What's it like to be a Thinker?

[substitute]

I don't know if it helps to remember that Thinkers tend to evaluate their feelings as objects (if they recognize they are having feelings); Values-oriented people tend to subject their thoughts to their values.

So at the end of an argument, someone could try to make me "feel better" by saying lots of nice things and apologizing for the conflict... but if the conclusion doesn't make sense, then it still doesn't make me feel better. It continues to eat at me until I can point out what doesn't make sense and have it addressed somehow (even if it's just the other person acknowledging my point and then refusing to agree. At that point, they've acknowledged the inconsistency, so whether or not they want to agree is inconsequential).

I still tend to do better with NFs than SFs, overall. Even when T/F conflicts, the N connection creates a bridge.

Very true, I agree with all of that. In fact, it often makes me feel worse - insulted even, patronized, when someone seems to be trying to paper over obvious cracks and inconsistencies, trying to get me to swallow unreasonable behaviour without complaint, by shushing and cooing at me as though I were a mere child. And nothing's worse than when that person then tries to blacken me to other people by saying "I even apologized and tried to smooth things over but he still wouldn't have it!" It wasn't an apology that I wanted or needed - just an acknowledgement, as you say, of the inconsistencies.

edit - I can swallow it if someone can say "Yes, I know it's not logical but that's the way I feel". What I can't swallow is when someone effectively expects me to believe something is reasonable that to me, screamingly obviously isn't, on the basis that they 'said sorry' - which they clearly weren't - or that thing: 'sorry it makes you feel that way', I mean what's that supposed to mean, dammit? That's like invalidating me on both levels - both logical and emotional. It's saying you insist you're in the right, you believe me to be both irrational for not agreeing and my feelings on the matter inappropriate and regrettable? That's supposed to make me feel better?? :steam:

 

[nightning]

Does this actually help a feeler? I always assumed this was universal.

Not for this feeler... All I can think of to is this: "Okay! I get it that you care... kind of. But please, sometimes enough is enough. Say anymore and you'll be shooting yourself in the foot." A hug and telling me that if I want to talk about it, the person will be there serves so much better.

 

[zarc]

Hmmm... so thinking style is dependent on type. Eri and Nemo's seems to be more Ne focused. Like grabbing bits and pieces... connections as stuff flies around, while anon and Tallulah's are much more focused. I think I've noticed the pattern on the Feeler's thread as well... the differences between types.

Nemo's an ENTP Ne Ti while Eri/Anon/Tallulah are INTPs with Ti Ne. You say Eri and Nemo's seem to be more Ne focused but then Anon and Tallulah's are much more focused? err But reading all of the INTPs posts, they made it seem mostly scattered which they filter through without being easily distracted or it's somewhat of a step-by-step process. Especially reading Eri/Anon's reponses, they make it seem as though it's more controlled(Ti) but that they just gather tons of connections (Ne) and focus/control on what they want to figure out once they realise it (Ti). I'd think ENTPs are more jumpy outwardly about it, whereas INTPs seem more solid outwardly. So both can be focused, it's just displayed/processed a bit differently.

That's what I suspected. Most thinkers have a way with using words concisely. It's something I wish I can do. Being able to explain myself adequately without a ton of rambling. Usually it takes me forever to figure out what I wanted to say. I intuitively know it but it doesn't come out readily. Then there are times where I have to talk everything out, step by slow step.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words. I'd think they'd be more likely of being so with objective material or conversing with objective people as it's a comfort zone of sorts. Being quicker to speak might not necessarily happen to them sooner, either. INTJs may take as long as you in figuring out what they want to say (it's the Dom Ni) or likely with most Introverts too, regardless of T vs F (the processing will be different or where/what/whom the focus is on though with Dom Si vs Dom Fi etc). Reading MX5's post, he being an INTJ, it made sense to me when he explained that it's hard explaining his thought process (Dom Ni seems like a freakin smoke of crack or "Voodoo" as some people call it, eh? Hmph. ). Some INTJs might not want to explain either, figured out or not. Too bad ("WhyTH can't you figure it out if I did? Save me the grief of explaining, really, though I'm not telling you that!"). He gave an excellent INTJ (even INFJ) explanation that if he flip flops on a thought, he'll force himself to choose (That'a Ni! Focus on one, right or wrong! ) and that he dislikes being pressed to explain himself as it's not important to HIM that other people know where he gathered his info, only that they should care THAT he knows being enough. Ah, the differences of xxTx's !

