Let's type Lyedecker (again...)

[valaki]

Dawkins can also be pretty confrontational. That chart plays it down a little. He's just not at the same level as Hitchens.

And Dawkins being confrontational, does that still bother you?

I read only one book from him I think, it wasn't about religion so I didn't see that side of him yet

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

And Dawkins being confrontational, does that still bother you?

I read only one book from him I think, it wasn't about religion so I didn't see that side of him yet

Not too much. He usually makes strong, logic-based points. It's expected he's going to step on a few toes and ruffle feathers in the fundamentalist community.

 

[valaki]

Not too much. He usually makes strong, logic-based points. It's expected he's going to step on a few toes and ruffle feathers in the fundamentalist community.

I see So you need logic to be there. That does sound like Ti > Fe to me

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I'd like to get more INTPs in here to read their perspectives. Does the following statement generally seem accurate?

Ti strives for thought precision and logical coherence therefore it openly questions thought processes and doubts itself to reach a state of self-assurance and harmony.

source: http://psyphics.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/infj-vs-intp/

When information presented to me is inconsistent with information in my brain, I often feel a need to analyze it and pick it to pieces to verify its accuracy or inaccuracy. This often leads me to second guess myself as I become worried I'm not getting the correct information from the external world or that I've been carrying around faulty information in my brain.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Jung on Ti

Facts are collected as evidence or examples for a theory, but never for their own sake. Should this latter ever occur, it is done only as a compliment to the extraverted style. For this kind of thinking facts are of secondary importance; what, apparently, is of absolutely paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, that primordial symbolical image standing more or less darkly before the inner vision. Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Fe is important for initiating and maintaining social relationships and is very important from an early age. It is common for young INTPs to unintentionally offend others because they may not have insight into what is considered socially acceptable. This is usually learned through trial and error (Si) and observing behavioral patterns (Ne). Social life requires them to spend more effort than other types in developing their inferior function so their inferior function may appear “stronger” than the inferior function of other types. (...) Most INTPs learn to feign Fe and adjust to their social environments using their auxiliary function (Ne). INTPs may mistype as INFJs, if they have developed their inferior function (Fe).

source: http://psyphics.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/infj-vs-intp/

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I mentioned earlier that I have always felt a certain detachment from people in general. I sometimes pretend to be more emotional about something, because otherwise people seem to think I don't care about, say, the homeless. It's not that I don't care, it's just that I have to work to show people I care. Does this make sense? I think people see me as some sort of aloof introvert. This is true to an extent, but if they got to know me better, they'd also see someone who can be very passionate about a cause, especially if said cause is pertinent to one of my interests.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

How do Ti users argue? I've read that if you insult one or argue with them, they will more likely find some factual piece of evidence to throw back that shows some fault in the other person. I don't know how accurate that is, but it's usually been my experience. In general, I avoid conflict and arguments, but if I feel my back is against the wall, I will start tossing out pieces of data that are hard to argue with.

I'm one of the few people to ever bring my father [ESFJ] to tears for this reason. It's only happened a few times in my life, but when I've had enough of his overbearing behavior, I've easily put him in his place. I never feel any better for doing this to people, so it's something I avoid unless they've really hit a nerve or tried to make things "personal" with me.

More likely I will simply walk away and cut them off for a short amount of time (ranging from a few minutes to a few months), then I'm over it.

If you insult me about my face, it probably won't do much, but if you insult me about my intelligence or ability, it can be very damaging. I was picked on relentlessly in grade school, but it really didn't leave a huge scar because the insults were usually about me being a red headed stepchild or being a fire crotch or a trekkie dweeb.

 

[five sounds]

How do Ti users argue? I've read that if you insult one or argue with them, they will more likely find some factual piece of evidence to throw back that shows some fault in the other person. I don't know how accurate that is, but it's usually been my experience. In general, I avoid conflict and arguments, but if I feel my back is against the wall, I will start tossing out pieces of data that are hard to argue with.

I'm one of the few people to ever bring my father [ESFJ] to tears for this reason. It's only happened a few times in my life, but when I've had enough of his overbearing behavior, I've easily put him in his place. I never any better for doing this to people, so it's something I avoid unless they've hit a nerve or tried to make things "personal" with me.

have you considered that your e9 might be stronger (1st or 2nd in your tritype)? avoiding conflict/being really concerned with keeping peace is a 9-ish way to be. just a thought

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

have you considered that your e9 might be stronger (1st or 2nd in your tritype)? avoiding conflict/being really concerned with keeping peace is a 9-ish way to be. just a thought

It's something to consider.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/134-Lenore-Thomson-MBTI-Functions

In contrast to other attitudes, especially left-brain and Feeling attitudes, Ti does not lead you to experience a sense of self. There is no "you" who is separate from the process in which the material takes on the form that is natural to it. Whether people find the way the parts want to arrange themselves into a harmonious whole offensive, whether you find it pleasant or painful, whether you personally like it or not--you see these as distractions. Your job is to get yourself in harmony with it. The Idea of the whole must become real, and it must be necessitated by the nature of the parts. What "you" create must already be there, as form latent within the material, already yearning to exist. You bring no notion of self to your work except perhaps that of midwife to Nature.

