I believe, we are simply doing what we want to do. I know this may do nothing about the dislike of a particular activity. But keep in mind what it would be like if someone turned off your favorite show--there ought to be a good reason.
That is more or less the point, I agree. When we split groups up on preferences - and this doesn't require MBTI at all - we are going to get groups that have different preferences... obvious, right?
It shouldn't be surprising that we each have our own 'show' that we prefer.
You could do the exact same thing with sport preferences and repeat the discussion. It goes a bit deeper when it is personality, but same concept.
Illusions exist. Experience is limited. Data is often doctored, mismeasured, or misrepresented. Objectivity is nothing more than the repeatability of subjective experience. Please let me know which of those statements you disagree with.
I agree with all, but it doesn't change my preference.
For each point that can be brought up in the subjective world, it is always the progression towards objective that I (we) strive for. Illusion and bad data is the enemy, meant to be overcome, not an excuse to avoid using a particular method.
If anything, the intuitive approach is less rigid with illusion and bad data - granted, Ss can take it at face value, but theorists can be heavily misled into believing their own theories when supported by even the weakest (anecdotal, etc) data or the flimsiest of illusions (human biases come to mind here for some reason).
The downside to the more rigid thinkers is that they can become rigid with bad data and illusions and not let go of them, whereas the theorists tend to... retheorize. On the balance, the openness part is probably more important right now, due to the acceleration of technology.
3) Perhaps it is my technical background, but I found myself sharing many of the sentiments of Grayscale and pt on this matter. One of my favorite phrases at work is "if it isn't tested, it doesn't work" (an exageration, but not far from the truth).
The only difference here would be that I say "if I can't use it, it doesn't work". A very subjective thing - I have no comment on anything that I do not use/know about. That's why I say I don't have patience for just theory. I need to use it to care.
edit - but the particular point made in the quote I put in the OP, or the point it brought up in my mind was that here, the N isn't even being trusted to know how to handle THEIR OWN LIFE, to know or be able to judge what information they need, what's relevant to a situation... ?!
The most competent people I know are all Ns, and most of them are very balanced.
However, it does bother me when something happens to them and automatically cope by saying "what do you think about..." in a general way. Don't do that! Just tell me what happened so I can understand *you*. I don't want to talk about something for 15 minutes only to realise that it had happened to you!
It'll help you too. A solution made *for* you will be better than understanding the big picture, of which you could be an exception (one of many!).
I would guess the majority of the irritation I feel comes from this scenario. I can talk theory, big picture, but I'd really talk about the matter at hand. If that needs to be theory, I'll manage... but when it doesn't and it feels forced? Grrr...
But if you do that enough, I do think I might think that you don't deal with your own issues at a practical level. Maybe not fair, I agree, but the tendency would be there. Course, I think this about a lot of people and I don't seem to have a S/N divide. More like a Ti divide. And I'm looking at you too, TJs.
But like was hit somewhere else in this thread, I'll also avoid the direct question if I'm looking for more than just the direct answer (beating around the bush to learn more about it).