In a more emotional situation, it may be hard for xxTx's to word what they'd like to say or convey their thoughts. Irregardless, if they've emotionally filtered what they think is appropriate to the given situation/person. It might be hard trying to reach out or not sound too logically cold, even if they really care as some people might misconstrue their emotions or what they say anyway or they THINK the people will. Feelings of others can be tricky, esp. if they don't know the person or the person appears superficial to them, aye. I know that in my case, being an INFJ, either with objective material/people or subjective, I may have worded everything I want to say exactly in my head but then the translation may become lost or altered when I speak. Though speaking "emotionally" is easier with others, even if I'm objectively critical about it all. I've mostly balanced my Ti out well enough to counterbalance losing my train of thought or speaking them out. However, it can be very hard if I'm interrupted or not given enough time to think, so I've likely lost my thoughts or the precise wording of them, or I'm trying to keep up with someone who won't be quiet (I've noticed one ENTP I've gotten to know who frequently does that with me, eh :rolli: Still, I think of it as training for me. And that I might train those who are similar as well, such as shutting up to let another person speak or finish their point without them trying to Ne-play and snatch and rocketing into another dimension. lol)

I've noticed this with sub as well. Somehow Ne seems so much more energetic than Ni. Hehe!

I think that it seems more energetic because Ne is outwardly spiraled with a future focus, especially in relation to people and future themes based off the ideas that Ne connects due to people or through them. Ni can be energetic in the sense that there's intense focus on sifting through the data/info but coming to a conclusion as opposed to keep jumping. Sure, it can jump again, but it'll likely do it after the concluded thought or it becomes frustrated because that former concluded thought wasn't able in being concluded. But, say, when a Dom Ne is focused on getting the exact info they want from a person or source, they seem focused because they will be more so or appear more aggressive about it. If a Dom Ni is excited about something, they may spiral into an upward spin of thoughts (whether they outwardly show they're excited or not, depends on them. Though I think they won't show it as much or often as opposed to a Dom Ne unless they're comfortable with the people surrounding them or they aren't aware they're with others...).

Anyhoo, I think if you'd asked what type Thinkers are, it might've helped you to see how their Dom and Secondary CPs tinker, helping your focus in seeing the pattern b/w them. Such as with ENTPs and INTPs being similar yet different.

Excuse me.

 

[Totenkindly]

Does this actually help a feeler? I always assumed this was universal.

Well... all the feelers I have had tense discussions / arguments with usually want to feel heard and have me give some sign that I am sympathetic [and usually this sign is hard for me to give, because just "explaining how I understand" does not cut it]... They do not seem to much care if my view is "logically correct" either, even if they agree later it was. They usually have wanted to be affirmed first, then come to some consensus afterwards.

I notice with me I'd still rather have them acknowledge that what I am saying is TRUE -- before they start trying to make me feel better.

It wasn't an apology that I wanted or needed - just an acknowledgement, as you say, of the inconsistencies.

Yes, exactly. And honestly, I don't know if this is normal or not, but sometimes I don't even care if they apologize even if they wronged me... as long as I feel like they accurately have described the situation and acknowledge what they did. (It depends on exactly what it was.) It's when someone obfuscates or glosses over or conveniently makes themselves looks better than they know they were, that's when I get upset.

