Let's discuss this: NeFi, FiNe, etc

[Slacker]

This is a Maritsa thing:

NeFi-expands possibilities then draws conclusions
FiNe-limits/processes possibilities to draw conclusion

Really, I don't even think that first thing is accurate for me. It's mroe like I feel it's important to look at every single possibility from the beginning, and then evaluate all equally and try to eliminate those that don't go anywhere, though I'm always willing to go back to a possibility I've eliminated earlier.

[Beautiful sky]

Mirrors.

NeFi-You look at all the possibilities. You look at the big picture all the time. You just look at high volume of information but don't draw general conclusion...
FiNe-I look at the most likely to succeed of all the possibilities. I look at the big picture and see what stands out in Red. I process a high volume of info and draw general conclusions....

This is why in close relations this match causes problems because while one can't settle (you/ENFp) the other has already settled (me/INFj).

[krieger]

Maritsa's explanation surprisingly well matches my views on this issue.

Accepting functions (aka dominant) are expanding; they start with a very small observation and create a huge number of interpretations as to what goes on to give rise to the perceived occasion.

(Dynamic/Accepting (Limiting) == just acknowledging a singular perception; Static/Accepting (Empowering) == chosing one interpretation out of the many possible ones)

Creating functions (aka secundary/auxiliary) are contracting; they combine a lot of observations, a large body of impressions, and identify their common properties so as to isolate a single possible state of affairs in the real world.

(Dynamic/Creating (Empowering) == having many pieces of information available to you and/or focussing on one out of these many pieces; Static/Creating (Limiting) == combining all pieces of information and isolating one possibility of interpretation)

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa's explanation surprisingly well matches my views on this issue.

Accepting functions (aka dominant) are expanding; they start with a very small observation and create a huge number of interpretations as to what goes on to give rise to the perceived occasion.

(Dynamic/Accepting (Limiting) == just acknowledging a singular perception; Static/Accepting (Empowering) == chosing one interpretation out of the many possible ones)

Creating functions (aka secundary/auxiliary) are contracting; they combine a lot of observations, a large body of impressions, and identify their common properties so as to isolate a single possible state of affairs in the real world.

(Dynamic/Creating (Empowering) == having many pieces of information available to you and/or focussing on one out of these many pieces; Static/Creating (Limiting) == combining all pieces of information and isolating one possibility of interpretation)

Labcoat, I find when reading the interpretations offered by ENTp's on any given topic, that my mind did the math without being able to explain how; why is that? We basically reach the same conclusion on two seperate paths. Or, maybe not two seperate paths but ENTp more math or analytic, based on hard core, representative logic...like they can write out the formula for the conclusion; while I make the conclusion and I KNOW I am right about it but can't relate to the math until I look at a formula and say "yes, that's how I got to my conclusion."

[krieger]

Labcoat, I find when reading the interpretations offered by ENTp's on any given topic, that my mind did the math without being able to explain how; why is that?

ENTp thought works a lot like that. They don't use models and stable descriptions, they just skip right to adressing the answer to the problem (which they understand in a sort of shallow, subjective way rather than in one conforming to some precise description). The ENTps basically help you draw on the part of your mind that thinks the way they do, so you borrow the ability to this same thing through their guidance.

Other than that, no idea.

[Beautiful sky]

ENTp thought works a lot like that. They don't use models and stable descriptions, they just skip right to adressing the answer to the problem. The ENTps basically help you draw on the part of your mind that thinks the way they do, so you borrow the ability to this same thing through their guidance.

Other than that, no idea.

Maybe it's this the Ne, Ti

[consentingadult]

This is a Maritsa thing:




Really, I don't even think that first thing is accurate for me. It's mroe like I feel it's important to look at every single possibility from the beginning, and then evaluate all equally and try to eliminate those that don't go anywhere, though I'm always willing to go back to a possibility I've eliminated earlier.

Maritsa's definitions are vague to begin with, but I think your description is typical for how IEEs deal with information.

[krieger]

Maybe it's this the Ne, Ti

Yes. In ENTps the possibilities don't start contracting until they address the answer to the problem (J). Their understanding of the problem is variable and multiplicitous.

Contrarily, in INxjs, the act of understanding is already a contraction. So the person identifies one situation out of many possible ones in the act of recognizing the problem.

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa's definitions are vague to begin with, but I think your description is typical for how IEEs deal with information.

You blow at Socionics OR SUCK, TAKE A PICK EITHER WAY IT ARRIVES AT THE SAME CONCLUSION.

Yes. In ENTps the possibilities don't start contracting until they address the answer to the problem (J). Their understanding of the problem is variable and multiplicitous.

Contrarily, in INxjs, the act of understanding is already a contraction. So the person identifies one situation out of many possible ones in the act of recognizing the problem.

Thank you, that was wonderfully said.

[consentingadult]

You blow at Socionics OR SUCK, TAKE A PICK EITHER WAY IT ARRIVES AT THE SAME CONCLUSION.

Well, I'm willing to admit that I suck at your version of Socionics, which is a deluded form of Socionics.

[Beautiful sky]

Well, I'm willing to admit that I suck at your version of Socionics, which is a deluded form of Socionics.

I feel guilty for having said that to you. I'm sorry.

[consentingadult]

I feel guilty for having said that to you. I'm sorry.

I could accept your apologies, if only I'd know the reasons why you are sorry.

[Beautiful sky]

I could accept your apologies, if only I'd know the reasons why you are sorry.

I don't like lowering myself to that level, lose my emotions and temper. I'm very calm most of the time and yet something that you wrote got to the "please be smart about it" part of me. I think because I don't want to hurt your emotions and I realize that I have, that's not kind/human of me to not control my instinct for anger/rage/raw emotions.

You make assumptions about me that I am vague and I am unclear, that's just the N part of me; instead of doing that, next time, we'll call in the "guns" (ENTp's and ESTj's) to explain what we see and can't explain. With N types, you just have to trust sometimes that they know what they are talking about, that's not easy for most people to do without proof...well, labcoat provided the mathematics/logic behind that relationship dynamics and hopefully that is enough to proove it.

[consentingadult]

I don't like lowering myself to that level, lose my emotions and temper. I'm very calm most of the time and yet something that you wrote got to the "please be smart about it" part of me. I think because I don't want to hurt your emotions and I realize that I have, that's not kind/human of me to not control my instinct for anger/rage/raw emotions.

Well, you did not hurt me. No one can hurt me psychologically, unless I have expectations, in which case it is not the other person who hurt me, but my own expectations.

What I read in your apology, is that you feel you are more sorry about what you have done to yourself than what you have done to me (as said, I was not hurt). Fair enough, but in that case it's you yourself who has to accept your own apologies and forgive yourself.

[consentingadult]

You make assumptions about me that I am vague and I am unclear...

I never said that, I said:

Maritsa's definitions are vague to begin with...

You're confusing the message (your definitions) with the messenger (you) and take things way to personally.

[Lobo]

I look at it as the 1st function is your "aim," and creative is how you get there. I'm naturally inclined to understand general relationship dynamics and the inner emotional state of human life, and I get to the understanding via Ne, or something like that.

[Beautiful sky]

Well, you did not hurt me. No one can hurt me psychologically, unless I have expectations, in which case it is not the other person who hurt me, but my own expectations.

What I read in your apology, is that you feel you are more sorry about what you have done to yourself than what you have done to me (as said, I was not hurt). Fair enough, but in that case it's you yourself who has to accept your own apologies and forgive yourself.

What is your type?

[consentingadult]

What is your type?

We've been through this by PM's already and you have drawn conclusions about my type. Besides, you should have enough information by now to be able to draw conslusions about my type.

[Beautiful sky]

We've been through this by PM's already and you have drawn conclusions about my type. Besides, you should have enough information by now to be able to draw conslusions about my type.

I'm sorry there are too many people to keep track of sometimes; ESFp, but you want INFp, or I have you mixed up with someone else.

In any case, it makes sense of ESFp because of the "what you feel bad is about your own self and not me"...power.

I do not want anything, and IEI last of all. If you want to see me as SEE, that's your perogative and right to deal with me as such. But it is funny that you typed me LSE and SLI respectively before.

Oh, I remember now, you're not the VI case, you're the written language one...yeah. Sorry about that, I have gotten over 500 emails so far.

[Slacker]

Is there a way to change the thread title to include NiFe and FeNi as well? I'd like input from those folks too.

Edited to add that I figured it out.

[consentingadult]

I'm sorry there are too many people to keep track of sometimes; ESFp, but you want INFp.

I do not want anything, and IEI last of all. If you want to see me as SEE, that's your perogative and right to deal with me as such. But it is funny that you typed me LSE and SLI respectively before.

[Slacker]

She typed me as SEE before too. That's a common thing she types people as.

[consentingadult]

She typed me as SEE before too. That's a common thing she types people as.

Really? I must admit I have been ignoring her posts for a while, before that I was under the impression she typed everyone LSE :wink:

[Beautiful sky]

Really? I must admit I have been ignoring her posts for a while, before that I was under the impression she typed everyone LSE :wink:

Great, another assumption... I did not type her as SEE; at first I thought SEI until I read her post log.

pull the post where I said SEE not SEI Mariella, thanks.

[Slacker]

Great, another assumption... I did not type her as SEE; at first I thought SEI until I read her post log.

pull the post where I said SEE not SEI Mariella, thanks.

I showed you the post before and I'm not going to show you again. You called me SEE, actually twice.

[consentingadult]

Great, another assumption... I did not type her as SEE; at first I thought SEI until I read her post log.

pull the post where I said SEE not SEI Mariella, thanks.

Well, everyone can err, but in general Mariella has her shit together, and I doubt she's dishonest in this respect.

