Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 61

Thread: Mystic Sonic a sensory type?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Mystic Sonic a sensory type?

    I think it seems highly probable that mystic sonic could really be a sensory type. As long as I have talked to him, I have noted time and time again that he seems to have a hugh tendency towards making inductions in a way that does not seem very intuitive. I could be wrong, but I don't think that alot of what he says is based on intuitive or judgement processes. I may list some examples of some thing I have seen him do later when I have time.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I disagree.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeia
    I disagree.
    Why? He has a hugh tendency to make conclusions about whole systems based on what he knows about a small static example of the general element of the system, which is typical of people who are sensors and use inductive reasoning ... you've never noticed that?

  4. #4
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeia
    I disagree.
    Why? He has a hugh tendency to make conclusions about whole systems based on what he knows about a small static example of the general element of the system, which is typical of people who are sensors and use inductive reasoning ... you've never noticed that?
    I also disagree... rmcnew, did you think MS would describe you his system when trying to explain anything? It's probably too big. That's the thing with me - I can see the conclusion and even parts of the system, but I explain the system itself, nor do I plan to try.

    You'll ask something, and he'll give you his opinion, and he'll add a part of the system to show you that he knows where this thing belongs in his system. To you it seems like a static example, because you are not familiar with his system.
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    mysticsonic is one of the most classic intj's we have here!!
    Entp
    ILE

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kristiina
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeia
    I disagree.
    Why? He has a hugh tendency to make conclusions about whole systems based on what he knows about a small static example of the general element of the system, which is typical of people who are sensors and use inductive reasoning ... you've never noticed that?
    I also disagree... rmcnew, did you think MS would describe you his system when trying to explain anything? It's probably too big. That's the thing with me - I can see the conclusion and even parts of the system, but I explain the system itself, nor do I plan to try.

    You'll ask something, and he'll give you his opinion, and he'll add a part of the system to show you that he knows where this thing belongs in his system. To you it seems like a static example, because you are not familiar with his system.
    A classic case of missing the point. Apparently kriistina does not see what I have seen, but I think what I am implying is totally applicable to someone who is sensory.

    There are actually more than a few examples I can think of, as it is a pattern I have noticed in his behaviour and how he comes acrost in the chat and on the forum. It is especially noticable when he defends his opinions. The thing I have noticed is that when he defends what he has said against people with diffrent opinions he tends to make conclusions that can not be guaranted, and then acts like they are valid conclusions which justify what he has said. Intuitive types do not tend to do this! An intuitive type would say something general and avoid saying something that escapes an absolute conclusion which is undeniable, which I havn't really seen mysticsonic do much at all, if even at all!

    Anyhow ... like I said I don't think you guys are seeing what I am seeing, but when you finally get around to it and start seeing his patterns of behaviour, I hope you'd understand by then.

    And by the way, I think you guys are confusing his use of a sensory function with , and that is why you think he is INTj, unless he is really ISTj ...

  7. #7
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    nope.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    This is one of the stupidest threads I've read on here in quite some time, and everyone knows there's A LOT of stupid threads on here. Anyway...

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Why? He has a hugh tendency to make conclusions about whole systems based on what he knows about a small static example of the general element of the system, which is typical of people who are sensors and use inductive reasoning ... you've never noticed that?
    Yeah, that's what intelligent people do mcnew. You can't know everything about a system plus the full extent of it beforehand and draw absolute conclusions about it unless it was written from the ground up beforehand (like math). Reality doesn't work this way - all you can ever do is make inductive probabilistic statements drawn on your knowledge about some incomplete segment of it.
    You can speculate about the system, which what mystic sonic does not do which means he may not be an intuitive, because an intuitive would speculate about the system and not make inductions about it.

    And I disagree, so while you are at it just get out of my thread if you think it is stupid meerly because you don't agree with it, though you can disagree. Not everyone makes inductive conclusions over speculative deductions, like you claim.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    And I disagree, so while you are at it just get out of my thread if you think it is stupid meerly because you don't agree with it, though you can disagree.
    Hey look mcnew, some woman is being a whore!
    *Looks at Dynamicism*

    Yup ...