So someone can tell me they did something to me just to hurt my feelings, and I actually can respect that and say, "Okay. As long as we're clear." Yes, it's nice if they apologize, but I don't want an apology they don't mean. And someone else will try to blame me for misinterpreting them, or claim they were doing something else (when it's clear they weren't), etc., and THAT will make me furious.

edit - I can swallow it if someone can say "Yes, I know it's not logical but that's the way I feel".

Yes, that is a "fair" statement to make. THey acknowledged that their feelings don't make sense, and then they are allowed to express what they are feeling as a reality in itself. That is perfectly fine -- because it is accurately delineating fact from feeling. Everything is clearly and accurately defined for what it is.

What I can't swallow is when someone effectively expects me to believe something is reasonable that to me, screamingly obviously isn't, on the basis that they 'said sorry' - which they clearly weren't - or that thing: 'sorry it makes you feel that way', I mean what's that supposed to mean, dammit?

ha... yeah... that last bit. I avoid saying that myself nowadays, it's such a bad line. Because I know when *I* say it, I mean, "I know you strongly believe that, but I totally think you're wrong."

 

[Seanan]

ALERT!!!! from an INTP of course.

Anyone see a problem here? (as its a good example):

Quote:
That's what I suspected. Most thinkers have a way with using words concisely. It's something I wish I can do. Being able to explain myself adequately without a ton of rambling. Usually it takes me forever to figure out what I wanted to say. I intuitively know it but it doesn't come out readily. Then there are times where I have to talk everything out, step by slow step.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words.

See? Now this is what happens.

IRL... I would jump right on that! just like here... and I quit reading. Because we're no longer communicating effectively (assuming our goal is that) when the meaning has changed entirely... and, in fact, someone is being accused of speaking an untruth based on the words not being heard as said. Yes, INTPs are sticklers on it for good reason.

Edit: well I happen to be one of those so used myself but I think most type of "T" do it. Simon Cowel cracked me up last night because Paula said "I hope you let everyone hear what we see." Simon gave her this SayWhat? face and simply said "HEAR what we SEE." LOL The look on his face was precious.

 

[nightning]

Nemo's an ENTP Ne Ti while Eri/Anon/Tallulah are INTPs with Ti Ne. You say Eri and Nemo's seem to be more Ne focused but then Anon and Tallulah's are much more focused? err But reading all of the INTPs posts, they made it seem mostly scattered which they filter through without being easily distracted or it's somewhat of a step-by-step process. Especially reading Eri/Anon's reponses, they make it seem as though it's more controlled(Ti) but that they just gather tons of connections (Ne) and focus/control on what they want to figure out once they realise it (Ti). I'd think ENTPs are more jumpy outwardly about it, whereas INTPs seem more solid outwardly. So both can be focused, it's just displayed/processed a bit differently.

My comment was more related to which function they use first and more of... I believe all four of them uses Ne first than Ti... But for Nemo and Eri... Ne is more prominent. Obviously You can see that Eri's use of Ne is much more directed... I believe she called it snatching pieces from the whirlwind or whatnot... It's Ti directed use of Ne. While Nemo is more free... Letting Ne go and having Ti pick its target.

Anyways... Ne (from most apparently to least) Nemo > Eri > Anon ~ Tallulah. That was the observation I made.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words. I'd think they'd be more likely of being so with objective material or conversing with objective people as it's a comfort zone of sorts. Being quicker to speak might not necessarily happen to them sooner, either. INTJs may take as long as you in figuring out what they want to say (it's the Dom Ni) or likely with most Introverts too, regardless of T vs F (the processing will be different or where/what/whom the focus is on though with Dom Si vs Dom Fi etc). Reading MX5's post, he being an INTJ, it made sense to me when he explained that it's hard explaining his thought process (Dom Ni seems like a freakin smoke of crack or "Voodoo" as some people call it, eh? Hmph. ). Some INTJs might not want to explain either, figured out or not. Too bad ("WhyTH can't you figure it out if I did? Save me the grief of explaining, really, though I'm not telling you that!"). He gave an excellent INTJ (even INFJ) explanation that if he flip flops on a thought, he'll force himself to choose (That'a Ni! Focus on one, right or wrong! ) and that he dislikes being pressed to explain himself as it's not important to HIM that other people know where he gathered his info, only that they should care THAT he knows being enough. Ah, the differences of xxTx's !