[Beautiful sky]

Really? I must admit I have been ignoring her posts for a while, before that I was under the impression she typed everyone LSE :wink:

Just tell me your type. And don't say INTp or INFj or INTj, because you're not those types.

[consentingadult]

Just tell me your type.

You just said so: SEE!

[Beautiful sky]

You just said so: SEE!

I was trying to remember from your emails...but if you like, I can pull your post log and disect it for you.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

So CA, did you accept her apology once she met your specifications for decision? Missed that part maybe, just seen you baiting her or something.

[consentingadult]

I was trying to remember from your emails...but if you like, I can pull your post log and disect it for you.

In your emails, you first said LSE then changed it to SLI. Feel free to pull my post log and disect if for yourself, I'm not interested in your opinion, since I consider your typing methods invalid.

[consentingadult]

So CA, did you accept her apology once she met your specifications for decision? Missed that part maybe, just seen you baiting her or something.

No I did not, but not because of adversity, but because from her response, I don't get the impression she needs my acceptance. I have no hard feelings against her in relation to myself, and there is nothing to forgive either.

[Beautiful sky]

In your emails, you first said LSE then changed it to SLI. Feel free to pull my post log and disect if for yourself, I'm not interested in your opinion, since I consider your typing methods invalid.

My instincts were correct the first time. I forgot who you were.
I typed you based on exactly how others type you only they assign superficial names and dichotomies to these functions which in my logic arrive to the same thing; as you can view below.

I don't need anyone's acceptance that's not what INFj's need; they need PROTECTION. Protection from getting emotionally hurt by cold SOB's like yourself. I'm happy not to stand down from an argument, my stubborn side shows right through.

[consentingadult]

And how is your method valid?
ESTj
My instincts were correct the first time. I forgot who you were.

My method is as valid as any unscientific system can be, and I accept that insecurity. But let me add that in my everyday dealings with people, I do not go just by socionics insights, but by a large body of knowledge. It works for me, but I'm prepared to change my views when my knowledge no longer seems to work for me.

Funny that you changed your typing of me in just a few minutes. In our PM's you were quite convinced I was SLI.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

No I did not, but not because of adversity, but because from her response, I don't get the impression she needs my acceptance. I have no hard feelings against her in relation to myself, and there is nothing to forgive either.

Fair enough.

I type you as a person, speak to Jung via seance for the rest.

[Beautiful sky]

Do you expect people to care about you over the internet, possibly even half way across the world from you, sitting at a computer screen somewhere you probably don't even know?

I know my duals who know me will be happy to take up that post; provided they have two bit of sense in their head, which so far, seems like they don't doesn't it; except for Rasputin and Airborne and a few SLI's and a few SEE even.

My method is as valid as any unscientific system can be, and I accept that insecurity. But let me add that in my everyday dealings with people, I do not go just by socionics insights, but by a large body of knowledge. It works for me, but I'm prepared to change my views when my knowledge no longer seems to work for me.

Funny that you changed your typing of me in just a few minutes. In our PM's you were quite convinced I was SLI.

I keep backing forth from ESTj to ISTp and you can't even see in your own writing why, can you? But I can. Because you're an S type, can't make the connections can you?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

My instincts were correct the first time. I forgot who you were.
I typed you based on exactly how others type you only they assign superficial names and dichotomies to these functions which in my logic arrive to the same thing; as you can view below.

I don't need anyone's acceptance that's not what INFj's need; they need PROTECTION. Protection from getting emotionally hurt by cold SOB's like yourself. I'm happy not to stand down from an argument, my stubborn side shows right through.

Do you expect people to care about you over the internet, possibly even half way across the world from you, sitting at a computer screen somewhere you probably don't even know?

[consentingadult]

Protection from getting emotionally hurt by cold SOB's like yourself.

No person can emotionally hurt you unless you have unrealistic expectations from that person, in which case you are hurt not by me, but by your own expectations. Where does it say I have to be warm person?

I deny that I am a cold person. I can be a pain in the ass to some people, but most people know me as a warm, considering, helpful and approachable person.

You on the other hand, are not warm. Underneath this so called and assumed EII warmness and loving facade, is a person with suppressed aggression and anger. You are a ticking time bomb.

[Beautiful sky]

Do you expect people to care about you over the internet, possibly even half way across the world from you, sitting at a computer screen somewhere you probably don't even know?

Do you want to know how duals provide that "protection"?

No person can emotionally hurt you unless you have unrealistic expectations from that person, in which case you are hurt not by me, but by your own expectations. Where does it say I have to be warm person?

I deny that I am a cold person. I can be a pain in the ass to some people, but most people know me as a warm, considering, helpful and approachable person.

You on the other hand, are not warm. Underneath this so called and assumed EII warmness and loving facade, is a person with suppressed aggression and anger. You are a ticking time bomb.

Only if it suits/serves your needs to see me that way. Then you can pose the same argument for you; you don't see me but you see yourself.

[thePirate]

hehe

oh maritsa yoru avatar is soo cute!

it makes me want to cuddle you