Do you find it hard to understand what shape this is? Were you even able to get it right before reading the spoiler?
this actually sounds very stand-offish/show-offey. Like a little kid on a skateboard, "you couldn't even get that jump, could you???!"
(Edit: No, I didn't see it right off, I can kind of see it now if I picture it being folded up- cool image, and really cool that you own a ukulele! I had myself giggling the other day over the prospect of owning a ukulele or giving one to a relative.)
I just said "diamond"
I didnt say i would had easy time understanding this if i saw it somewhere, so im not showing off my comprehension of complex shapes.. i was just interested if Se doms for example have easy time seeing it and Ne doms seeing it the wrong way easier(you cant get a diamond out of that, even tho it might look like a diamond at first), making faster judgment from external perceptions and being more guided by internal associations.
Do you find it hard to understand what shape this is?
no, not really. at first it did appear flat, then it expanded in my internal vision, becoming more three-dimensional, and developed into a transparent cube with two flat surfaces inside that join the opposite corners and criss-cross. it took three to five seconds.
there is no possibility of my being Se-dominant, not with the way i limit my intake of the external world (sometimes severely) and break it down into small "doses". or even Si-dominant, though i do seem to have fairly strong Si, and it is something i understand.
this is very interesting. what ought to be made, i think, is a post with other pattern recognition tasks, such as the ones where you have to discern a concealed shape or choose one out of two overlapping/simultaneously existing shapes. then it would be possible to test one's perception of them and compare the results to other members who are either Ne- or Se-dominant.
I saw a cube as soon as I looked at it.
And yet it's really not a cube at all, so seeing something else is not wrong in the least. On that basis, I don't think this reveals much at all. Maybe it just shows one's exposure to other images of cube-like figures in the past.
>spoiler
-> too obvious to even cross my mind.
i was trying hard to find something different IN it. which is possible of course, because it contains divided parts. bended pyramids. it's rather difficult to go through all of them and only through real ones.
That Se dom thing was just an example.
Anyways, how sure you are on being N and P? You are pretty new to the forum, so i dunno if you are new to typology too and people do make mistakes on their type at first quite alot.
Same here, plus I saw the planar triangular areas connecting the corners. But then my work involves ordered materials so I am used to looking at three-dimensional symmetric structures represented in two dimensions.It's interesting to me that many might look at it and NOT see a 3-D cube [with intricacies within] right away? It seemed so obvious to me. Curious.
I saw the cube almost immediately and saw the connectedness of it, but because of the prompt I spent a little time looking for other shapes as well.
My mind roughly went from: diamondy shape thingy --> diamondy cube thing --> cube---> hypercube?--> various stretched out cubes that look like diamonds. But not all of us are used to seeing 2D drawings as representing 3D. I took a drawing class and enjoyed learning how to make things look 3D, so that way of reading it stuck with me more. So I don't know how much of this is going to relate to type.
I don't buy that these sorts of things have one answer. They are lines that suggest (or may not suggest) something more. Our view on these lines might suggest something of our type