In general... I'm relating to the speed of translation, nothing to do with the length of posts etc. From people I deal with in real life and what I observed here. The Ts tend to be able to describe things in a manner that are readily understood easier than Fs. Even on this forum, the precise articulate Fs (FineLine for example) get to that stage only after extensive practice. Obviously the difference between dominant T vs dominant N affects how much translation you need to do (and thus slow down the process). But with Ts... In my opinion, since their thoughts have already been placed more or less systematically (logically), it takes less work for them to structure the thoughts into something coherent. The Fs... I find especially for myself... that stupid "voodoo Ni" there's an extra step involve in wangling my thoughts into acceptable systematic patterns so that other people can understand it.

I think that it seems more energetic because Ne is outwardly spiraled with a future focus, especially in relation to people and future themes based off the ideas that Ne connects due to people or through them. Ni can be energetic in the sense that there's intense focus on sifting through the data/info but coming to a conclusion as opposed to keep jumping. Sure, it can jump again, but it'll likely do it after the concluded thought or it becomes frustrated because that former concluded thought wasn't able in being concluded. But, say, when a Dom Ne is focused on getting the exact info they want from a person or source, they seem focused because they will be more so or appear more aggressive about it. If a Dom Ni is excited about something, they may spiral into an upward spin of thoughts (whether they outwardly show they're excited or not, depends on them. Though I think they won't show it as much or often as opposed to a Dom Ne unless they're comfortable with the people surrounding them or they aren't aware they're with others...).

Yes, the direction of energy is different between Ne and Ni. Ne spreads across linking different ideas while Ni digs inward in order to link attribute inherent in ideas into a whole. Also the fact that Ne dominants are extroverts while Ni dominants are introverts affect how much apparent energy is output.

 

[Tallulah]

ALERT!!!! from an INTP of course.

Anyone see a problem here? (as its a good example):

Quote:
That's what I suspected. Most thinkers have a way with using words concisely. It's something I wish I can do. Being able to explain myself adequately without a ton of rambling. Usually it takes me forever to figure out what I wanted to say. I intuitively know it but it doesn't come out readily. Then there are times where I have to talk everything out, step by slow step.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words.

See? Now this is what happens.

IRL... I would jump right on that! just like here... and I quit reading. Because we're no longer communicating effectively (assuming our goal is that) when the meaning has changed entirely... and, in fact, someone is being accused of speaking an untruth based on the words not being heard as said. Yes, INTPs are sticklers on it for good reason.

Edit: well I happen to be one of those so used myself but I think most type of "T" do it. Simon Cowel cracked me up last night because Paula said "I hope you let everyone hear what we see." Simon gave her this SayWhat? face and simply said "HEAR what we SEE." LOL The look on his face was precious.

Yeah, I don't do that, though...I'll wait to hear/read what the person has to say, and take away the larger picture. If you get too hung up on the preciseness of words, you can get stuck on the first sentence and then can't proceed further. (Universal "you," here.) I tend to try to get the gist of what a person is saying, and then I might try to clarify it in "my own language" to make sure I got it. Now, if I were editing someone's work or grading a paper, I'd show them how certain words might be misleading, and a different one might be clearer. But if the idea is still solid, I won't say anything in conversation.*

In this case, the evidence that followed proved more of a dialogue than a challenge. Is the most/always stuff what you're referring to as being the misunderstanding?

In the case of Paula, I'm surprised Simon says anything at all to her anymore...it just makes her talk more. She is definitely a case of someone who doesn't need to think aloud. I kind of wish she'd write her thoughts down while the contestant is singing so she'd have at least a basic outline of what she wants to say.

*Edited to add: I am not saying anyone's posts need "editing."

