• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Mistyped TypeCentral Members

W

WALMART

Guest
[MENTION=15886]jontherobot[/MENTION] why do you think Ni dominants are so rare? I'm not discounting your claim, though I'm just wondering what line of reasoning led you to such a conclusion. :thinking:


I believe the key to understanding intuitive dominants is to understand how the mind works.

What separates us from animals of lesser intelligence is the interconnection of our neural pathways. Not even the most advanced technologies of today can distinguish between an ant neuron and a human neuron. My favorite neuroscientist, Michael S. Gazzaniga, put the difference kind of something like this:

"Imagine you are in Oklahoma and someone robs a store. He leaves the state, and you are tasked with tracking him down. If you were a police agency equivalent to a whale's brain, it would be like having three federal agents searching different states looking for the perpetrator. If you were a police agency equivalent to a human brain, it would be like being able to search thirty-eight states at once looking for the perpetrator."

Humans are exponentially more capable of tracking and identifying critical information relevant to thought processes, to the point where we can look for five, ten, and twenty 'perpetrators' at a time efficiently. This gives rise to a multitude of advantages over minds capable of only a few simultaneous threads of thought.



Now that some basic physiology of the mind is out of the way, we must look at the Ne/Si - Ni/Se duality. Ne and Se are methods of metabolizing information (from the previous analogy - federal officers), while Ni and Si are methods of recalling information (the perpetrators). Ne users are quick at metabolizing information; I think of it like lightning shooting across existing nodes of Si into the unknown, forging a path to be filled with more nodes of Si. The data generated by this imaginative thought then falls into 'factual' information, which is why I think Ne users are labeled as 'expert classifiers' - kind of like a system of guilty until proven innocent.

Ni users, however, prefer to work and rework the nodes of information already accrued, relying on the direct interpretation of sensory input to provide new nodes to be worked around. To be Ni-dom is to consistently seek nodes of Si that have connections previously unrealized, like turning a stone over four times expecting to see something different on the next flip. They will observe it from the top down and bottom up simultaneously, under a black light, heated up to 300 degrees and then dipped in paint if it meant coming to an objective, definitive conclusion (hence aux Te/Fe - the strive for objective criteria) - in the Se/Ni system, it is kind of like innocent until proven guilty.


I just don't see Ni dominance in many people. I honestly think it manifests itself as a twinge of crazy; I don't think people have the capacity for such mentally exhausting procedure, and statistics apparently back up my perception.


So do you think I actually am then ? ;)

I think they actually are, because though they are rare in real life, more of them would gravitate to forums. The type distribution on the forum is not random.


I do not get an infj vibe from you. I'd have to talk to you real time to be sure though.

I think you possess an innate desire to understand yourself and the universe you exist in, more so than most - Ti or Fi - likely the latter. I think you prefer objective facts to what your mind conjures and enjoy contemplating these facts - Ni use, which you obviously prefer over Si. I'd vote isfp.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I believe the key to understanding intuitive dominants is to understand how the mind works.

What separates us from animals of lesser intelligence is the interconnection of our neural pathways. Not even the most advanced technologies of today can distinguish between an ant neuron and a human neuron. My favorite neuroscientist, Michael S. Gazzaniga, put the difference kind of something like this:

"Imagine you are in Oklahoma and someone robs a store. He leaves the state, and you are tasked with tracking him down. If you were a police agency equivalent to a whale's brain, it would be like having three federal agents searching different states looking for the perpetrator. If you were a police agency equivalent to a human brain, it would be like being able to search thirty-eight states at once looking for the perpetrator."

Humans are exponentially more capable of tracking and identifying critical information relevant to thought processes, to the point where we can look for five, ten, and twenty 'perpetrators' at a time efficiently. This gives rise to a multitude of advantages over minds capable of only a few simultaneous threads of thought.



Now that some basic physiology of the mind is out of the way, we must look at the Ne/Si - Ni/Se duality. Ne and Se are methods of metabolizing information (from the previous analogy - federal officers), while Ni and Si are methods of recalling information (the perpetrators). Ne users are quick at metabolizing information; I think of it like lightning shooting across existing nodes of Si into the unknown, forging a path to be filled with more nodes of Si. The data generated by this imaginative thought then falls into 'factual' information, which is why I think Ne users are labeled as 'expert classifiers' - kind of like a system of guilty until proven innocent.

Ni users, however, prefer to work and rework the nodes of information already accrued, relying on the direct interpretation of sensory input to provide new nodes to be worked around. To be Ni-dom is to consistently seek nodes of Si that have connections previously unrealized, like turning a stone over four times expecting to see something different on the next flip. They will observe it from the top down and bottom up simultaneously, under a black light, heated up to 300 degrees and then dipped in paint if it meant coming to an objective, definitive conclusion (hence aux Te/Fe - the strive for objective criteria) - in the Se/Ni system, it is kind of like innocent until proven guilty.


