Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 144

Thread: Mental Imagery ?function?

  1. #1
    nyessss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    female
    Posts
    159
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Question Mental Imagery ?function?

    I'm getting mixed messages from people and media in general. It seems like mental imagery is linked to imagination, or traditionally, "Ni". I theorized it stemmed from "Si" as well, but I'm unsure. Additionally it appears types with the "panoramic" cognitive style also sport better mental imagery. What are everyone's opinions and anecdotes about mental imagery? I'm asking because I have near non-existent mental imagery, however, I am good at associations usually attributed to the intuitive functions. It always seems like an exception exists to any generalization I make about this, but I want a clear link to "the" mental imagery function.

  2. #2
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it has to do with what its blocked with and whether its accepting/producing. I think producing intuition blocked with logic is most likely the standard conception of "mental imagery" which is sort of like a big picture view of many inter related parts hanging together in a logical relationship. that said, I think mental imagery can mean literally anything because all humans are capable of it and for that reason all have something in mind which is real that counts as mental imagery. the best way to get at this is ask the person what they mean when they said mental imagery. I don't think, in the final analysis, its tied to one function like "Ni", I think rather it can be experienced in 16 different ways

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well it seems to me that whatever that you're going to imagine is necessarily going to be linked to your memory, as in things that you have actually seen in the past.

    So really the only way to imagine something "new", as in something that has never been imagined before is either through total randomness, or through abstract thinking, that is, logic. So you're probably going to play around with variables, you can swap things around with the if-then causal chains and imagine that if we suppose that those imagined things are true, then considering all the logical chains are completely consistent, we must be able to see certain "new" results.

    This also seems to happen with certain fusions, when you imagine two seemingly unrelated things, and you make some sort of logical connections between them.

  4. #4
    I sacrificed a goat to Zeus and I liked it
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Durmstrang School
    Posts
    2,845
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm pretty sure by mental imagery he means pictures in your head. I'd think Ni and Si are about equal based on type descriptions. Rational functions would be useless since they seem like they're about abstract/"verbal" thinking (especially Ti.) It probably depends on the kind of mental imagery. There's the Static vs. Dynamic thing. But when I think mental imagery, I think of a fully-moving scene. I can't believe anyone would actually think in still pictures, so Static is probably the completely abstract/verbal thinking that people occasionally report.

    I think just NT types don't use much mental imagery due to being abstract though. SFs probably don't either since they are too focused on their immediate surroundings. Democratic quadras must have it rough being unable to visualize an ideal world and be proactive.

  5. #5
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    First of, I would make a distinction between imagination which leans towards fantasy, daydreaming, and narrative imagery; and a spatial understanding of objects, e.g. "X-Ray vision".
    I'd ask you which of the two you mostly mean when you talk of "mental imagery"?

    Generally, being good at mental imagery is a matter of higher visual/spatial intelligence, but as I said, I'd make a distinction between the two subsets of it.

    Strong Ni seems to "boost" the more narrative imagination in the "inner eye" (it is as if you were watching a movie).
    While strong Ti seems to "boost" the spatial understanding of objects – especially in combination with Sensing, and the result of that is typically "X-ray vision".

    Types who tend to be best at "X-ray vision" of objects have been mostly (spatially gifted) ISTx > ESTx in my experience. That is also where the stereotype of ISTx being mechanics comes from; in combination with higher visual intelligence, they are best at imagining the inner workings of machines etc.

    So all in all, I'd say that a combination of high visual intelligence and being INTx (strong Ni and Ti) would result in the most profound and all-encompassing mental imagery that involves both the imaginative and spatial aspects.

    I'd stress once again as a closing thought that at the end of the day it counts more what your level of visual intelligence is. There are xSI types with a good imagination; they have been gifted with enough visual intelligence which compensates for/or seems to "boost" their Ni. On the other hand, there can be Intuitive people who have lower visual intelligence and hence their imagination is not as vivid, or ISTx who have lower spatial intelligence and hence they would not make the best mechanics.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  6. #6
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Exactly what do you mean b it.

