Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: question about information elements

  1. #1
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default question about information elements

    I've got some questions...

    Augusta says you only communicate your Ego functions to the outside world.
    Other people claim you use all your functions towards the outside world.
    Next to that there are people who say you use ego/others about 60%/40%.

    Can anyone shed some light on this?

  2. #2
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    It's a good question. Way I see it is the unconcious functions work to serve the concious functions, so we may have 5th 6th 7th and 8th functions within, but we communicate it through our concious functions.

    I wouldn't be suprised if our super ego functions then fed into our ego functions and it was then through our ego functions that we communicate.

    My observation is we can demonstrate our concious functions. So I think re first paragraph, that our unconcious ones are channelled into our concious 1st 2nd 3rd 4th functions in order to communicate with outside world, I don't think it is just through our 1st and 2nd, but I would be interested to hear what others think.

    To give percentages of usage, i've no idea, although I think we use demonstrate our functions in the following order of frequency: 1st, 2nd, 4th then 3rd, which would kind of make sense when you consider the 5th is the weakest so there is less flowing through to the 3rd.
    Last edited by Cyclops; 12-16-2008 at 07:56 PM.

  3. #3
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "It's kind of stuffy in here and my skin has that unpleasant sticky feeling."

    There, I just communicated something from a Super-Id function to the outside world. So the first hypothesis is clearly false. Don't know about the others though.
    It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.

  4. #4
    Ritella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    at your feet
    Posts
    2,092
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    uh. i just farted.
    what element did I use there?
    i'm guessing neither Fi nor Ne.
    EII; E6(w5)

    i am flakey

  5. #5
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    uh. i just farted.
    what element did I use there?

    i'm guessing neither Fi nor Ne.
    A mixture of one part carbon per four part hydrogen.

  6. #6
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    A mixture of one part carbon per four part hydrogen.
    Methane, lol ))
    It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.

  7. #7
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    "It's kind of stuffy in here and my skin has that unpleasant sticky feeling."

    There, I just communicated something from a Super-Id function to the outside world.
    Well, and this is exactly where I get confused.

    Because although this sentence is based on Si information, you have said or written it in a style you would only encounter in IEE's, with their intuitive and developed language. A true Si leading person wouldn't have written it like this. So although the information is Si, the writing style is Ne/Fi.

    And therefor I would still say you are using Ne/Fi to form the sentence.


    I can give another example.

    An EIE-Fe in my office is very enthusiastic in her writing language. Which is Fe.
    If she would say something which is Ti information, like 'i can see the connection'
    Then she would write it in her Fe style: Hey! I can see the connection now!!

    Again, you can either look at the information and conclude this is Ti (and some people then conclude, so it is a Ti type...) Or you can look at the wrting style and see that this is an Fe type.


    What's your opinion about this?

  8. #8
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Well and this is where I get confused.

    Because although this sentence is based on Si information, you have said or written it in a manner you would only encounter in IEE's, with the intuitive and developed language way. A true Si leading person wouldn't have written it like this. So although the information is Si, the writing style is Ne/Fi.

    And therefor I would still say you are using Ne/Fi to form the sentence.
    True. Pretty much everything is colored by the leading function, no matter what you say or do! I don't know the answer to your question

    ...

    OK, one way of looking at it is that the function is there, operating, but the process of verbalization almost inevitably puts the "spin" of your base function on it. I think it wouldn't make sense to say that the statement itself was . More like an type trying to express his experience.
    It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.

  9. #9
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    True. Pretty much everything is colored by the leading function, no matter what you say or do! I don't know the answer to your question
    Thanks! I was really curious what you thought of it.

    I often get the impression that a lot of people think it is just the information that counts...

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Well and this is where I get confused.

    Because although this sentence is based on Si information, you have said or written it in a manner you would only encounter in IEE's, with the intuitive and developed language way. A true Si leading person wouldn't have written it like this. So although the information is Si, the writing style is Ne/Fi.

    And therefor I would still say you are using Ne/Fi to form the sentence.
    How do you figure that sentence is written in either an Ne or Fi way?

    I'm also not sure that Augusta thought that you can only use the Ego functions as I've read an article by her that said you use both base and role when arguing. The whole existence of the Super-Ego is the functions you feel you must do to perform well in society. The Super-Id contains functions that you want to use, because using them makes you feel like a kid and revitalizes you.

    That said, the only functions that I think you do not actively report to the world are your Id functions. Your dual sees how you silently use your Id functions and tries to copy you, along with receiving instructions from you on how to use them.

  11. #11
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZTCrawcrustle View Post
    How do you figure that sentence is written in either an Ne or Fi way?
    Because all/most ENFP's favor that kind of writing style.

    Like my example of the ENFJ who writes exclamation marks at every sentence. And other hints that show she is an enthusiast type.

    If you know many types, you see patterns arise. In their writingstyle and other things. (I guess you've seen that too)

    So what I'm concluding, is that you should rather look at those patterns, then at information you get, when you want to type someone.

    BTW the rest of your post is very interesting.
    Last edited by Jarno; 12-16-2008 at 11:13 PM.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Because all/most ENFP's favor that kind of writing style.

    Like my example of the ENFJ who writes exclamation marks at every sentence. And other hints that show she is an enthusiast type.

    If you know many types, you see patterns arise. In their writingstyle and other things. (I guess you've seen that too)

    So what I'm concluding, is that you should rather look at those patterns, then at information you get, when you want to type someone.

    BTW the rest of your post is very interesting.
    But writing is very easy to fake. And writing really depends on what mood you want to get across. I've known EIEs who do not use exclamation marks at all.

  13. #13
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I've got some questions...

    Augusta says you only communicate your Ego functions to the outside world.
    Other people claim you use all your functions towards the outside world.
    Next to that there are people who say you use ego/others about 60%/40%.

    Can anyone shed some light on this?
    Your ego functions are the functions you "actively use" to interact with the world, the lens through which you view life, which is what I think Augusta means. However theoretically we MUST use all functions on some level, or else we would be altogether blind to certain aspects of reality.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  14. #14
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZTCrawcrustle View Post
    But writing is very easy to fake. And writing really depends on what mood you want to get across. I've known EIEs who do not use exclamation marks at all.

    True. I used the EIE example just to show how this particular person's writing style doesn't change, even when talking about information of non-ego functions. My purpose was to show that ego functions always leave their mark.

    That writing is easy to fake is also true, but how many times do you fake your writing? Only when you purposely want to come of as someone else. Sure it works, but I'm only referring to general/normal cases. In fact, while thinking about it, I don't think I could mimic the writing style of an IEE. Or I had to overthink every word for minutes.

    I think the best example is IEE's writing style. Even when they are in a different mood they still have that developed language, use of vivid writing style, with lot of creative words in it.
    Last edited by Jarno; 12-17-2008 at 11:25 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •