uni exam, or explaining the subject to a friend), I always make sure my speech is organized and polished.
    10) How do you judge new ideas? You try to understand the principles behind it to see if they make sense or do you look for information that supports it?
    See answer 5, I guess. I immediately evaluate if it makes sense. If it doesn't, I look for information that disproves it.
    11) You find harmony by making sure everyone is doing fine and belonging to a given group or by making sure that you follow what you believe and being yourself?
    First one. Second option, I don't even care, nor I know what do I really believe in or who I am.
    12) Are you the kind that thinks before speaking or do you speak before thinking? Do you prefer one-on-one communication or group discussions?
    Group discussions, just because I don't have to do anything: others would talk for me. In one-on-one, I'd run out of ideas really quickly, and then, awkward silence.
    First part, I genuinely don't know. I'd be more inclined to say the first one, as I used to be really paranoid about how would others perceive me and I would double think everything.
    13) Do you jump into action right away or do you like to know where are you jumping before leaping? Does action speaks more than words?
    I normally want to know where I am jumping before leaping. But sometimes I just enjoy the adrenaline rush of doing stupid things.
    I think actions and words can both be deceptive, so they have to be evalued together.
    14) It's Saturday. You're at home, and your favorite show is about to start. Your friends call you for a night out. What will you do?
    I'm staying for the show. If I don't feel like going out, there's no way you're gonna take me out my pj.
    I'd just make up an excuse or pretend I didn't see the message. They can have fun also without me
    15) How do you act when you're stressed out?
    I get extremely dramatic, and irrational. I start snapping at people over trivial matters. I become harsh.
    19) How do your friends perceive you? What is wrong about their perception? What would your friends never say about your personality?
    I think they see me as more talkative than what I feel I am. That's because I see them only when my social batteries are full, so I can interact with no problems. After a while, I usually disappear for a few days/weeks with some excuse. They perceive me as a weirdo, and I'm fine with that. Also, my closest friends know how many problems I have with socializing and people in general.
    20) You got a whole day to do whatever you like. What kind of activities do you feel like doing?
    Just what I'm doing these days: videogames, Netflix, and studying random things.
    I don't think that it's so personal
    Anymore
    I don't think that it's irreversible
    Anymore
    Sometimes I feel like I'm a sentimental trooper.

    6w5 - 3w4 - 9w8 so/sp
    RLUEI
    Chaotic neutral.
    LII-Ne.

  7. #17

    Default

    I like this life,cause u always need to fight

  8. #18
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LForward1 View Post
    I like this life,cause u always need to fight
    random af?
    the lone star flies alone
    Likes Methylene liked this post

  9. #19
    Now with less salt. Methylene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    639 so/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    823

    Default

    @Legion, about the discussion we've had regarding the way I write papers, I have some new infos. I realized this while clearing up the pc from all the papers I've written.

    Standard procedure in lab, defined by law, is "theoretical introduction, listing of the reagents, listing of the glassware, experimental procedure, data collection, data elaboration, conclusions".
    I've found the very first papers I've written, when I didn't know what the required standards were (we already had the list to follow, but I wasn't so good at following it).

    The theoretical introduction per se is very small. First one, as required. Then the listings, which are correct, with range and sensitivity of the glassware and instruments needed, not so thorough with informations concerning the reagents, I'd often skip the molarity of them or add it later.
    But it's in the experimental procedure that things are weird, and I think they could be useful.
    This part is supposed to be slim, with just the essential, EXPERIMENTAL details.
    I wouldn't. I'd start from the practical part to elaborate about the theory, instead of putting it all beforehand as first step, where it should have been. So, I'd say, "I do X because it helps obtaining Y by this theoretical concept", NOT "This is the concept. In order to achieve it, we're gonna do X and obtain Y" (this one was what was actually required in the theoretical introduction ad that I couldn't do).
    After that, I'd list the gained data here, during the procedure, and elaborate it.
    I'd actually miss a lot of theoretical details in the introduction because a lot seemed reduntant to me, so not needed for the level I was..
    I remember I struggled a lot with writing the theoretical part first (that's also what I meant with "I'm a poor idea generator"), without the experimental part. I needed to start from it to give sense to everything in my mind.
    I don't think that it's so personal
    Anymore
    I don't think that it's irreversible
    Anymore
    Sometimes I feel like I'm a sentimental trooper.

    6w5 - 3w4 - 9w8 so/sp
    RLUEI
    Chaotic neutral.
    LII-Ne.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    -
    Socionics
    - None
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Yes. I agree. Judging solely by your posting, you are an INTP to the MBTI.
    Fe-Si verbal expression would be like this: "You walk too slowly, you are just like a snail". When they say this it means Fe-Si wants to push the person they sensates subjectively walking so slowly like a snail, to walk faster so that they won't sensate the person resembles a snail, that walks very slowly anymore. The Fe-Si empirically likes to instruct others to take some actions. My mother (identification: ESFJ) instructs me to throw the garbage away while she was busy doing something else. They are an "executive" that take actions habitually. They delegate task to others rather easily, by instructing.

    Some years ago When I began researching about the typology theory, I stayed in my room for such a long time, that my mother commented: "staying in your room for a long time, you are just like "a hen" who hatches its eggs". Telling that, She instructs me not to stay in my room for such a long time and go out for another activities.
    Likes Methylene liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] NE vs. NI here we go again!
    By GarrotTheThief in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-16-2019, 10:53 AM
  2. Here we go again.
    By Caligula in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-19-2011, 10:42 AM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 09:55 AM
  4. Here We Go Again INTJs, I Need Your Advice on MBTI
    By WithoutaFace in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 12:56 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