Signs of Ni

[INTP]

If that is the depth of your understanding, I see why you're not able to post more intelligently.

:-----DDDD

 

[Zarathustra]

[canned response]

Yes, as I said before, I'm familiar with your canned responses when you're wrong and have nothing substantive to say.

 

[INTP]

Yes, as I said before, I'm familiar with your canned responses when you're wrong and have nothing substantive to say.

 

[Redbone]

That's where you're misinterpreting the INTJ thought process, because you're treating it as if it were an INTP thought process. And yes, I see INTPs get one thing wrong, only one, and it takes an extremely long time to correct the error, never mind the amount of time it takes to sift through their version of truth to find the error.

And yes, that's exactly why INTPs are very careful with the truth, because one wrong fact requires a lot of work to rebuild.

I have to say that this has been a stumbling block for me. It is something I have only been able to improve by being aware of it and then taking steps to prevent it. One of the best ways I handle it is to reduce my insistence on precision. It creates necessary wiggle room for me so that when that 'one thing' is wrong, I don't become stuck.

 

[uumlau]

I have to say that this has been a stumbling block for me. It is something I have only been able to improve by being aware of it and then taking steps to prevent it. One of the best ways I handle it is to reduce my insistence on precision. It creates necessary wiggle room for me so that when that 'one thing' is wrong, I don't become stuck.

Thanks for your insight. It's always interesting to hear the other side of it. How does that "wiggle room" feel to you? Do you just accept things as provisionally true, or what?

 

[PeaceBaby]

#3 Not listening - Si (check)

By what extrapolation do you think Si is about listening vs not listening?

 

[Mia.]

By what extrapolation do you think Si is about listening vs not listening?

Here we go...

 

[Redbone]

Thanks for your insight. It's always interesting to hear the other side of it. How does that "wiggle room" feel to you? Do you just accept things as provisionally true, or what?

Scary at first but necessary. Now, it feels "right". I find that I can act on things and feel comfortable with it. I don't have to know everything, have everything figured out before I act. I just trust myself better now to know that I can fit myself into the path toward the goal. Easing up on the precision makes things fall into place much easier than me forcing it.

Yes, I do accept things as provisionally true. It's like a river; the paradox of something being the same and yet ever changing.

Oddly enough, I only started to think like this while I was recovering from a severe, years-long depression and a series of severe emotional shocks.

 

[Zarathustra]

By what extrapolation do you think Si is about listening vs not listening?

Agreed.

Peacebaby, that answer's easy to find if you just read the thread.

These two posts (1, 2) are where I started putting that construction down in writing.

I really don't think it serves any value to the thread to recapitulate what I meant by that.

If, after reading the thread, you still have questions about it, I'll be more than willing to answer.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Peacebaby, that answer's easy to find if you just read the thread.

No, you just pulled it out of your ass my friend.

If you are referencing Nardi's research, the lack of interest / desire to listen is related to Ti types.

Pointing to your own response to the thread here on TypC:

1

So, again, I am interested to know how you make that jump about Si, esp when Fi types (also with Si in the tertiary position same as an INTP) "are consummate listeners who listen in a holistic way" from the op of that thread.

 

[Zarathustra]

No, you just pulled it out of your ass my friend.

Regardless, if I pulled it out of my ass, I already did so before in the thread.

And, as such, if you haven't read it, then fucking read it.

If you are referencing Nardi's research, the lack of interest / desire to listen is related to Ti types.

Yes, I know this.

But I think it relates to TiSi cognition.

Pointing to your own response to the thread here on TypC:

1

Yes, if you'd read the thread, you would have seen that I already referenced that post in this thread.

So, again, I am interested to know how you make that jump about Si...

As I said before, if you haven't already, read the thread.

I don't feel like recapitulating what's already been covered before.

Get some context, and then, if you still want to discuss, as I said, I will be more than willing to.

A ton of the context is within this thread, and I even spent my time/energy finding and linking you to where to start.

So, for the third time: if you want to actually discuss this issue, get some context by reading the fucking thread.

...esp when Fi types (also with Si in the tertiary position same as an INTP) "are consummate listeners who listen in a holistic way" from the op of that thread.

Are you aware of the part where he said, "Until they make up their mind. Then they're not good listeners anymore. Then they never change their initial decision."?

 

[PeaceBaby]

But I think it relates to TiSi cognition.

But that's not what you are saying - you point specifically to Si for the "not listening" part?

And I am curious why? Surely your Te can quickly summarize and spare me 231 posts, of which I have probably read 100 but for heaven's sakes! Have some mercy on me!

Are you aware of the part where he said, "Until they make up their mind. Then they're not good listeners anymore. Then they never change their initial decision."?

Enjoyed your paraphrase. This is what's actually in thread: "INFPs are less likely to defend their own views or take action, though when they stop listening, region Fp1 becomes very active as they make a strong (and perhaps final) decision."

