Symbolic learning: Part of the J/P dichotomy?

[Athenian200]

This is an idea that a friend of mine had (I'm keeping them anonymous for now because I'm not sure they want the attention). Anyway, they believed that J's think symbolically, which would mean through words/numbers/icons. P's on the other hand, supposedly think graphically/visually, which would explain to me why their thoughts seem to be less fixed, like a movie that changes scenes from one moment to the next, and mine are arranged more like a book. I can't verify this idea, but it seems at least plausible, since interpreting reality through words, which point to things in a more specific way than pictures, would lead to slightly more predictable and rigid behaviors.

As for myself, I usually have to use language to comprehend my thoughts, and when I see a picture/envision something, I almost immediately translate it into words/symbols to make sense of them to myself and others. Language is also my strongest skill set.

So, do all Perceiving types think graphically, or do some of you think in words as well? Do all other Judges think in words/symbols? I don't know where this theory came from, and I'd like to see if it actually applies to most people's preferences.

 

[Usehername]

Thinking visually is something I'm terribly poor at. (I don't think in words, either... I've been wondering how I think. I really can't describe it. I have to translate thoughts to "words" to communicate them to others, but it's certainly not a visual thing going on.)

I heard that women are generally not visual, whereas more men are. I know I certainly fit into that stereotype.

 

[Lateralus]

Well, I definitely think visually and I'm a P.

 

[Usehername]

Well, I definitely think visually and I'm a P.

And a male, right? (Let's see about Usehername's theory while we're at it!)

 

[Kaveri]

I wrote a lengthy response but am editting it away because frankly my point was that I can relate to both thinking/learning styles and I can't limit myself to one and I don't know which I prefer or which is more me.

 

[Natrushka]

Female, J, very visual, but then I also have a near photographic memory.

However, for years I used to say "I see words" and be unable to explain to others just what I meant. I think I use symbols / icons the most when dealing with my second language. I am fluent in both, but have a definite preference, I tend to use symbols when thinking in French.

 

[Athenian200]

I'm female.

I would prefer J but I act on P, so I guess I'm P.

I'm not sure if I think in symbols or images. I can identify with both.

I have a habit of translating emotions and sounds into (semi-)abstract visualizations: for instance, if I feel anxious and stressed, I may have a vision of being stuck in a burning house or when I hear a melody, I might think of it as a misty combination of pink and grey or waves and coils of very pure colours. I also have visualizations for numbers: zero is like a surface below which numbers spiral down into dark, icy nothingness and above zero numbers look more like a staircase. I like geometry and other visual fields of math.

But also, when I look at a mathematical figure, I translate it into words. When I speak or listen to someone else speak, I often imagine the sentences in written language. It helps me to concentrate to read aloud and I do think in sentences. I can translate visions into language. My visions are not very detailed-- I've usually found it quite difficult to imagine book characters' facial features, for example (but it hasn't bothered me).

That actually sounds like it might be symbolic rather than visual. So, do you need a certain amount of structure in your behavior, or can you just deal with anything spur of the moment? I'm a J because I need a certain amount of order and predictability, not because I'm organized. In fact, my home is usually a mess unless there's a possibility that people will come over. But I'm very particular about my grammar and spelling, and I can keep my ideas and definitions in good order. NJ's are somewhat different from SJ's in what they organize. However, whenever I make an appointment or have a deadline, I always arrive/finish early if it's at all possible.

 

[wildcat]

I wrote a lengthy response but am editting it away because frankly my point was that I can relate to both thinking/learning styles and I can't limit myself to one and I don't know which I prefer or which is more me.

I am sorry that you edited a very good post.

 

[Sahara]

I think I do a combination of both to be honest, I can visualise very well, and sometimes do think in moving pictures, but sometimes I think in words, just words, I remember because once when I was interested in astral projection and things like that, I had alot of trouble letting go of thinking in words, I couldn't just visualise without using words, I would use the words to create the visual as it was something unfamiliar.

Once it becomes familiar, no words are needed, does this make any sense to you?

 

[Geoff]

This is an idea that a friend of mine had (I'm keeping them anonymous for now because I'm not sure they want the attention). Anyway, they believed that J's think symbolically, which would mean through words/numbers/icons. P's on the other hand, supposedly think graphically/visually, which would explain to me why their thoughts seem to be less fixed, like a movie that changes scenes from one moment to the next, and mine are arranged more like a book. I can't verify this idea, but it seems at least plausible, since interpreting reality through words, which point to things in a more specific way than pictures, would lead to slightly more predictable and rigid behaviors.

As for myself, I usually have to use language to comprehend my thoughts, and when I see a picture/envision something, I almost immediately translate it into words/symbols to make sense of them to myself and others. Language is also my strongest skill set.