I just don't see Ni dominance in many people. I honestly think it manifests itself as a twinge of crazy; I don't think people have the capacity for such mentally exhausting procedure, and statistics apparently back up my perception.





I do not get an infj vibe from you. I'd have to talk to you real time to be sure though.

I think you possess an innate desire to understand yourself and the universe you exist in, more so than most - Ti or Fi - likely the latter. I think you prefer objective facts to what your mind conjures and enjoy contemplating these facts - Ni use, which you obviously prefer over Si. I'd vote isfp.

Interesting. I have an ISFP friend and he and I are completely opposite psychologically, but I could see why you'd think that.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
I think that I am a mistyped 7w6(sw6w5) whom is in real life a 6w7(sw7w8)
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
JTR I'm glad you answered my question. Now for my thoughts on your responce:

I believe the key to understanding intuitive dominants is to understand how the mind works.

What separates us from animals of lesser intelligence is the interconnection of our neural pathways. Not even the most advanced technologies of today can distinguish between an ant neuron and a human neuron. My favorite neuroscientist, Michael S. Gazzaniga, put the difference kind of something like this:

"Imagine you are in Oklahoma and someone robs a store. He leaves the state, and you are tasked with tracking him down. If you were a police agency equivalent to a whale's brain, it would be like having three federal agents searching different states looking for the perpetrator. If you were a police agency equivalent to a human brain, it would be like being able to search thirty-eight states at once looking for the perpetrator."

Humans are exponentially more capable of tracking and identifying critical information relevant to thought processes, to the point where we can look for five, ten, and twenty 'perpetrators' at a time efficiently. This gives rise to a multitude of advantages over minds capable of only a few simultaneous threads of thought.

Yes I agree with the story example you used, where the ability to hold many thoughts within the mind at once gives one advanced levels of perception, and from this one can see things from all possible angles and dimensions, these different states of mind we can tap into giving us a greater awareness, almost like an illumination or an awakening, which I could see as sharing a connection with Ni cognition.

Now that some basic physiology of the mind is out of the way, we must look at the Ne/Si - Ni/Se duality. Ne and Se are methods of metabolizing information (from the previous analogy - federal officers), while Ni and Si are methods of recalling information (the perpetrators). Ne users are quick at metabolizing information; I think of it like lightning shooting across existing nodes of Si into the unknown, forging a path to be filled with more nodes of Si. The data generated by this imaginative thought then falls into 'factual' information, which is why I think Ne users are labeled as 'expert classifiers' - kind of like a system of guilty until proven innocent.

It seems you are saying that Ne users can branch outwards in order to interconnect related or even potentially unrelated information into a corehent whole, different categorical systems being attached to each branch, and of course each branch constitutes the same tree, and the funny thing too is that trees do indeed quite literally get struck by epic bolts of lightning.

Ni users, however, prefer to work and rework the nodes of information already accrued, relying on the direct interpretation of sensory input to provide new nodes to be worked around. To be Ni-dom is to consistently seek nodes of Si that have connections previously unrealized, like turning a stone over four times expecting to see something different on the next flip. They will observe it from the top down and bottom up simultaneously, under a black light, heated up to 300 degrees and then dipped in paint if it meant coming to an objective, definitive conclusion (hence aux Te/Fe - the strive for objective criteria) - in the Se/Ni system, it is kind of like innocent until proven guilty.

I see that Ni will turn the world on its head with revolutionary insights that completely transform our current paradigm, and that Ni is open to all of the possibilities, with a mixed wonder for what could be true, and a skepticism for what could be false, balancing them out on the scales of judgment, and then arriving at the destination of a fixed decision.

I just don't see Ni dominance in many people. I honestly think it manifests itself as a twinge of crazy; I don't think people have the capacity for such mentally exhausting procedure, and statistics apparently back up my perception.

If Ni dominants are so rare, as the above information implies, then it follows that we may need to begin second guessing ourselves, not only in regards to our own types, but also on all frontiers, checking decisions out against all available criteria in a never ending quest of questioning each and every one of our preconcieved convictions. This method may not only apply to typing oneself, but could also be used as a universally applicable system to all questions requiring a full and complete analysis in their design, following the chain of contingency to the inscrutable source containing within the grand and unified truth of all things.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
That would be a pretty long and detailed post...

You want to read another Greenfairy wall of text? haha


I aspire to be the greatest typologist in all of history. I must know what differentiates one another.


