Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 60

Thread: Does Fi work this way?

  1. #1
    Delilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    1,497
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Does Fi work this way?

    Often it is said (by all the formal sources) that Si will avoid/stay clear of situation where the inner peace/balance is disturbed and will avoid things such as those that are harmful to one's physical health, etc. Not in these exact words, but this is a very brief summary of it.

    Does Fi work similarly in that it will avoid the negative relations, those that present a potential for conflict? If this is true, would then a Fi ego person seek out the most compatible relations and generally be attracted to such? Would then a Fi ego person be less likely to be in largely incompatible relations (be it friends or other)

    Thanks for your feedback.

  2. #2
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,608
    Mentioned
    268 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Excellent question.

    Let's start off with what Fi ABSOLUTELY is not. It is not a value judgment....it does not fall into some moral domain. It is a socionics function. Plain and simple. Socionic functions are information processors. Thus, Fi is an information processor. That means value neutral. The butchering of Fi into a conflation with morality is amongst the pervasive stereotype that needs to be tossed out.

    Si similarly got railroaded by those working inside the one dimensional, one typology closed universe....there it got conflated into type nine. Avoidance of allowing situations to disturb one's mental tranquility is pure enneagram nine. R & H calls it the nine's inner sanctum. That's not to say the nine does not avoid such situations....the SLE-Se 9w1 so/sp can be quite brutal, but that its more nines negate the impact of their actions through the defense mechanism known as isolation. They disassociate...it allows them to be aggressive without really having to experience the impact of that aggression. The inner sanctum never gets touched. In attributing type nine to Si/SEI, socionists began invading the domain of behavior and personality. They couldn't just stick to socionics as cognition even though that was the crux of the theory. Think about it. Avoidance is behaviorally-related rather than cognition-type related...because the crux is 'to avoid', to avoid disturbing situations. To avoid is a behavior, so, thus, does not infer any particular cognition and has no significance socionically. People will vastly different styles of cognition can engage in avoidance. Yet, this was the direction Si and moreso SEI ended up becoming taken in.

    In contrast to typologers with one typology blinders on, I've not only laid a conceptually/structurally/logically flawless foundation for typing enneagram types (nobody else on the internet has done this), but I also laid the foundation for a conceptually/structurally/logically flawless foundation for typing socionic types. Thus, my point of view is expansive enough to lord over everybody but especially those just coming from inside a closed socionics universe...It's important to get the right information out there....my unification of socionics and enneagram does that. [on a sidenote, any and all typers here elsewhere or in wanting to go off on their own, need to be using the foundations I have laid as their basis for typing. anybody whose using my foundations will qualify to receive protection and reinforcement.]

    So in turning to Fi, we are looking specifically at the cognition. I will repost my post on Fi cognition, which is like the best concise summary of Fi cognition ever and I am not saying that because I wrote it, but because it gets out of the moralistic shell game of conflating Fi to morals...It was also the post that set off the great socionics bloodbath against the quadra values mythology.....what I got was...."Oh but don't you know all murderers and psychos are in Beta!"

    "Fi cognition is an internal mirror of other people's inner worlds. It would be like having another person inside your skin, that you're constantly introspecting to. Fi has heightened capacity to experience that other person's thoughts/memories/goals/discomforts/impressions and grasp the other persons' psychology as if it were organic to their own. See the car-ride clip from basic instinct. in the meantime, the EII's own thoughts/memories/goals/discomforts/drives are pushed out of cognition and wind up in the PoLR.

    Fi/Ne cognition excels at envisioning/anticipating/forecasting immediate and distant futures for the person....so the possibile ways in which the surrounding context will effect that person's psychology. in the clip you see lecter fishing for information that he can use to deepen his internal mirror of clarice.

    EII vs IEE: The difference between Fi/Ne and Ne/Fi is Fi/Ne is drained by any environment/situation where they aren't directly involved with the person/people they have internally mirrored. Ne/Fi mirroring cognition reflects more the other person's external world and outer responses/inflections but doesn't go as inward. Ne/Fi mirroring changes rapidly from one environment to the next and just mirrors enough to adapt/blend in socially. It's very easy to tell who the EII has in their internal mirror because that's who they will constantly talk and/or wonder about.
    "


    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...83#post1254083
    Last edited by Kill4Me; 07-22-2018 at 05:19 AM.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    244
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kill4Me View Post
    Excellent question.

    Let's start off with what Fi ABSOLUTELY is not. It is not a value judgment....it does not fall into some moral domain. It is a socionics function. Plain and simple. Socionic functions are information processors. Thus, Fi is an information processor. That means value neutral. The butchering of Fi into a conflation with morality is amongst the pervasive stereotype that needs to be tossed out.
    The most wrong response I have ever seen. Everything is the opposite of what you said. Fi is a judgement function that evaluates the ethicacy of decisions.