So, do all Perceiving types think graphically, or do some of you think in words as well? Do all other Judges think in words/symbols? I don't know where this theory came from, and I'd like to see if it actually applies to most people's preferences.

This may be more extraversion vs intraversion, than J vs P. A mechanism for interacting with the world (either internalised as thoughts and ideas, or externalised in visible symbols and notation)

-Geoff

 

[The Ü™]

I'm visual in that I get images in my head, but I prefer to read about something than see graphic charts and stuff...although I'm not particularly bad at either.

 

[Lateralus]

And a male, right? (Let's see about Usehername's theory while we're at it!)

Yep, I'm male...at least the last time I checked.

 

[lastrailway]

Well, no, I believe I am a P but I think almost exclusively in words. If I ever think visually is or when I am terribly stressed/in danger/in fear of danger or if I press myself to do so.
Of what I understand of the type theory (not many things, yet), I fail to see the relation between thinking visually and being P (that is, having either thinking or feeling as a dominant function). I am tempted to correlate it more with the S-N axis, and I would say that an S might prefer to use words since they prefer to use more concrete stimuli as an input. A N would possibly prefer more abstract, visual or non-clearly-shaped kind of thoughts. Maybe the visual-symbolic axis could relate with a Ni-Ne-Se-Si order.

 

[Kaveri]

That actually sounds like it might be symbolic rather than visual. So, do you need a certain amount of structure in your behavior, or can you just deal with anything spur of the moment? I'm a J because I need a certain amount of order and predictability, not because I'm organized. In fact, my home is usually a mess unless there's a possibility that people will come over. But I'm very particular about my grammar and spelling, and I can keep my ideas and definitions in good order. NJ's are somewhat different from SJ's in what they organize. However, whenever I make an appointment or have a deadline, I always arrive/finish early if it's at all possible.

I enjoy many spur-of-the-moment activities such as improvized dancing.

I try to write and express myself as correctly as possible and grammatical errors often upset me. Although. INFPs and INTPs are both known to be good writers, INTPs in particular have a tendency to be especially thorough, so I'm not sure if this is a J/P thing.

Here's what I wrote in another thread:

My room is messy.
But it bothers me. Disorder does unsettle me.
I'm often late and tend to misplace and forget and lose things.
But I would love to lead a systematic and organized life.
I try many different things and am interested in a lot of stuff.
But I wish I could stick with something, develop one of my skills to "championship" level, and have a more clearly defined and solid identity.
I'm open-minded to new ideas and I never consider my thoughts, opinions and ideas "final".
But I dream of knowing things for sure-- I simply think it's practical to keep my mind open because I don't believe that my thoughts could ever *be* right but since I want to keep them as close to "right" as possible, I need to be ready to develop and enhance them.
I question myself a lot.
But I would love to be consistent and confident.
Some people have said that I seem to have a fear of making final decisions.
But of course I would love to find something that is appealing enough to make it a final part of myself/my value system/my life.

(One of my next goals is to define my principles and values clearly and then rely upon them.)

So, for the most part, I would prefer J but I systematically act on P.

I've had J phases, though. During them I have *felt* happy. I have focused on a few things, set goals for myself, achieved them, been productive, improved my abilities, followed to-do lists and felt optimistic and thought that life is simple. An outsider might have noted that it isn't "right" in their opinion to value oneself in terms of achievements, but it's what has genuinely made me happy, although sometimes it might have gotten a bit out of proportion, but never dangerously much.

The problem is that so far, I've never been able to keep up a happy, structured phase for a very long time. Most of the time I've been very disorganized, constantly losing things and chronically late. I've been widely known as the absent-mided and disorganized girl who always has to borrow others' things because she has misplaced hers.

Maybe it's just that modern life is so complicated that it's very difficult to focus on just a few things. I like it when I have a few duties and a few free-time activities per day, but when there are too many duties or free-time activities to handle, I tend to slacken.

So, if I'm really a J who just acts like a P, then the explanation might be
a) self-diagnosed ADD without hyperactivity (can a J have this disorder? how can it be cured?)
b) that I'm so iNtuitive that I'm not practical enough to keep things in order (N is my strongest function)
c) some other explanation

 

[Kaveri]

Well, no, I believe I am a P but I think almost exclusively in words. If I ever think visually is or when I am terribly stressed/in danger/in fear of danger or if I press myself to do so.
Of what I understand of the type theory (not many things, yet), I fail to see the relation between thinking visually and being P (that is, having either thinking or feeling as a dominant function). I am tempted to correlate it more with the S-N axis, and I would say that an S might prefer to use words since they prefer to use more concrete stimuli as an input. A N would possibly prefer more abstract, visual or non-clearly-shaped kind of thoughts. Maybe the visual-symbolic axis could relate with a Ni-Ne-Se-Si order.

