another way to describe information aspects

[Joy]

Ne = the states of underlying, independent aspects of reality
Se = the states of apparent, independent aspects of reality
Te = the changing of apparent, independent aspects of reality
Fe = the changing of underlying, independent aspects of reality
Ni = the changing of underlying, interconnected aspects of reality
Si = the changing of apparent, interconnected aspects of reality
Ti = the states of apparent, interconnected aspects of reality
Fi = the states of underlying, interconnected aspects of reality


These may be easiest to understand by comparing and contrasting various information aspects (rather than looking at each one individually).

[Joy]

in case anyone is interested, these were other options:

[spoil:564009ac79]Ne = the implicit states of objects
Se = the explicit states of objects
Te = the explicit activities of objects
Fe = the implicit activities of objects
Ni = the implicit activities of connections
Si = the explicit activities of connections
Ti = the explicit states of connections
Fi = the implicit states of connections

or would it be...

[hr:564009ac79]

Ne = the implicit states of objects
Se = the explicit states of objects
Te = the explicit activities of objects
Fe = the implicit activities of objects
Ni = the implicit connections between activities
Si = the explicit connections between activities
Ti = the explicit connections between states
Fi = the implicit connections between states

(the descriptions of Ti and Fi don't quite work though)

[hr:564009ac79]

external: explicit, apparent, directly sensible
internal: implicit, indirectly perceivable, implied, understood, potential, unseen, inherent, underlying, subtle

statics: states
dynamics: activities, transitions, changes, changing

objects: independent, in and of itself, isolated, single, lone, unattached, single, self-determining, separate
fields: connections, relationships, interconnected

the ... aspect of reality
the ... of aspects of reality


Ne = internal statics of objects
Se = external statics of objects
Te = external dynamics of objects
Fe = internal dynamics of objects
Ni = internal dynamics of fields
Si = external dynamics of fields
Ti = external statics of fields
Fe = internal statics of fields



Ne = underlying aspects of self-determined states
Se = apparent aspects of self-determined states
Te = apparent aspects of self-determined activities
Fe = underlying aspects of self-determined activities
Ni = underlying aspects of interconnected activities
Si = apparent aspects of interconnected activities
Ti = apparent aspects of interconnected states
Fi = underlying aspects of interconnected states



Ne = underlying aspects of independent states
Se = apparent aspects of independent states
Te = apparent aspects of independent activities
Fe = underlying aspects of independent activities
Ni = underlying aspects of interconnected activities
Si = apparent aspects of interconnected activities
Ti = apparent aspects of interconnected states
Fi = underlying aspects of interconnected states


Ne = underlying independent states
Se = apparent independent states
Te = apparent independent activities
Fe = underlying independent activities
Ni = underlying interconnected activities
Si = apparent interconnected activities
Ti = apparent interconnected states
Fi = underlying interconnected states


Ne = underlying independent states
Se = apparent independent states
Te = apparent independent activities
Fe = underlying independent activities
Ni = underlying interconnected activities
Si = apparent interconnected activities
Ti = apparent interconnected states
Fi = underlying interconnected states



Ne = the states of underlying independent aspects of reality
Se = the states of apparent independent aspects of reality
Te = the activities of apparent independent aspects of reality
Fe = the activities of underlying independent aspects of reality
Ni = the activities of underlying interconnected aspects of reality
Si = the activities of apparent interconnected aspects of reality
Ti = the states of apparent interconnected aspects of reality
Fi = the states of underlying interconnected aspects of reality[/spoil:564009ac79]

[aestrivex]

zzzzz

[Joy]

thanks, peter

[aestrivex]

actually, cesium rubidide has a number of adhesion and solubility equilibrium constants greater than zero, varying slightly by the isotopes used of those elements.

[aestrivex]

peter, knock it off .

the culmination of the marathon of the rabbits will take place on october 23 at approximately 3:17:08 in boulder, CO. the winning participating will be slaughtered at the occasion. additionally, a marginally excessive supply of old, hairy, elliptical magazines will also be provided for anyone who flew to brazil on jetBlue airways in the month of september 2005. there will also be a crazy old lunatic screaming "GIVE ME BACK MY DOLLAR YOU BITCH" at any and all passersby.

have a nice day, and don't forget to bring a phillips head screwdriver and a 11/16'' crescent wrench.

[Joy]

i think you're getting somewhere, but the Ti and Fi are tricky, aren't they?

Ti is about apparent things... external information. Fi is about underlying, internal things.

i have an idea. what if only the perceiving elements are about objects insides and outsides? what if external and internal as related to T and F are not about objects or people or how objects or people view or whatever, what if it's just about for example stuff like subjective objective? like heart/head sort of think, material physical objective world versus human emotional world or whatever. then it all makes sense.

Well, ethics are largely about people, but I wouldn't call Ti objective by any means. If anything, extroverted information aspects are objective and introverted information aspects are subjective. I wouldn't say that Ti is related to the physical world, either...

Did you look inside the spoiler? I had a few other options for internal and external.

external: explicit, apparent
internal: implicit, implied, understood, potential, unseen, inherent, underlying, subtle

Fe about actions (dynamics) of internal, subjective, feeling, attractions, dislikes, moral stance nature so to say.

Nooooooooooooooooooo... that's Fi.

Fe is about the internal dynamics of (for lack of a better word) people.

peter, knock it off .

It's tempting not to correct you so you'll start calling him peter all over the forum.... but his name isn't actually peter. I was joking.

[aestrivex]

It's tempting not to correct you so you'll start calling him peter all over the forum.... but his name isn't actually peter. I was joking.

what, you don't recognize me? call me by my appropriate title right now or i'll throw you in the basement right now, you filthy sex lackey.