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, looks like this thead is about to go to hell ... quit posting here.

  11. #11
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are actually more than a few examples I can think of, as it is a pattern I have noticed in his behaviour and how he comes acrost in the chat and on the forum. It is especially noticable when he defends his opinions. The thing I have noticed is that when he defends what he has said against people with diffrent opinions he tends to make conclusions that can not be guaranted, and then acts like they are valid conclusions which justify what he has said. Intuitive types do not tend to do this! An intuitive type would say something general and avoid saying something that escapes an absolute conclusion which is undeniable, which I havn't really seen mysticsonic do much at all, if even at all!
    How confident, though, is he in his defense of his conclusions? That is probably the most important factor.

    You may have a point, here, rmcnew. The description of Se that Hugo often uses states that the Se type has the "skill to make decisions on the basis of incomplete data."

    Although we should wait to see what Mystic has to say about this.
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    And I disagree, so while you are at it just get out of my thread if you think it is stupid meerly because you don't agree with it, though you can disagree.
    Hey look mcnew, some woman is being a whore!
    *Looks at Dynamicism*

    Yup ...
    *farts on mcnew*
    *pulls up with a truckload of manure and dumps the load on top of Dynamicism*

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cone
    There are actually more than a few examples I can think of, as it is a pattern I have noticed in his behaviour and how he comes acrost in the chat and on the forum. It is especially noticable when he defends his opinions. The thing I have noticed is that when he defends what he has said against people with diffrent opinions he tends to make conclusions that can not be guaranted, and then acts like they are valid conclusions which justify what he has said. Intuitive types do not tend to do this! An intuitive type would say something general and avoid saying something that escapes an absolute conclusion which is undeniable, which I havn't really seen mysticsonic do much at all, if even at all!
    How confident, though, is he in his defense of his conclusions? That is probably the most important factor.

    You may have a point, here, rmcnew. The description of Se that Hugo often uses states that the Se type has the "skill to make decisions on the basis of incomplete data."

    Although we should wait to see what Mystic has to say about this.
    From what I see he places all emphasis on his conclusions and runs with them like they are tough enough to busts through anything. That is eveidence that he is placing alot of confidence in his conclusions, in my opinion.

  14. #14
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, because all N types are always totally insecure about their conclusions.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Herzy
    Yeah, because all N types are always totally insecure about their conclusions.
    Yes!!! That is a NEGITIVE point about being intuitive ... The NEGITIVE point about being sensory is that the conclusion is never guaranteed to be true!

    For example, there is a guy typing load on a keyboard -

    Sensory type would say: HE NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO TYPE!
    Intuitive type would say: He types FAST and in an UNORTHODOX way ...

    The sensory types conclusion is not guaranteed, the intuitive types conclusion can not be denied!!!!!!

    The sensory type makes conclusion that are usually initially FALSE, and the intuitive type makes conclusions that can not said to be anything other than TRUE.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    Quote Originally Posted by Herzy
    Yeah, because all N types are always totally insecure about their conclusions.
    Yeah, especially those constantly doubting, ever-deliberating ENTjs who hesitate to come to any conclusion about anything.
    I don't think that herzy realized it, but she is proving the points I have made in her sarcasm.

  17. #17
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    I don't think that herzy realized it, but she is proving the points I have made in her sarcasm.
    No. You're just making yourself look stupid. Especially with statements like the following:


    Sensory type would say: HE NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO TYPE!
    Intuitive type would say: He types FAST and in an UNORTHODOX way ...

    The sensory types conclusion is not guaranteed, the intuitive types conclusion can not be denied!!!!!!