    It is bit crazy. I suddenly see mentally foe example balls dividing into pieces. Then forming certain sorts of statures divining itself into pieces which again begins to restructuring itself. Lines are forming pointing towards something, things filling up, suddenly planet starts to bounce on top of trampoline that is wired on top street lamps etc. Sudden expansion of realization in terms of scalability of the understanding and how we are just limited emerges etc.


    Then there is mundane imaginary. That is coined together by logical absurdities.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Mental imagery is associated with working memory:

    Recent research suggests that visual mental imagery functions as if it were a weak form of perception.

    Evidence suggests overlap between visual imagery and visual working memory – those with strong imagery tend to utilize it for mnemonic performance.

    We use the term ‘mental imagery’ to refer to representations and the accompanying experience of sensory information without a direct external stimulus. Such representations are recalled from memory and lead one to re-experience a version of the original stimulus or some novel combination of stimuli.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595480/

    Well this is troubling, since Socionics doesn't have a concept of memory. Saying things like "Mental imagery is associated with Ni or Ti" is pointless, since you're just associating the concept of mental imagery with Ni or Ti, but you're not explaining how that mental imagery works. You can say "Mental imagery is Ni", but it's like so what? The only use of that is you have shortened the words to "Ni".

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muhtempus View Post
    I'm getting mixed messages from people and media in general. It seems like mental imagery is linked to imagination, or traditionally, "Ni". I theorized it stemmed from "Si" as well, but I'm unsure. Additionally it appears types with the "panoramic" cognitive style also sport better mental imagery. What are everyone's opinions and anecdotes about mental imagery? I'm asking because I have near non-existent mental imagery, however, I am good at associations usually attributed to the intuitive functions. It always seems like an exception exists to any generalization I make about this, but I want a clear link to "the" mental imagery function.
    I also have near non-existent mental imagery utilized by default, heh. I can visualize something I've seen before, but mostly only what I've seen before and I don't dwell on such imagining. For problem solving I have such visuals of static sensory pictures flash very quickly, so quickly that they do not even get fully conscious, so I usually don't even notice them, but somehow they underpin my brand of logic for certain cases of deliberate thinking/problem solving (e.g. organize my day, organize a task, solve certain problems that came up etc). These pictures are not very vivid.

    The movie-like imagery people mention here, I can actually have that sometimes if there's an emotional motivation for it. Not often. Again not extremely vivid stuff but it's okay. And for imagining spatial locations in the movies, I have to have locations that I've already seen in real life. I can't conjure up ones I've not seen. The exception is my dreams at night lol. Idk why it gets creative there.


    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Well it seems to me that whatever that you're going to imagine is necessarily going to be linked to your memory, as in things that you have actually seen in the past.

    So really the only way to imagine something "new", as in something that has never been imagined before is either through total randomness, or through abstract thinking, that is, logic. So you're probably going to play around with variables, you can swap things around with the if-then causal chains and imagine that if we suppose that those imagined things are true, then considering all the logical chains are completely consistent, we must be able to see certain "new" results.

    This also seems to happen with certain fusions, when you imagine two seemingly unrelated things, and you make some sort of logical connections between them.
    Trust me I call all that pretty new/novel things being imagined. I do none of that. I have tried before as part of some exercise... Specifically, imagining some history scene and imagining actions to be taken and why. I wasn't terrible with it actually but it was draining af, because I felt disconnected from my surroundings.


    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Mental imagery is associated with working memory:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595480/

    Well this is troubling, since Socionics doesn't have a concept of memory. Saying things like "Mental imagery is associated with Ni or Ti" is pointless, since you're just associating the concept of mental imagery with Ni or Ti, but you're not explaining how that mental imagery works. You can say "Mental imagery is Ni", but it's like so what? The only use of that is you have shortened the words to "Ni".
    Yeah, if you want an explanation of such stuff, Socionics's model isn't meant for that and its purpose was never that. Look, I get it that you are really into cognitive psychology lately and that's actually really cool but please for the love of god, don't expect Socionics to really do anything for that, and don't blame it either for not delivering what you want it to. It was NEVER designed for that. Maybe one day you will realize this.

    Socionics gives some basic observations on it and that's it, the model itself is for analyzing certain general trends for your internals and for people and nothing more. The model is *not* for making sense of the cognitive observations Socionics does note in some definitions etc.

    The article looks very cool though as a neat summary and some new points in it for me, thanks for linking it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pallas View Post
    I'm pretty sure by mental imagery he means pictures in your head. I'd think Ni and Si are about equal based on type descriptions.
    What Socionics type description said this about Si? Please link to it. I've never seen one.


    Rational functions would be useless since they seem like they're about abstract/"verbal" thinking (especially Ti.) It probably depends on the kind of mental imagery. There's the Static vs. Dynamic thing. But when I think mental imagery, I think of a fully-moving scene. I can't believe anyone would actually think in still pictures, so Static is probably the completely abstract/verbal thinking that people occasionally report.
    You can't believe it, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I do see still static pictures if I want to recall my day for example. A lot of snapshots then. By default I'm not focused on them though. But it's not a problem for me to visualize these.

    My logic seems to rely on some pictures too that don't get fully conscious like I said above... but it's also got abstract and also verbal aspects, yeah.


    I think just NT types don't use much mental imagery due to being abstract though. SFs probably don't either since they are too focused on their immediate surroundings.
    OK, I'm SF


    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    First of, I would make a distinction between imagination which leans towards fantasy, daydreaming, and narrative imagery; and a spatial understanding of objects, e.g. "X-Ray vision".
    I'd ask you which of the two you mostly mean when you talk of "mental imagery"?

    Generally, being good at mental imagery is a matter of higher visual/spatial intelligence, but as I said, I'd make a distinction between the two subsets of it.

    Strong Ni seems to "boost" the more narrative imagination in the "inner eye" (it is as if you were watching a movie).
    While strong Ti seems to "boost" the spatial understanding of objects – especially in combination with Sensing, and the result of that is typically "X-ray vision".

    Types who tend to be best at "X-ray vision" of objects have been mostly (spatially gifted) ISTx > ESTx in my experience. That is also where the stereotype of ISTx being mechanics comes from; in combination with higher visual intelligence, they are best at imagining the inner workings of machines etc.

    So all in all, I'd say that a combination of high visual intelligence and being INTx (strong Ni and Ti) would result in the most profound and all-encompassing mental imagery that involves both the imaginative and spatial aspects.

    I'd stress once again as a closing thought that at the end of the day it counts more what your level of visual intelligence is. There are xSI types with a good imagination; they have been gifted with enough visual intelligence which compensates for/or seems to "boost" their Ni. On the other hand, there can be Intuitive people who have lower visual intelligence and hence their imagination is not as vivid, or ISTx who have lower spatial intelligence and hence they would not make the best mechanics.
    I don't have an X-ray vision of objects but I think my LIE ex bf did. He anyway had more of it than me for sure. I have spatial intelligence but not this very Intuitive-sounding* form of it, I instead have it about real objects (like I said, it's not about their inner structure tho', that to me is Ne anyway) and surroundings around me. I'm also decent at doing those spatial tests with abstract cubes and whatnot. But I am most comfortable with manipulating real objects without imagining their inner crap that cannot be directly experienced or directly deduced with concrete reasoning, and with navigating in my spatial surroundings.

    So anyway I suspect there is more than one kind of spatial intelligence.

    *: I realize that it's not necessarily all Intuitive, for sure some SLIs have some form of this intelligence too, and I don't know about the other S types, maybe, I'm just saying that to me it feels Intuitive for some reason. Just what my brain would try to utilize for it for some reason, I think. ...Thinking further on it, the way I break down *new* unfamiliar objects for mechanics purposes is by really actually checking all their concrete parts in an almost sequential fashion initially and deducing logic for them. None of the "inner structure imagination", which is why I said what I said above.