I was just thinking that visualizing would be more S and symbolizing more N; images are more detailed and particular and they can be thought of as representations of something concrete, while symbols represent a whole class of things. An example: a model of a mathematical 3D graphic can actually be built as a tangible object, while it's more difficult to make symbols concrete (unless you just draw or sculpt a symbol, but it's different... how can I explain how it's different... must think about this). Another example: an image of a clown represents the particular clown in question, whereas the word "clown" represents the class of all clowns.

I think that a visualization is a representation of a structure that can be fed to a system as symbols. The system then reads the symbols and generates a visualization. The symbols are like the hidden structure behind the image, and seeing them in the image would be like peeking behind the scenes. An example about html language. A web designer that reads websites as html language would be a symbolizer, and a web designer who visualizes html language as websites would be a visualizer. Hmm. I think they can both be equally iNtuitive, though.

Generally the range of symbols that are used in creating language is limited, while it would be more difficult to reduce an image to its parts in the first place. A limited range of options - J - countless options - P - yes, I can see a theoretical connection to J/P, although I don't know if it applies to real people.

Note that I believe that usually a person who can read an image as symbols can also visualize the symbols as an image, and vice versa.

EDIT. Hmm. I hope this post is not too vague.

 

[Blackwater]

Jung says that Is need symbols to understand reality while Es need symbols to understand the world of ideas. I don't know if he's spot on there; everyone uses symbols to different extents, really.

 

[TaylorS]

I'm a visual thinker to an almost absurd degree. I have trouble explaining things in a concise fashion because of the difficulty in "translating" my mental images into words, thus I tend to ramble on and on, especially if the person I'm talking to is an SJ. I never forget the face of an acquaintance, but I suck at remembering names. I also remember where a place is physically relative to other place very well but suck at remembering exact addresses.

I'll guess that NPs tend to be visual thinkers and SJs tend to be verbal/symbolic thinkers, with NJs and SPs being somewhere in between.

 

[lastrailway]

...Is need symbols to understand reality while Es need symbols to understand the world of ideas.

...visualizing would be more S and symbolizing more N
...a model of a mathematical 3D graphic can actually be built as a tangible object, while it's more difficult to make symbols concrete
...I think that a visualization is a representation of a structure that can be fed to a system as symbols.

I try to see your point, Kaveri, but I still consider symbols to be far more concrete than images. As you said, the range of symbols used is limited, and I would like to add that the perception of concepts through the symbols is limited as well. That would be the words or numerical or other symbols we use. Because I think an image or a visual representation usually carry more symbolism that the mere use of words (I hope this makes sense, I have a rather limited vocabulary in English and I don't know how to express better what I want to say). A word has a preset meaning, the concepts in which it corresponds are clearly defined and the margins for misinterpreting it are whether the sender and the receiver know the same parts of the code.
I see in your answer that you use examples of graphics, but I believe graphics to be a very limited form of visual representation and, anyway, few people would ever show a graphic without adding words to explain it - or better to define it.
A mental image (at least as far as I can imagine; I 've stated before that I find very difficult to think with images) is something heavily charged with emotions, states of mind, colours, concepts, interpretations, all in one single image, rarely static. It is a very condensed represantation of many different levels of though, when words are more clear, unambiguous and simplifistic, and much more static.
That is why I think that a person with S preferences would welcome a clear and efficient tool to classify, filter and finally use the stimuli they perceive, while a person with N preferences would generate abstract thoughs in the form of images/visualisations.

...Generally the range of symbols that are used in creating language is limited, while it would be more difficult to reduce an image to its parts in the first place.

And here we finally agree. Though I would not connect the limited range of words with the P/J. I tend to think that the P and J dichotomy refers simply to whether the individual prefers to use the external world for input (S/N, J) or the internal (T/F, P).
And one word on the I/E thing: I think that, if I am not very mistaken when saying that the S/N axis describes the relation of the individual with the outer world and the T/F with the inner, then this statement would coincide with the opinion I expressed, that the tendency to visualise or to use symbols correlates up to an extend with the S/N preferences.
I would like to add that I am not really familiar with most of the MBTI aspects, so I might be very mistaken in all I said. And since my English is quite poor, I might have failed to explain fully my point of view (the use of words limits me )

 

[NocturnalSun]

I have a hard time learning via listening alone. I must see something being done, imagining it, or explained in written word. However, I think rather symbolically and through language. ... P type fits me best, and I come out as a low-J on humanmetrics often though.