 

[nightning]

ALERT!!!! from an INTP of course.

Anyone see a problem here? (as its a good example):

Quote:
That's what I suspected. Most thinkers have a way with using words concisely. It's something I wish I can do. Being able to explain myself adequately without a ton of rambling. Usually it takes me forever to figure out what I wanted to say. I intuitively know it but it doesn't come out readily. Then there are times where I have to talk everything out, step by slow step.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words.

See? Now this is what happens.

IRL... I would jump right on that! just like here... and I quit reading. Because we're no longer communicating effectively (assuming our goal is that) when the meaning has changed entirely... and, in fact, someone is being accused of speaking an untruth based on the words not being heard as said. Yes, INTPs are sticklers on it for good reason.

Edit: well I happen to be one of those so used myself but I think most type of "T" do it. Simon Cowel cracked me up last night because Paula said "I hope you let everyone hear what we see." Simon gave her this SayWhat? face and simply said "HEAR what we SEE." LOL The look on his face was precious.

*blinks confusingly at Seanan*
IRL... I would jump right on that! ... just like here? ... Hear what we SEE?

I do that too... I had to reread what you posted three times. The first time I glaze over after then "just like here?" The second time I read through it without understanding half of it. 3 times.

Yes... being on the same page is very important.

 

[zarc]

ALERT!!!! from an INTP of course.

Anyone see a problem here? (as its a good example):

Quote:
That's what I suspected. Most thinkers have a way with using words concisely. It's something I wish I can do. Being able to explain myself adequately without a ton of rambling. Usually it takes me forever to figure out what I wanted to say. I intuitively know it but it doesn't come out readily. Then there are times where I have to talk everything out, step by slow step.

I don't think that's necessarily true, that they'll always be concise with their words.

See? Now this is what happens.

IRL... I would jump right on that! just like here... and I quit reading. Because we're no longer communicating effectively (assuming our goal is that) when the meaning has changed entirely... and, in fact, someone is being accused of speaking an untruth based on the words not being heard as said. Yes, INTPs are sticklers on it for good reason.

Edit: well I happen to be one of those so used myself but I think most type of "T" do it. Simon Cowel cracked me up last night because Paula said "I hope you let everyone hear what we see." Simon gave her this SayWhat? face and simply said "HEAR what we SEE." LOL The look on his face was precious.

Meow. Now pet me, I feel sad. However, the rest of what I said wasn't only about that quote.

Edit: And no one should be watching a show involving Paula! It might cause you night terrors if you're not careful....

Edit!:

In this case, the evidence that followed proved more of a dialogue than a challenge. Is the most/always stuff what you're referring to as being the misunderstanding?

Yup, dialogue. I'd think the most/always was what she meant...but uh I won't be 100% certain this time.

 

[nemo]

Just for the record, I find the Ni "voodoo-witchcraft-cosmic-logic" to be astoundingly cool. When I describe it as such, I mean it in the best of connotations.

And yes, I have Ne coming out the rear. I halfway want to upload one of my lectures or something to Youtube so you can see how ridiculous it is.

 

[nightning]

Meow. Now pet me, I feel sad. However, the rest of what I said wasn't only about that quote.

*mouse goes give duckie a pat* Yes yes... I know and have read it.

Just for the record, I find the Ni "voodoo-witchcraft-cosmic-logic" to be astoundingly cool. When I describe it as such, I mean it in the best of connotations.

And yes, I have Ne coming out the rear. I halfway want to upload one of my lectures or something to Youtube so you can see how ridiculous it is.

Who says voodoo is a bad thing? Have you seen the shops in the mall? I don't know if they're around at your place... but those "voodoo dolls" are quite a fad here. There's even a store that sells nothing but those. Voodoo dolls keychains... decorative items...

As to uploading lectures.... Can you do that? It'll be great!

 

[zarc]

*mouse goes give duckie a pat* Yes yes... I know and have read it.

*coos*

Who says voodoo is a bad thing?