    EDIT: oh and actually I am like this (with having to work on it some) when it comes to their *mechanics* specifically. If it's simply about the material structure of the object without considering the more complex functional purposes, then I am way faster/more natural with the spatial intelligence bit. I see how any object looks from the inside as far as I've seen the object (easily constructing what they must be looking like from the inside or just the currently unseen parts spatially based on what I've seen, to the extent that this is deducible at all). So I can manipulate them readily. But that's not enough to do more complex mechanics repairs lol, for that I have to analyze out the function of the parts so then it becomes that thorough initially slow-ish process for that if the thing is completely new. If not new, okay... For new stuff though, that is where LIE ex would run circles around me with his Intuition or the V-S thinking or whatever else.


    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    Exactly what do you mean b it.

    It is bit crazy. I suddenly see mentally foe example balls dividing into pieces. Then forming certain sorts of statures divining itself into pieces which again begins to restructuring itself. Lines are forming pointing towards something, things filling up, suddenly planet starts to bounce on top of trampoline that is wired on top street lamps etc. Sudden expansion of realization in terms of scalability of the understanding and how we are just limited emerges etc.


    Then there is mundane imaginary. That is coined together by logical absurdities.
    I've just got a glimpse (almost!!) into Ne. lol
    Last edited by Myst; 05-03-2018 at 12:35 PM.

  9. #9
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    16,229
    Mentioned
    1553 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    As a side note, I am LIE-Te and also have “x-ray vision” of objects. I’ve always been able to do those “rotate the object in space” tests, and when I look at objects, I can, if I wish, see them as if they are rotating 3D CAD models with all their inner parts in place.

    I don’t know if this matters, but I also have surprisingly (to me) good eye-hand coordination. I first noticed it when a woman knocked a porcelain teacup off the table and I thoughtlessly caught it before it hit the floor. Enhanced Se?

    On the other hand, my self-awareness of my body’s position with respect to the environment is poor. I back into things all the time. Maybe this is related to Si-PoLR?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    Yeah, if you want an explanation of such stuff, Socionics's model isn't meant for that and its purpose was never that. Look, I get it that you are really into cognitive psychology lately and that's actually really cool but please for the love of god, don't expect Socionics to really do anything for that, and don't blame it either for not delivering what you want it to. It was NEVER designed for that. Maybe one day you will realize this.

    Socionics gives some basic observations on it and that's it, the model itself is for analyzing certain general trends for your internals and for people and nothing more. The model is *not* for making sense of the cognitive observations Socionics does note in some definitions etc.
    Then maybe you should tell that to the people who *do* think that Socionics can explain things, since that's my entire problem. Like what do these things have anything to do with Ni, Si-PoLR etc? Absolutely nothing!

    Do I expect the Big 5 to be able to explain these things? No! Because the Big 5 doesn't even pretend to have the answers for these things! It's not an explanatory model! Do people go around saying, "This is Neuroticism thing, this is Openness thing"? No! So don't blame me for those things, the entire ridiculousness lies in those who *do* expect explanations from Socionics. I don't, obviously.

  11. #11
    back for the time being Chae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    europe
    TIM
    ExFx 3 sx
    Posts
    9,183
    Mentioned
    720 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was deeply unsettled reading OP has no mental imagery at all. To be fair: The inside of my own mind looks like Salvador Dalí just made out with Guillermo del Toro, I can't think how it would be like sans any fantasy.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    As a side note, I am LIE-Te and also have “x-ray vision” of objects. I’ve always been able to do those “rotate the object in space” tests, and when I look at objects, I can, if I wish, see them as if they are rotating 3D CAD models with all their inner parts in place.

    I don’t know if this matters, but I also have surprisingly (to me) good eye-hand coordination. I first noticed it when a woman knocked a porcelain teacup off the table and I thoughtlessly caught it before it hit the floor.
    I think males are naturally good at these things, apparently.


  13. #13
    I sacrificed a goat to Zeus and I liked it
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Durmstrang School
    Posts
    2,845
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I think males are naturally good at these things, apparently.

    All dads are LSE confirmed

  14. #14
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,695
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    Generally, being good at mental imagery is a matter of higher visual/spatial intelligence, but as I said, I'd make a distinction between the two subsets of it.