So if you're up to it, yes, I do.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
JTR I'm glad you answered my question. Now for my thoughts on your responce:

Yes I agree with the story example you used, where the ability to hold many thoughts within the mind at once gives one advanced levels of perception, and from this one can see things from all possible angles and dimensions, these different states of mind we can tap into giving us a greater awareness, almost like an illumination or an awakening, which I could see as sharing a connection with Ni cognition.


No prob. Yes, I think of the evolution of intelligence as an arms race of understanding how to manipulate the external world - literally. Warring tribes likely survived and bred based on how well they could throw a rock or perceive their mates intentions. Higher bandwidth, multi-threaded people simply triumphed over those that couldn't grasp Newtonian motion or why women Fe.


It seems you are saying that Ne users can branch outwards in order to interconnect related or even potentially unrelated information into a corehent whole, different categorical systems being attached to each branch, and of course each branch constitutes the same tree, and the funny thing too is that trees do indeed quite literally get struck by epic bolts of lightning.


Yes, exactly. I think they require external stimulus for the connections to be made, which differentiates Ni preference, where the connections are made internally. I like that analogy, a tree being struck by lightning :p I suppose I would liken Ni, then, as a web with a spider traipsing across it sucking the blood from her victims.


I see that Ni will turn the world on its head with revolutionary insights that completely transform our current paradigm, and that Ni is open to all of the possibilities, with a mixed wonder for what could be true, and a skepticism for what could be false, balancing them out on the scales of judgment, and then arriving at the destination of a fixed decision.


Yar. I wonder if a thread should be made on Ne/Ni comparative weaknesses, if it doesn't already exist. I kind of want to make one on the Ne/Si - Se/Ni duality. I've had a good bit of potentially constructive thoughts regarding that.


If Ni dominants are so rare, as the above information implies, then it follows that we may need to begin second guessing ourselves, not only in regards to our own types, but also on all frontiers, checking decisions out against all available criteria in a never ending quest of questioning each and every one of our preconceived convictions. This method may not only apply to typing oneself, but could also be used as a universally applicable system to all questions requiring a full and complete analysis in their design, following the chain of contingency to the inscrutable source containing within the grand and unified truth of all things.


Such an Ni-dom :p
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I aspire to be the greatest typologist in all of history. I must know what differentiates one another.


So if you're up to it, yes, I do.

Lol. That's about on par with me becoming an astrologer, imho. Except I might make more money. Sorry, I'm just a little cynical about the whole thing. But I think I'll get around to it sooner or later; I'm planning on writing an in depth assessment of the distinctions between Fi and Fe, and then after that I can use it to do some general thing about how it relates to me.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
Lol. That's about on par with me becoming an astrologer, imho. Except I might make more money. Sorry, I'm just a little cynical about the whole thing. But I think I'll get around to it sooner or later; I'm planning on writing an in depth assessment of the distinctions between Fi and Fe, and then after that I can use it to do some general thing about how it relates to me.


It was more hyperbole than anything ;)


Also, I retract my opinion: INFP.
 
Last edited:

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
OK, boss argued with me that they dont think I'm ENTJ, what do you people reckon? I've had two people so far say nay, I'm not but they didnt tell me what type they thought I was.

Strangely enough they said that I wasnt ENTJ on the basis of a summary of that type which said interested in structures and policy etc. which I thought was true to me whether its true to type or not.
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Someone suggested estj for you once. You don't seem as pro-authoritarian as most SJs I've met though. /random
 

citizen cane

ornery ornithologist
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
3,854
MBTI Type
BIRD
Enneagram
631
Instinctual Variant
sp
[MENTION=13402]Saturned[/MENTION] and [MENTION=15886]jontherobot[/MENTION] vehemently insist that I have mistyped myself and that I am, in fact, an ISTJ. I personally think this is quite laughable.
 

Aquarelle

Starcrossed Seafarer
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
3,144
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
OK, boss argued with me that they dont think I'm ENTJ, what do you people reckon? I've had two people so far say nay, I'm not but they didnt tell me what type they thought I was.

Strangely enough they said that I wasnt ENTJ on the basis of a summary of that type which said interested in structures and policy etc. which I thought was true to me whether its true to type or not.

I think your boss is crazy. What else would you be??
 
A

Anew Leaf

Guest
[MENTION=13402]Saturned[/MENTION] and [MENTION=15886]jontherobot[/MENTION] vehemently insist that I have mistyped myself and that I am, in fact, an ISTJ. I personally think this is quite laughable.

Bears.

Beets.

Battlestar Gallactica.

OK, boss argued with me that they dont think I'm ENTJ, what do you people reckon? I've had two people so far say nay, I'm not but they didnt tell me what type they thought I was.

Strangely enough they said that I wasnt ENTJ on the basis of a summary of that type which said interested in structures and policy etc. which I thought was true to me whether its true to type or not.

Have you considered ExFJ? You don't come across as Te, more Fe.
 
Top