    The sensory type makes conclusion that are usually initially FALSE, and the intuitive type makes conclusions that can not said to be anything other than TRUE.
    wtf? way to mass-stereotype the validity of half the population's conclusions. ZOMFGZ HE'Z A ZENZOR, HE MUST SUCK AT DRAWING KONKLUZINZ, EL OH ELZ. Just because someone is a sensor or an intutitive, has absolutely nothing at all to do with their assumptions / conclusions. Period.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  18. #18
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default


    Yes!!! That is a NEGITIVE point about being intuitive ... The NEGITIVE point about being sensory is that the conclusion is never guaranteed to be true!
    Heh, if this were true, you'd be a definate sensory type.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Herzy
    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    I don't think that herzy realized it, but she is proving the points I have made in her sarcasm.
    No. You're just making yourself look stupid. Especially with statements like the following:


    Sensory type would say: HE NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO TYPE!
    Intuitive type would say: He types FAST and in an UNORTHODOX way ...

    The sensory types conclusion is not guaranteed, the intuitive types conclusion can not be denied!!!!!!

    The sensory type makes conclusion that are usually initially FALSE, and the intuitive type makes conclusions that can not said to be anything other than TRUE.
    wtf? way to mass-stereotype the validity of half the population's conclusions. ZOMFGZ HE'Z A ZENZOR, HE MUST SUCK AT DRAWING KONKLUZINZ, EL OH ELZ. Just because someone is a sensor or an intutitive, has absolutely nothing at all to do with their assumptions / conclusions. Period.
    This is where I absolutly disagree with you, and for good reason. I am going to post what I put earlier in another thread to help prove some of this supposed 'stupid shit' some of you guys are obviously too blindsided to consider.


    So Te only makes observations? I disagree; perceiving functions make observations. Judging functions arrive at conclusions based on the data absorbed via perceiving functions.
    I disagree, I think it is the other way around ... perceiving functions make conclusions based on deductive/inductive referencing and judging functions make conclusions based on objective/subjective referencing.

    And the aptitude to making empirical conclusions is based on sensory perception [not the judging process Te], which is anything but initially accurate. Intuitives usually do not need to naturally make empirical conclusions, typically on account of their tendency to narrow generalizing specifics down to accurate conclusions. Sensors tend to work from induction and as a result naturally make false conclusions initially, because they go by the senses and therefore tend to lack the ability to make appropiate deductions from their surrounds such as an intuitive person would, and therefore make empirical conclusions instead. Making empirical conclusions has nothing to do with judging functions, with the exception in making subjective/objective inferences along with what has been inducted.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical

    A central concept in science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence that is observable by the senses. It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism by the use of the adjective "empirical" or the adverb "empirically." "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived from our experiences or observations.

    In a second sense "empirical" in science may be synonymous with "experimental." In this sense, an empirical result is an experimental observation. In this context, the term semi-empirical is used for qualifying theoretical methods which use in part basic axioms or postulated scientific laws and experimental results. Such methods are opposed to theoretical ab initio methods which are purely deductive and based on first principles.
    http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=4811&start=90

  20. #20
    the flying pig Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    5,929
    Mentioned
    122 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Herzy
    Yeah, because all N types are always totally insecure about their conclusions.
    Yes!!! That is a NEGITIVE point about being intuitive ... The NEGITIVE point about being sensory is that the conclusion is never guaranteed to be true!
    I must be an S type, too.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    I think I liked you better when you spent more time making useless tests rather than posting.
    A simple solution to that would be to quit acting like bigoted flamming trolls who can not posts in serious threads without the intent of verbal attacking another person or degrading what he or she has to say, but for some of that seems to be too much to ask.

  22. #22
    the flying pig Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    5,929
    Mentioned
    122 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Quote Originally Posted by Dynamicism
    I think I liked you better when you spent more time making useless tests rather than posting.
    A simple solution to that would be to quit acting like bigoted flamming trolls who can not posts in serious threads without the intent of verbal attacking another person or degrading what he or she has to say, but for some of that seems to be too much to ask.
    I think actually a little thought before hitting the "Submit" button would prevent situations like this.

    Or a click of the "Preview" button before the "Submit" button.

    Sorry man but this thread was really a very bad idea. Like very.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capitalist Pig
    Sorry man but this thread was really a very bad idea. Like very.
    That's good, 'cause I like controversy and it seems now there is plenty of it.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here is one example on Mysticsonic coming up with inductive conclusions they way I have implied in the chatroom. I took an EMT course and I remember that the instructor said that the worst pain in the world was a broken shoulder blade,which is why I was arguing with him about it in case anyone is wondering.