    Types who tend to be best at "X-ray vision" of objects have been mostly (spatially gifted) ISTx > ESTx in my experience. That is also where the stereotype of ISTx being mechanics comes from; in combination with higher visual intelligence, they are best at imagining the inner workings of machines etc.

    So all in all, I'd say that a combination of high visual intelligence and being INTx (strong Ni and Ti) would result in the most profound and all-encompassing mental imagery that involves both the imaginative and spatial aspects.
    I can do exploded view of technical devices as mental images. Does this count?
    I can move and replace parts of a device as mental image (projection).

  15. #15
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,372
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You are being vague with Mental Imagery being the context and content of your question.

    Describe it more, like... Pictures? Visuals? What do you "see"?
    Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.

  16. #16
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post

    I'd stress once again as a closing thought that at the end of the day it counts more what your level of visual intelligence is. There are xSI types with a good imagination; they have been gifted with enough visual intelligence which compensates for/or seems to "boost" their Ni. On the other hand, there can be Intuitive people who have lower visual intelligence and hence their imagination is not as vivid, or ISTx who have lower spatial intelligence and hence they would not make the best mechanics.
    I think being a good mechanic is really just 95% based off pure knowledge and experience, rather then any specific type of intelligence. If you know what every part does and ran into possible every problem least once, you'll know actually what to do to fix something with zero need for visualizing. If there is any skill at all involved with mechanics, I'd say its having enough patience to acquire the knowledge you need before getting frustrated and throwing in the towel.

  17. #17
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    I think being a good mechanic is really just 95% based off pure knowledge and experience, rather then any specific type of intelligence. If you know what every part does and ran into possible every problem least once, you'll know actually what to do to fix something with zero need for visualizing. If there is any skill at all involved with mechanics, I'd say its having enough patience to acquire the knowledge you need before getting frustrated and throwing in the towel.
    well each skill requires training.

    the best pianists practiced a ton AND have higher musical intelligence ofc

    practice and experience are/were assumed in my comment
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  18. #18
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If present, mental imagery suggests either form of intuition in socionics (especially as a leading function), not Si. It's less clear what it would mean if it were absent.

  19. #19
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    well each skill requires training.

    the best pianists practiced a ton AND have higher musical intelligence ofc

    practice and experience are/were assumed in my comment
    Playing a musical instrument is a bit different because you need to being to get down the rhythm of whatever music you are playing, which requires a level of coordination and muscle memory not everyone possesses equally. With mechanics, your skill depends almost purely off of how many different problems you solved in the past, which provide you with knowledge to fix the same mechanical problems in the future with very little mental effort.

    I'm not saying mechanics doesn't ever require intelligence or skill, I'm just saying it's possible to be a decent mechanic in the eyes of most people just by learning steps and not ever having to ever tinker with or visual anything at all.

    I hope you aren't mad at me for starting a debate again lol. :<
    Last edited by Muddy; 05-04-2018 at 12:15 AM.

  20. #20
    Melodies from Mars~
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,016
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have random visual fragments of memory that are too fleeting to see completely and really have no details so it kinda is useless when I need to be specific about what I remember.

    So I have really bad visual memory, It's literally like the memory of a blind person.

    It could be that I spend so much time in the "synthesizing new memories" part of my brain that I neglect to remember the source of the memories. I don't have much fun with reality enough to have full details of it.


  21. #21
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,372
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    NF here ^, and I'm entirely an auditory learner.
    Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,026
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pretty much my entire mental memory is in images. I can memorize images easily. I frequently visualize as well.

  23. #23
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WinnieW View Post
    I can do exploded view of technical devices as mental images. Does this count?
    I can move and replace parts of a device as mental image (projection).
    Ummm. I don't really do that but people can not comprehend when they put me in front of computer screen. I just look at it and see abstracted underpinnings in my mind.

    Someone: Help me!!!
    Me: I have never done this but do a then b then c and d but you can also do it many different ways.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    imagination relates to N, in both variants

  25. #25
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    As a side note, I am LIE-Te and also have “x-ray vision” of objects. I’ve always been able to do those “rotate the object in space” tests, and when I look at objects, I can, if I wish, see them as if they are rotating 3D CAD models with all their inner parts in place.