 

[Zarathustra]

But that's not what you are saying - you point specifically to Si for the "not listening" part?

No, I'm not.

And that's why I'm not going to paraphrase it for you.

Because to understand what I was actually saying, you need to read it in context.

I understand that you're an Si user, and, as such, per our discussion here, context isn't that important to you, but, here, it is.

([MENTION=13260]Rasofy[/MENTION]: see, re: this last part here, I don't really believe that to be too highly accurate, but it is a fun slight misconstrual of what has actually been discovered/discussed in this thread about Se/Ni users vs. Si/Ne users, and, as Peacebaby is annoying me right now, specifically about not knowing the context in which I wrote what I wrote, I'm throwing that in her face, not only in spite of the fact that I know it's a misconstrual, but because I know it's a misconstrual (although, I don't think it's necessarily entirely inaccurate [specifically and generally], which adds one more dimension of fun to the mix). Why do this? Because she's annoying me. Or, to put it in more noble language -- and just as accurate -- because I think her behavior is inappropriate. Could you call this trolling? Yes. But that wouldn't be too accurate. I consider it punishment. Despite her first post already being slightly inappropriate (specifically, in tone), I responded relatively politely, but she continued along the same path she'd attempted to engage me before (an inappropriate one), so I pushed back more heavily the next time. With this last post: three strikes and it's not trolling. It's punishment.)

(Also, I never offer any kind of explanation like this when I do this, but it's always present, and, seeing as how you mentioned finding my posting style "eccentric", I figured I would let you in a bit on why it is the way it is.)

*Back to Peacebaby*

And I am curious why? Surely your Te can quickly summarize and spare me 231 posts, of which I have probably read 100 but for heaven's sakes! Have some mercy on me!

Oh, I certainly can.

But I don't really feel like it.

Not with the tone with which you've chosen to engage me.

You've known me long enough to not make the assumptions you did that were inherent from your tone, and that addressing me in such a tone wouldn't yield your desired results. And, if you didn't already, you should have, so you can consider these last several posts the negative reinforcement that is necessary to get you to realize it.

Enjoyed your paraphrase. This is what's actually in thread: "INFPs are less likely to defend their own views or take action, though when they stop listening, region Fp1 becomes very active as they make a strong (and perhaps final) decision."

I wasn't paraphrasing (just) that.

And my paraphrase was pretty accurate.

I was paraphrasing the lecture he gave in the video I posted.

 

[PeaceBaby]

You've known me long enough to not make the assumptions you did that were inherent from your tone, and that addressing me in such a tone wouldn't yield your desired results.

There was NO tone, only YOUR inference of tone. Read it again. There's only a question there.

Anyways, don't bother to answer, I haven't seen anything in your posts that proves this to me.

 

[Zarathustra]

There was NO tone, only YOUR inference of tone. Read it again. There's only a question there.

There is always tone.

Whether you are aware of it or not.

Just look at your second post to see when it was made (more) obvious.

Anyways, don't bother to answer, I haven't seen anything in your posts that proves this to me.

I really don't care if you have, as I highly doubt you understand it; nor will attempted reverse psychology work here.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Just look at your second post to see when it was made more obvious.

You know what, I have had only brief moments on the forum lately as I am renovating a house.

(Yesterday I hopped on more between waiting for coats of paint to dry.)

So if my question struck you as short, it's only because I have been pressed for time to engage with the content here. I asked it quickly.

My apologies if that offended you.

There WAS tone in the second post though because of your choice to construe the first as tone.

So, whatever. Think whatever you want to.

 

[uumlau]

Why is the notion that, "Oh, I doubt you'd understand it" and "Your posts prove my point" so prevalent, today?

FWIW, I don't respond to people who assert that I don't understand what they're talking about.

 

[Zarathustra]

You know what, I have had only brief moments on the forum lately as I am renovating a house.

(Yesterday I hopped on more between waiting for coats of paint to dry.)

So if my question struck you as short, it's only because I have been pressed for time to engage with the content here. I asked it quickly.

My apologies if that offended you.

No need to apologize for the first.

I wasn't offended, it simply didn't prompt me to respond as you wanted.

There WAS tone in the second post though because of your choice to construe the first as tone.

I didn't construe the first as having tone, I considered it as possibly having tone, and not phrased in a way or happening to be about a particular topic that I found interesting enough to respond to (at least not how you wanted). Regardless, I still gave you a relatively polite reply, going so far as to find the links to the correct posts for you to start reading up on. And I said nothing overtly offensive enough in my response to warrant the tone in your second post, whether it existed concealed in your first post or not.

So, whatever. Think whatever you want to.

Ditto.

 

[Zarathustra]

Why is the notion that, "Oh, I doubt you'd understand it" and "Your posts prove my point" so prevalent, today?

FWIW, I don't respond to people who assert that I don't understand what they're talking about.

And, ftr, I never said I highly doubt she would/could understand it.

I said I highly doubt she does understand it.

 

[Mia.]