[Joy]

It's tempting not to correct you so you'll start calling him peter all over the forum.... but his name isn't actually peter. I was joking.

what, you don't recognize me? call me by my appropriate title right now or i'll throw you in the basement right now, you filthy sex lackey.

well... the filthy part doesn't fit... but the rest sounds sorta close to something he might say

ok you didn't get me. i'll approach differently.

you have dynamics. motion, action, activity. you have Je to describe it. now you will have F-related activity and T-related activity. ok, it may sound no, MBTI is MBTI, but just for analogy sake, F and T there, remember what they are about, objective and subjective, right, well what if similar stuff here. now, you have Ji, relationships, systems, dependencies, affectaions, sets of rules (Fi - code of ethics and Ti - rules related to restricting objective motion somehow, physical, whatever). get my drift?

Sorta... but I still don't think Ti is objective, by any means.

Ti isn't really about restricting motion, either. Organizing power which in turn restricts people from doing stuff, perhaps.

If this is about figuring out the difference between dynamic and static functions, you shouldn't be comparing T and F.

[Joy]

Okay, I follow.

I disagree. Internal and external aren't similar to objective and subjective when you're talking about rational information aspects.

[Joy]

Detached and involved would be a better way to look at it than objective and subjective.

And it's best to just forget about MBTT altogether. But I'll look at the correlations between rational/irrational and ethics/logic later.

[Joy]

no (at least not that I know of)

[XoX]

Is niffweed yet another Peter?

He is yet another ISFj.

[Joy]

I actually got that from anndelise.

(btw, I wouldn't suggest thinking of niffweed as an ESI)

[Creepy-bg]

lol the problem is that there are like 500 definitions for this shit out there already... coming up with another set isn't going to make things any clearer

[Joy]

[anndelise]

Detached and involved would be a better way to look at it than objective and subjective.

And it's best to just forget about MBTT altogether. But I'll look at the correlations between rational/irrational and ethics/logic later.

Detached and involved - sounds great!

not between J/P and E/T but between Ti and Fi or Te and Fe and MBTI *SO TO SAY* T and F (as Ti and Fi are only differentiated by external and internal), or as you put it detached and involved.

wrong
T is external AND detached
F is internal AND involved

S is external and involved
N is internal and detached


(Note: if you'd actually read anything i wrote a while back regarding socionics you would know that I got these from a russian site which I linked to in those posts.
you would also know that I merely parroted back what was given there and did not create anything new.
so while YOU sit there and try to redefine things/people to fit your own pov(Ti/Fe)...
I try to figure out what was actually said(Te)...and try to figure out how it fits into my own observations(Fi).)

[anndelise]

while YOU sit there and try to redefine things/people to fit your own pov(Ti/Fe)...
I try to figure out what was actually said(Te)...and try to figure out how it fits into my own observations(Fi).)

Ti observations. man, Fi does not observe the Ne and Ti theories with Fi, it uses Ti and Ne to do it.

No, I use Fi.
Which pretty much means I have to go through a complicated process when trying to figure out what's been said and what it means. A process that I've described elsewhere in the forum as well. Of skimming the paper, paying attention to parts that trigger an attraction/revulsion feeling, zero-ing in on each of the parts that created the feeling and again paying attention to the attraction/revulsion triggers...and continuing until I get a few memories that pop up that were the ones creating the attraction/revulsion triggers. Yes, it's a complicated process. But definitely Fi not Ti.

The same process serves me in my writing.

And are you seriously suggesting that none of the NeFi's here understand socionics? After all, according to you, they could only understand it if they used Ti...which is their polr. Or are you suggesting more that if an NeFi writes anything about socionics...even if just repeating what was already written, then they must really be a Ti ego?

[Joy]

anndelise is most certainly IEE... she's just a strange one (as if there were any other kind? )

[anndelise]

while YOU sit there and try to redefine things/people to fit your own pov(Ti/Fe)...
I try to figure out what was actually said(Te)...and try to figure out how it fits into my own observations(Fi).)

Ti observations. man, Fi does not observe the Ne and Ti theories with Fi, it uses Ti and Ne to do it.

No, I use Fi.
Which pretty much means I have to go through a complicated process when trying to figure out what's been said and what it means. A process that I've described elsewhere in the forum as well. Of skimming the paper, paying attention to parts that trigger an attraction/revulsion feeling, zero-ing in on each of the parts that created the feeling and again paying attention to the attraction/revulsion triggers...and continuing until I get a few memories that pop up that were the ones creating the attraction/revulsion triggers. Yes, it's a complicated process. But definitely Fi not Ti.

The same process serves me in my writing.

And are you seriously suggesting that none of the NeFi's here understand socionics? After all, according to you, they could only understand it if they used Ti...which is their polr. Or are you suggesting more that if an NeFi writes anything about socionics...even if just repeating what was already written, then they must really be a Ti ego?

that's why i don't like to engage in certain conversations. everything i say is examined for loopholes to make me look like a jerk.

NO i didn't say NeFis cannot understand socionics. they use their Ne to grasp intuituve directions in the information and that suffices them.

i don't really want to analyize your mental processes, sorry, not that i don't care about you, just i see no point.

much easier to ignore what one says about their mental processes and project your own ideas onto them, eh?

you say you don't want to analyze my mental processes....but then you keep saying I'm INTj and not NeFi. So really, you are the one who keeps the shit going.

Oh, and your writings don't have to be examined for loopholes....cuz the implications and subsequent consequences of what you write are very clear.