    I don’t know if this matters, but I also have surprisingly (to me) good eye-hand coordination. I first noticed it when a woman knocked a porcelain teacup off the table and I thoughtlessly caught it before it hit the floor. Enhanced Se?

    On the other hand, my self-awareness of my body’s position with respect to the environment is poor. I back into things all the time. Maybe this is related to Si-PoLR?
    Yeah, I'm also like this.

    I don't think it's just a 'male thing' because i know a lot of guys that have a good sense of their immediate environment but are relatively bad at mentally imaging 3d mechanical objects.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  26. #26

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But males are better at mentally rotating things than females, on average.

  27. #27
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    But males are better at mentally rotating things than females, on average.
    Yeah, that's true.

    Anyway, adding to the topic - I don't know if it counts as mental imagery, but I if I've lived somewhere for a couple of weeks, I can often tell when it's gonna rain soon by looking at the clouds. With some precision, not just "it's going to rain soon" but rather "it'll rain between 5:40 and 5:45" - and a couple of people have commented that I'm good at it. Usually I automatically get some internal imagery when I do this. I always assumed this is "Ni" in socionics.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  28. #28
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm crappy at mental rotation. My brain lays out schematics of functionality in terms of estimated guessed connections.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  29. #29
    schwiftyrickty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Kansas City
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    345
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    My thoughts are almost 100% verbal. I have to make a sincere effort to imagine images and for the images to actually move in a realistic way or be 3D might be impossible without drugs. If I tried to imagine movement or a story or something in a visual way, I'd be more likely to just see the words of what's happening. I've actually had dreams where I'm reading and instead of imagining what it is I'm reading, I just see the words on the page lol. I'm not sure if any of this makes sense.

    I like to write fiction and I used to get high before brainstorming because it helped me imagine in actual pictures, sometimes even moving pictures. I don't really think it works anymore. I can't get high enough.

    My imagination is broken. Maybe it's time for me to take acid for the first time in ~6 years.
    7w6 9w1 2w3 sx/? RLUAI(rl|U|ai)

  30. #30
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schwiftyrickty View Post
    My thoughts are almost 100% verbal. I have to make a sincere effort to imagine images and for the images to actually move in a realistic way or be 3D might be impossible without drugs. If I tried to imagine movement or a story or something in a visual way, I'd be more likely to just see the words of what's happening. I've actually had dreams where I'm reading and instead of imagining what it is I'm reading, I just see the words on the page lol. I'm not sure if any of this makes sense.

    I like to write fiction and I used to get high before brainstorming because it helped me imagine in actual pictures, sometimes even moving pictures. I don't really think it works anymore. I can't get high enough.

    My imagination is broken. Maybe it's time for me to take acid for the first time in ~6 years.
    That's fascinating lol. I pretty much never imagine things in text form and just assumed everybody imagined things in movie form like I do.

  31. #31
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    i ffind it hard to understand that someone can imagine in full detail. I have only vague non-detailed and usually non-concrete stuff going on. i would say it is quite active more than verbal since I find sometimes hard to be verbal.

    Things are merging, bursting and arranging in new ways.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  32. #32
    schwiftyrickty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Kansas City
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    345
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    That's fascinating lol. I pretty much never imagine things in text form and just assumed everybody imagined things in movie form like I do.
    I wouldn't unconsciously imagine things in text necessarily (though I can), but my thoughts are just an inner monologue. Not a very focused one, but just words. One of the many downsides of this is that I can only think as fast as I can speak/read (though I can and tend to do those very fast and perhaps I think faster than those who think in pictures, I have no way of knowing), unless I am intentionally trying to think without verbalizing, sort of like speed reading. If I was to picture something, my eyes would have to be closed and it would be a struggle.

    Perhaps my inability to think in pictures has something to do with why I feel the need to write everything down. Words tend to leave less of an impact and are more easily forgotten, especially when there's thousands of them, few taking precedence over the others. I find it difficult to decide which thoughts are important.
    7w6 9w1 2w3 sx/? RLUAI(rl|U|ai)

  33. #33
    schwiftyrickty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Kansas City
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    345
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    i ffind it hard to understand that someone can imagine in full detail. I have only vague non-detailed and usually non-concrete stuff going on. i would say it is quite active more than verbal since I find sometimes hard to be verbal.