I've been told that! That Ni is just crazy..."Voodoo." and such.. numerous times by an ENTP brat no less (nemo, yes, you'll know who! )

As to uploading lectures.... Can you do that? It'll be great!

Yea, I second that! I just...have such visions of how he'll be, it's not even funny at this point..I half expect him to be wearing his Maximus Prime helmet with a pipe sticking out his mouth and lots of green things attached to his body or picked up as strays from playing in nature....all the while his students are so used to it that they no longer blink anymore!!!

 

[Seanan]

Meow. Now pet me, I feel sad. However, the rest of what I said wasn't only about that quote.

Edit: And no one should be watching a show involving Paula! It might cause you night terrors if you're not careful....

Awe... it was intended to be fun.

Sooo right... she drives me right up a wall! But I love watching those kids.

 

[zarc]

Awe... it was intended to be fun.

Fun or not, you were right. I find nothing wrong with owning up to it. It makes a person stronger!

Sooo right... she drives me right up a wall! But I love watching those kids.

I've only bothered watching the show during the preliminaries so I can laugh at the horribly atrocious people who are likely that bad believing they are great or are paid to sing/act that badly believing they are great. And honestly, I had to frickin search the name of the show. I kept thinking "America's Best ____". I'm soooooo happy I actually forgot it's American Idol... Demonic Si can be so wickedly blessful at times.

The only "reality" show I've found enjoyable is So You Think You Can Dance. But I only started watching after a time because I feared it as I do most reality shows...

 

[substitute]

Just for the record, I find the Ni "voodoo-witchcraft-cosmic-logic" to be astoundingly cool. When I describe it as such, I mean it in the best of connotations.

Heh, yeah, like Hercule Poirot, an INTJ if ever there was one

And yes, I have Ne coming out the rear. I halfway want to upload one of my lectures or something to Youtube so you can see how ridiculous it is.

No way man it's cool. Ne is the only thing that can get me public speaking. If I know what I have to say before hand, if there's expectations that I have to fulfl a certain script, I freeze and get really nervous cos I'm terrified of making a mistake and everyone knowing I got it wrong. I just suck, cos the audience can see there's no enthusiasm about it, I know I'm just going through the motions, I can't get into it; it's boring and dull to me so it is to them too.

But if I just don't bother with the script and let the Ne flow, just say what comes to mind, then it's impossible to make a mistake cos nobody knows what I'm gonna say, not even me. And whilst I'm thinking "this is ridiculous, I'm just rambling, I'm making it up as I go", afterwards everyone tells me it was great, they love my talks, "you take the audience on a whirlwind tour of the galaxy in fifteen minutes, you get us thinking in ways we never thought possible" one person said to me. That wasn't my intention - I was just taking whatever the cosmos threw at me and showing it to them - I can't even remember what I said!!

Anyway this is digressing isn't it? This belongs in a 'what's it like to be an intuitive' thread!!

 

[ygolo]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?


There are always several streams of thought happening in parallel.

• One is a stream of observations/speculations. It goes "It seems that <insert speculative observation here>." When I become more sure of my speculative observations, I often drop the "It seems that," part. This is probably my dominant stream. You can probably see it in all my posts including this one. It is at least a good candidate for my most productive.
  
• Another is a "work" stream. It is not as prevalent as the other streams, as I have to put effort into making it progress and often "stall" the other streams. This one makes observations and creates logical inferences (quite different, and generally more painstaking than the "speculative observations" I mentioned above). I have to slow my thought processes down to use it, but it is almost always rewarding. Usually, I need to keep a log or at least have something to scribble on.
  
• Another is a day-dream stream, where I am off in some fantasy world doing some fantasy stuff. It can be anything really, from very far-fetched things like flying on a spaceship, and making love to a beautiful woman on a deserted island, to more reality based things, like having a fake conversation with a friend of mine.
  
• Another is a constant stream of desires. It goes, "I want this," "I want that," "I like this, I want more," "I don't like this, and I want it to stop," and various other thoughts like that.
  