  4. #4
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    338 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have hard time seeing EII's as value driven. I mostly see them subjectively evaluating feelings of another person through their own lens. This is a subjective process (and probably means empathy to many) and can be off. They would be bad judges. Values as on sense of crystallized in definitive form? Probably not. Sure they have to come into definitions at some point but you usually see it as If they do those case by case basis. They will surely break the rules If they feel (enough) that way.
    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

  5. #5
    Chthonic Daydream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    The Snail Spiral
    Posts
    1,245
    Mentioned
    171 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    I have hard time seeing EII's as value driven. I mostly see them subjectively evaluating feelings of another person through their own lens. This is a subjective process (and probably means empathy to many) and can be off. They would be bad judges. Values as on sense of crystallized in definitive form? Probably not. Sure they have to come into definitions at some point but you usually see it as If they do those case by case basis. They will surely break the rules If they feel (enough) that way.
    You never cease to amaze me. This is some quality socionics info right there. Well done.
    “I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
    Clarice Lispector

  6. #6
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The answer is yes and no. You ask whether Fi avoids "conflicting" relations, not conflicting situations, and by that I imagine that you're referring to a person whom we know we can't deal with for one reason or the other, and so does a Fi avoid that person? Well yes, but seriously who would want to deal with someone who just causes distress or conflict? The thing is that even when we deal with someone close and dear we can go through conflict, so what does a Fi does? Se people tend to face the thing right away and are usually unmovable on their convictions; Ne people are less direct and with a tendency to withdraw in the "what if...".

    In general, Fi is not the function of "good relationships", that's more Fe; Fi has "deeper" principles than Fe because these principles are tied to what is the essence of the Fi types, the law they live by, but it's an internal law, not coming from outside (although sure, there's always a contribution, an exchange), so even a Fi can be pretty much "against the current" and cause conflict with the outside world just in virtue of its feeling.

    'neway I've seen Gamma SF just cut out people without much regret, for all of their reasons, close friends and colleagues and what not. Delta NF don't really do that but they'll probably start disappearing...

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    282
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fi avoids conflict because of their own internal discomfort, fi also causes conflict because of their own internal discomfort.

  8. #8
    falsehope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    TIM
    ILE ENTp-Ti
    Posts
    438
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am yet to find Si who takes care of his health and doesnt endanger others as well Fi people with good relationships.

  9. #9
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kill4Me View Post
    Excellent question.

    Let's start off with what Fi ABSOLUTELY is not. It is not a value judgment....it does not fall into some moral domain. It is a socionics function. Plain and simple. Socionic functions are information processors. Thus, Fi is an information processor. That means value neutral. The butchering of Fi into a conflation with morality is amongst the pervasive stereotype that needs to be tossed out.
    It's not morality, no, but it does involve value judgements. Value judgements and morality are not the same thing, and can even be opposites if you think in terms of a moral code. A value judgment just says, "This is good/something I like" or "this is bad/something I don't like" and at a simplistic level, this is indeed Fi. The reason it gets conflated with morality while not actually being morality itself is when someone takes a Fi judgement, and tries to impose it on everyone else. So, "I don't like this" becomes "this is a bad thing, nobody should do it" when it's simply how that person feels about something.

    Ethical codes on the other hand, are funny enough more Ti than Fi . . .something like Kant's moral imperative is entirely Ti - and in direct opposition to Fi. IE "objective, rationally necessary and unconditional principle that we must always follow despite any natural desires or inclinations we may have to the contrary" and this illustrates the difference between a Ti principle and Fi sentiment. Fi is involved in those "desires and inclinations" in fact "desires and inclinations" is a pretty good descriptor of Fi.

    Both Ti and Fi are static judgements, but how they make those judgments are different. At the aspect level you have them differing only in explicit vs implicit or external vs internal or pick your synonymous words of choice. Bringing that up to a working level it roughly translates into the difference between principles and sentiments. (Which means Fi creatives are technically unprincipled lol, and before anyone jumps down my throat - I'm just teasing. And everyone has at least some use of all the elements, even polr anyway.) Anyway, Fi leads operate under Ti norms as their role, and Ti leads operate under Fi norms as their role, so it's never a huge stretch to understand the other. Also with all that static judgment both in the way they think and generally act, IJs end up being the most rigid-seeming bastards of the socion hehe.

  10. #10
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    that said all base rationals have a degree of hyper rigidity, the formula for base Te is just derived from the outside, but is no less rigidly adhered to, it just seems like they are more willing to adjust because it is determined from outside which can change. these people happen to be hyper conservative, because they build their lives on the rules as they stood at one time [1], and don't like to see them change, because they're bound to change with them, and that could invalidate much of their prior effort. LSE is very much like this. I have a LSE professor and he was, strangely, very much against progress in the US civil rights movement in regard to contraceptive use (it used to be illegal), and much of his argument relied on the premise that many people got married simply to have sex and that if we make contraceptives legal it might make some of those relationships look like poor choices in retrospect (contraceptive between married couples was also illegal, but the idea was you were more likely to risk pregnancy with your spouse, so it had this dual effect of promoting marriage and thus was resisted as being a threat to society).. I remember laughing to myself at this argument, because I thought essentially if that is what you base marriage on you get what you get because it was a house built on sand anyway, since the only true guarantor of human bonds is genuine love that functions best in spite of opposition not when it is generated as a product of sticks/carrots on the part of the law. and that laws change, and so they should, as we come to fix old problems and promote freedom in general. law is in flux and only reflects the prevailing attitudes of society, it can't be otherwise without being a tyranny by definition [2]