Introverted Thinking leads you to relate whatever you are doing to some larger principles that you have identified. Hence, Ti is like having some kind of book in your head, which describes the inner workings of things. When interacting with reality, you are constantly writing and re-writing your book. To deal with anything, you have to be able to understand in terms of the observations in your book. Whenever you are dealing with any new system, you start writing a new chapter on it in order to attain complete understanding of it.

This approach may seem very cumbersome from an extraverted standpoint. You don't really need to understand how a bicycle works in order to ride one. You don't have to actually understand a subject in school if you simply cram and memorize. You don't have to understand computers to check your email. Yet Ti leads you to desire complete understanding of whatever you are doing, instead of looking up the correct procedure, or asking your friends for help, or kicking it when it's not working. With Ti, you don't simply try to understand a system well enough to manipulate it. You try to become such an expert on how it works that you could write a book about it if you had to, even if your expertise is unusable or useless to everybody (sometimes even to yourself).

I remember working at a job building pinspotters for bowling alleys. I wanted to know how the particular part I was building worked inside the machine, and for that matter, how the rest of the machine worked. My supervisor and co-workers thought I was silly. What difference does it make? Just do your job, take your paycheck, and shut the fuck up were their typical reactions. They couldn't understand why I was so concerned with knowing all of the inner workings and functions of what we were building. I couldn't really understand it either, but I've always been that way. When I was a kid, I used to get together with a neighborhood friend and we'd take our bicycles apart to clean, repair, whatever. For me, the importance of that act lay not so much in servicing my bike but in learning how it worked, how each individual piece functioned as part of a larger mechanism.

I don't consider myself a particularly "handy" person or one who is naturally great with tools (I don't know if this is modesty speaking *shrug*) but I do enjoy taking things apart. I was scolded on several occasions as a child for taking things apart and trying to fix or improve them when there was nothing wrong with them to begin with.

Does anything I just wrote about sound like Ti?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

To illustrate what we mean by that, consider what happens when someone tells you how to do something moderately complicated with a certain computer program (say, MS-Word or Excel). They tell you how to work it, but that day you don't operate it yourself (maybe they were telling you over the phone when you weren't at a computer). When you finally try it yourself the next day, you can't get anything to work. All sorts of crucial details are missing from your memory. Or perhaps you remember everything perfectly, but they forgot to tell you something crucial. Now consider what happens when someone sits down in front of you and demonstrates how to operate the program. They run through the whole thing and explain as they go. The next day, you try it yourself for the first time. And barely anything works, again because crucial details are missing. And now consider what happens when they show you how to work the program by having you sit down at the computer. You type as they tell you what to do and point things out on the screen. Every time they forget a detail, you catch it immediately, and they supply the missing info. Every time you run into something you don't understand, you just ask them right away, or they tell you without your asking because it's obvious what you need to be shown. When you work the program again the next day, you're not a pro yet, but you can actually do stuff.

What's relevant here is not the sense of touch, but whether you are actively engaged with the tool. When you interact with the tool using your very own body, the reality of the tool becomes known to you in a different way than when someone tells you or shows you how to use the tool. You understand in a right-brain way rather than a left-brain way. The reality of the tool is guaranteed to have shown itself, because you had a concrete experience with the tool, not just a verbal or symbolic representation of it. The causal relationships of the tool get burned into your brain in a way that transcends words. You could try to translate your understanding into a linear stream of words, but you would indeed be translating: the actual knowledge that you have is not linear and not words. It's an "all at once" thing, and it seems that the knowledge resides in your hand. Or in other words, you have come to understand the tool in the Ti way.

Again, a lot of this reminds me of personal experience. You can tell me how to do something twenty times, then I can read the instruction manual 3 times, but I still might not get it right. This is unfortunate because I think it's led people to mistake me for a blubbering idiot who is unable to take simple instructions on several occasions.

I'm a visual, hands-on learner and I learn to do things by walking through the steps myself as I am taught or trained. It's the only way I can fully grasp something. Of course I can read about the process and get a very, very good idea of how it works or how to do it, but I won't feel completely confident until I've done it myself. Once I've got it in my head, however, it's very unlikely I will forget.

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

I remember working at a job building pinspotters for bowling alleys. I wanted to know how the particular part I was building worked inside the machine, and for that matter, how the rest of the machine worked. My supervisor and co-workers thought I was silly. What difference does it make? Just do your job, take your paycheck, and shut the fuck up were their typical reactions. They couldn't understand why I was so concerned with knowing all of the inner workings and functions of what we were building. I couldn't really understand it either, but I've always been that way. When I was a kid, I used to get together with a neighborhood friend and we'd take our bicycles apart to clean, repair, whatever. For me, the importance of that act lay not so much in servicing my bike but in learning how it worked, how each individual piece functioned as part of a larger mechanism.