• Another is a kind of "ckecklist" that has dates and times of when I need to be somewhere and for what reason, and is constantly assessing what I am doing relative to that "checklist." It has all the dependencies built-in (and tends to be hyper-conservative/eager in creating links between what needs to happen for some thing else). This one is annoying and seems to cause a lot of stress for me.
  
• Yet another is an internal monitoring stream. This one tracks any strange sensations (back pain, discomfort, dizziness, thirst, anxiety, elation, strange urges, etc.) It also tracks what my body, face etc. are doing.

Generally the output thoughts from all my streams of thoughts are inputs to all the others.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

Logic is very important. It is how I decide something. If there is no logic, there is no decision. period. I have no choice in this matter.

That of-course doesn't mean there is no action. You could claim that I am making thousands of "decisions" when I drive or walk or do other things like this, but I believe this stretches the word "decision" rather thinly. When I play sports, a lot of things come naturally-- fake-outs, taking a shot, etc. But this is not the same as "decision making." At a lot of times in games I do make conscious decisions, but even these are based on logic. "He favors driving to the right so will force him to try to drive to the right, etc."

Logic requires models to function. The accuracy and efficacy of the models determine how well I make decisions. These models take emotions(both mine and others') into account.

"Over-think" is a phrase I hate. As far as I am concerned, I never over-think things. When someone accuses me of "over-thinking," I have to fight down a strange urge to punch the person. (Please don't take offense, it is just an urge, and you have not accused me of anything).

Still, I have a policy of using the simplest model that will work. Sometimes, I will choose a model that is too simplistic and gets me into trouble. At other times, I will choose a model that is too complicated to get timely conclusions from. This is when people accuse me of "over-thinking" things. That's how I know that someone believes I am "over-thinking" things--they tell me (at their own risk ).

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

I can go through my steps fairly easily, and fairly automatically to myself. However, significant translation is required to make it understandable by others.

4) Anything else you feel like sharing.

Not at the moment.

 

[25Hour]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?
Not sure how to describe it, really.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

I've always thought of logic and feelings as occupying two different realms of decision making. Feeling will give me long-term goals, like "I want to be a chemist," or "I want to improve my friendship with X, Y, and Z," or "I want to have children someday." Logic will then tell me how to achieve one of those objectives in a way that won't interfere with any of the others. Or with my sense of morality, natch.

I also think of there being two types of feelings-- there are some, like the ones above, that are very stable and pretty much unchanging. These are feelings that should be listened to, that should guide me throughout my life. The other type of feeling is the short-duration sort, impulses which tell me things like "This class is hard, I want to quit," or "I'm scared to meet new people," or "This guy's a jackass, I should tell him so." Those feelings are stupid, and I mean that in the most direct sense possible-- they do not take the future into account, and will disappear in a few short hours/days/months, leaving me with the consequences of having acted on them. So, I disregard them whenever they have a conflict with my long-term feelings. (Of course, sometimes the impulses are correct, but that's not their fault-- remember the stopped clock.) I don't succeed in suppressing those impulses all the time, but it's a rule I try to live by.

I always know when I've over-thought something because I'll keep going back to the same line of reasoning over and over.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

I've found it pretty easy to translate my thoughts into words. In fact, I find it useful to do so even when I don't have to communicate-- it's much easier to see gaps in your reasoning when you've put the whole train of logic all down on paper. So most of the time, in explaining something to another person I'll have already thought out the words necessary just in the course of understanding it for myself.

 

[mortabunt]

Cold; clear.

 

[Eagle]

Cold; clear.

Does this look cold and clear to you?

Cold and clear is a misconception, a failed stereotype.

 

[nightning]

Does this look cold and clear to you?

Cold and clear is a misconception, a failed stereotype.

That's a fuzzy wuzzy ENTP if I do say so myself

I think he meant Ti or Te isolated is cold. A T isn't limited to one function and so can be fuzzy wuzzy like.