    <Mysticsonic> Nothing hurts worse than a woman giving birth
    <rmcnew> except for maybe getting a broken shoulderblade, that hurts way way worse!
    <mysticsonic> I wouldn't think so
    <rmcnew> *posts link about website on shoulderblade injuries*
    <rmcnew> Shoulderblade injuries usually only happen in car wrecks
    <mysticsonic> I've known people to have carwrecks, they've come out fine! <--- inductive conclusion
    <mysticsonic> having kids still hurts worse, but it does not matter 'cause we are not women ...
    And another instance of his doing something similar with making inductive conclusions, as opposed to making speculative deductions is found in this thread where he mentions Kierkegaard ...

    http://oldforumlinkviewtopic.php?t=4...r=asc&start=15

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, it is MBTI --- otherwise it is pretty clear.

    http://www.breakoutofthebox.com/mbti.htm

    Sensors are more concrete perceivers, relying more heavily on what they can taste, touch, hear, see, and what is right in front of their noses--they analyze through comparison to their past experiences. They tend to think sequentially from A to B to C, using inductive reasoning (going from the specific to the general).

    Intuitors, on the other hand, tend to consider the hunches, the overall picture, the possibilities, the patterns, and to use deductive reasoning (going from the general to the specific). Because they focus on possibilities, Intuitive types draw more on the unknown, the indirect, the not - yet - experienced -- and are therefore more oriented in time to the future.

  26. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Mcnew, what do you mean about sensory types being wrong and intuitive types being right? I'm hoping what you meant to say differs from how it read.

  27. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Mcnew, what do you mean about sensory types being wrong and intuitive types being right? I'm hoping what you meant to say differs from how it read.
    It means that intuitive types generalize in such a way that they can never be wrong about what they say and sensors tend to make conclusions based upon what they see with no guarnatee that their conclusions are right or guaranteed.

    I tried to make an example that demonstrated that, but I don't think people are getting what the example implies.

  28. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are you saying the initial statements made by a sensor are inductive, and thus probably wrong, and that an intuiter is generally deductive and therefore must be correct?

  29. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I figured what you said didn't come out right...

  30. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Are you saying the initial statements made by a sensor are inductive, and thus probably wrong, and that an intuiter is generally deductive and therefore must be correct?
    Well, an intuitive is not necessarily correct or even sure of being correct, but will usually generalize in such a way that can not be proven wrong. Other than that, I think you understand.

  31. #31
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    McNew's mad I disagreed with him about existentialism and for some reason do not see the tradition as one being composed of those who are scientific in their philosphical endeavors.

    Let's look at it this way: McNew claimed that existentialism is, inpart and insofar that it can be referred to as a unitary movement, as stated above. This conclusion seems inductive, and if it is deductive, then I would have to say I do not see the deductive reasoning used in the process of coming to such a conclusion; by Mcnew's own criteria, it appears he would be a sensor.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  32. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He said existensialism is a "unitary movement"? First of all, what the hell does that mean. And second, lmao.

  33. #33
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, he said there are contradictions within it, but insofar that it can be referred to as a whole, what I stated in the first part of the post is a part of existentialism.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    question for mcnew:

    i think most people who disagree with you here (which is everybody) would say that what you are describing has more to do with Te/Ti. i certainly think you've missed the point completely on the differences between sensation and intuition.

    based on your criteria of sensing being inductive and intuition being deductive, and your further elaborations on the point, how would you differentiate these criteria from the difference between Te and Ti?

  35. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't necessarily disagree with him...

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the vast majority of the people who have responded have disagreed.

  37. #37
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah and we all know that the masses are always right
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    yeah and we all know that the masses are always right
    that's irrelevant if you look at the context of the statement.

  39. #39
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    my vote goes for INTj btw
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  40. #40
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DJ wasn't talking about my type when he said "I don't necessarily disagree with him," but rather McNew's conclusions about existentialism.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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