I don't consider myself a particularly "handy" person or one who is naturally great with tools (I don't know if this is modesty speaking *shrug*) but I do enjoy taking things apart. I was scolded on several occasions as a child for taking things apart and trying to fix or improve them when there was nothing wrong with them to begin with.

Does anything I just wrote about sound like Ti?

Ti-Se?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

A similar simple example of the Ti approach to ethics would be a student correcting a teacher when they get something wrong. Of course, from the standpoint of Je, correcting a teacher is not acceptable because it subverts the authority of the teacher. Yet from the standpoint of Ti, the teacher only holds authority to the extent that they are true to the material. Hence, by correcting a teacher, you aren't subverting their authority, but rather showing that their authority is an illusion in the first place. Your loyalty is to the material being taught, not to the teacher.

This sort of thing got me in trouble on multiple occasions in school. I'm pretty sure some teachers hated me for doing this, but it was never my intent to be a pain in the ass or make them look stupid. If anything, I felt I was doing a service to them, correcting them so that they were teaching the correct facts. It usually happened in history classes. I read a lot about history growing up, and frankly, the history that is taught in Kindergarten through High School in the US is often factually wrong. Whitewashed shit that ignores facts, bends facts, or plain lies.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Ti-Se?

Yes, I've been considering that as well.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

In a manufacturing job, knowing how something works makes the person building it do a better job at anticipating all of the things that could go wrong or right with the machine or product.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

As a secondary function, Se leads ISPs to make "what plays" into the object of their thoughts. The world of appearance and spectacle provides them with a subject matter to analyze and comment on from an outside perspective, especially to point out (from the sidelines) how people are attempting to be cool but failing, ha ha. ISPs often see themselves as the true leading edge of cool, hipper than hip, into what becomes popular before it becomes popular. As a path of further development and expansion of consciousness, Se shows ISPs how to "go with the flow", to "accept" what is, to "be present" to what is happening right now, recognizing that they can't control it. Incorporating an Se way of orienting themselves, they find a way for their dominant moral perspective to bear fruit in any circumstances they find themselves in. Their dominant function has led them to cultivate a way of being, or state of grace, that feels possible only in a private space, where public perception is not a factor (e.g. Michael Jackson's Never-Never Land Ranch). Se tunes them in to public perception in a way that enables them to fully be themselves wherever they are, freely giving their gifts to all comers, and unconditionally accepting the results.

^^I have a hard time relating to the above description of Se as a secondary function, [MENTION=15318]Nights and Days[/MENTION].^^

In general, I'm finding Ne-Si easier to identify with my own experiences and ways of perceiving and interpreting the world.

I think Ne is my auxiliary.

When dreaming Ne paints a portrait of reality and then attempts to understand it (Ti/Fi), while Ni moves through frames to eventually stops at some arbitrary point (Te,Fe). Ni is brick by brick from the ground up, Ne is large scale demolition, taking large chunks of an idea and refining down. Ne is a completed sudoku puzzle and Ti makes all the numbers fit. Ni is a chess match where every move is recorded along the way and Te determines where something can move at a given time (also fits into gameboard exegesis). So Te is "Outside the Box" because it defines that it wants to go to another box, which is within a larger box (Ni). While Ti wants to study the current box, and Ne says "Hey there's this other box."

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

[MENTION=18819]nicolita[/MENTION] mentioned something like this when talking about her own experience as a Ne user:

Ne can also help INPs sniff out intriguing possibilities. At a party, for instance, their Ne may guide them in their search for a worthwhile conversation partner. Likewise, in the business world, it can help INP entrepreneurs read market trends and identify promising opportunities.

source: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/75987-understanding-extraverted-intuition-ne.html

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

To satisfy INPs’ desire for novelty and outward exploration, Ne can spur physical action, as depicted in some of the examples above. Consequently, those functioning in Ne mode may at times be mistaken for Extroverts or Sensors. In fact, those with a strong Ne are often, whether rightly or not, diagnosed with ADD or ADHD. If physically capable, INPs can thoroughly enjoy sports and athletics, offering them a consistent source of challenge and novelty.

Ne is also sensitive to ambience. When introduced to new surroundings, INPs typically do not attune to specific objects or details (Se), but are more aware of the vague feelings or impressions it inspires. Because Ne acts quickly, INPs know almost immediately whether they like “the feel” of a given environment. Since they are not attuned to sensory details, they can be oblivious to things other types may consider blatantly obvious, causing them to appear naive, dreamy, or absent-minded.

zoned out, space cadet, airhead....I've been labeled each of these things too many times to count.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Thanks for the advice and help, everybody.