    Things are merging, bursting and arranging in new ways.

    I actually barely believe people who say they think in movies. That seems like a special superpower. I'm not sure what you mean when you say you don't think verbally but you also don't think in full detail though. What do you mean by actively? My thoughts are very active and all over the place and I relate to "merging, bursting and arranging in new ways" but it's still manifesting in a verbal way.
    7w6 9w1 2w3 sx/? RLUAI(rl|U|ai)

  34. #34
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think mainly verbally but as I've gotten older I've learned to visualize complex schemes. kind of like a flow chart in my head.. its still low res and by no means a movie, but its definitely got an organic quality, like I think of complex situations like cells, as in the biology sense, with lots of internal moving parts and interactions. I really don't think in terms of movies and spend most the time talking to myself internally. its hard for me to imagine people visualizing vivid scenes in their head, to me its not like that at all. at most its the thought of the happening like its an idea but not an image. i can picture some stuff but its like snapshots where im really focused on a few particular details and the rest is kind of assumed to be there but mainly obscured by a kind of fog or darkness

  35. #35
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schwiftyrickty View Post
    I actually barely believe people who say they think in movies. That seems like a special superpower. I'm not sure what you mean when you say you don't think verbally but you also don't think in full detail though. What do you mean by actively? My thoughts are very active and all over the place and I relate to "merging, bursting and arranging in new ways" but it's still manifesting in a verbal way.
    It is like... for example: look at a building rip it to pieces and bring it together with something else from somewhere, merge it, transform it etc. Suddenly you have created vague picture of something new. Like roads that circulate on top roofs.

    Or think list of words: now loose all the specifics imagine it as a bar. Shuffle things inside it, cut it, glue it etc.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  36. #36
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,695
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    Things are merging, bursting and arranging in new ways.
    The best scene I found so far is from the Sci-Fi series Alphas.

    Something I'm capable of doing too. A demonstration of construction using mental imagery.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbJHi_QCvoo#t=2478s


  37. #37
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WinnieW View Post
    The best scene I found so far is from the Sci-Fi series Alphas.

    Something I'm capable of doing too. A demonstration of construction using mental imagery.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbJHi_QCvoo#t=2478s

    Hah. It seems like holographic panoramic thinking. I would just look at connectives while comparing what there is needed to be reserved for something else in a way that whole package just holds integrity since it is useful to treat it as closed system. Everything in that context would be a chart like stuff. Things like construction manual sheet for furnitures.

    I could never manage something so tangibly confined things like pipes. 3D rotational abilities are like none while 2D stuff is very easy.

    It is very non concrete stuff.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  38. #38
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,695
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    It seems like holographic panoramic thinking.
    Yes, it seems so. It's a mental projection of already existion parts which can be rearranged and moved around in one's mind.

    But I doubt that a person is limited to only one thinking style. A person might b best at a specific style of thinking but not totally incapable of using the other styles.

    The following one is a example of causal-deterministic thinking, I guess. Do you agree?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk1N6Th4AoA#t=25s

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,026
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah I remember best with images and the spoken word. I still associate the months of the year with the banner on my grade 2 classroom that ran around the top of the room beneath the ceiling.

    I can recall conversations word for word.

  40. #40
    Hot Scalding Gayser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The evolved form of Warm Soapy Water
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    14,902
    Mentioned
    661 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can think very vividly once in a while. With crisp, detailed images that are more real than real life is. Like ironically more fantastical than reality, but more gritty/real as well. A few years ago I was in an incredibly creative mode and had access to it more. If I meditate and get in the right frame of mind I can will myself to do it. I think anybody can do this though, just takes some practice? I wouldn't think it made me a special snowflake or anything. It also relates to pushing society/super-ego away and just letting your mind's eye glow. I guess it's very enneagram 4-ish too. God I don't want to be a 4 though. /cuts wrists.

Page 1 of 4 1234 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
  •