    [1] Ni polr being the most obvious example, but even Ni creatives can "gamble" and lose

    [2] a prevailing societal attitude could become tyranical according to a minority, but I think these tyranny of the majority scenarios are more often a consequence of an actual inversion of the minority/majority via linguistic manipulation. by this I mean money is transformed into influence is transformed into laws and some of these laws function to supress votes which transform a powerful minority into a "majority" on paper, when the "votes" are tallied. this is more a hijacking of the system in order to create the impression of a prevailing attitude of society when it is more a manufactured attitude laundered through a process that abstracts people from their votes and creates results tailored to suit fundamentally anti social ends. in other words, based on my experience in California for example and prop 8, the anti gay marriage initiative, the entire thing was more a consequence of resources and effort being funneled into passing a law that did not reflect the actual values of the society, and yet it passed via a "direct democratic" initiative. this is not some metaphysical splitting of hairs, "tyranny of the majority" in a contemporary US context often just means "hijacking of the political process by elites in order to pass what is fundamentally at odds with societal values but pass it off as the prevailing attitude, by manipulating the process itself by which the prevailing attitude is said to be determined"... by analogy, its a form of losing the popular vote but winning the electoral college for president and then the president denying human rights to unlawful immigrants--is that really the voice of the majority? it could be said to be a minority suffering at the hands of the majority but it seems more likely to say the president does not actually have the values of the majority behind him, rather the entire thing is a sham and the emperor has no clothes despite draping himself in the sanctifying process of "democracy", which is democracy in name only, having actually been handed to them by another branch and the confluence of every other little theft that went into creating this particular outcome
    Last edited by Bertrand; 07-22-2018 at 04:58 PM.

  11. #11
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Calling IJs the "most rigid-seeming bastards of the socion" was meant as a lighthearted joking remark, not to be taken completely seriously. Hmm, maybe I shouldn't joke about these things.
    Last edited by squark; 07-22-2018 at 05:01 PM.

  12. #12
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    well its true if for no other reason than "rigid-seeming" is a matter of perspective, and someone (possibly most) sees that mode of rigidity as the most rigid, but its really no more rigid than other forms of base rationality. I thought it was an insightful post, and I don't think anyone is taking it to be hostile or denigrating towards IJs since we're mainly talking about how they're perceived not what they genuinely are worth as a class

  13. #13
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delilah View Post
    Often it is said (by all the formal sources) that Si will avoid/stay clear of situation where the inner peace/balance is disturbed and will avoid things such as those that are harmful to one's physical health, etc. Not in these exact words, but this is a very brief summary of it.

    Does Fi work similarly in that it will avoid the negative relations, those that present a potential for conflict?
    Avoiding conflict is again Si, not Fi. Si valuers are the ones who tend to avoid conflict, Alphas perhaps somewhat less than Deltas but they all do in general. Gammas may use Fi to decide who to avoid, but it isn't with the goal of avoiding conflict, it's merely because they dislike the person.

    would then a Fi ego person seek out the most compatible relations and generally be attracted to such? Would then a Fi ego person be less likely to be in largely incompatible relations (be it friends or other)
    Do Fi egos tend to have more successful relationships? Yes and no. They tend to form more stable relationships and are better at maintaining them. But relationships are tricky things and can fail even when you do your best to prevent it.

    If you're talking just about socionic compatibility, then I'd wager the answer is a resounding "no".

  14. #14
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    a code are the scales and the value judgements are how much weight you assign the objects thrown into the scales. a moral judgment is what results. obviously you can influence the moral judgement by weighing the values differently, so the two are related. you can think of moral judgements as derivations of values, with the code being that which mediates the two

  15. #15
    Delilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    1,497
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Avoiding conflict is again Si, not Fi. Si valuers are the ones who tend to avoid conflict, Alphas perhaps somewhat less than Deltas but they all do in general. Gammas may use Fi to decide who to avoid, but it isn't with the goal of avoiding conflict, it's merely because they dislike the person.

    .
    To the bold, no, i don't think so. I know plenty of LSEs and SLIs who are not conflict averse and have even initiated conflicts/fights, you name it.

    Regarding your last sentence , yes, that's what i'm investigating, whether Fi ego types are more prone to compatible relations. Well, not strictly in the socionics sense, but that too i guess.

  16. #16
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    luls Delilah so true, they're all mistyped

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    282
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Deltas seem to usually shy away from conflict and tense up in high conflict situations. Gammas don't shy away. If they deem you useless, you're useless and are never going to change. Good riddance, and they're not afraid to make it very clear to you no matter who you are.

    I'm just wondering if Fi doms in general are easily triggered and/or defensive for no apparent reason? Or that perhaps their reasons are so deep seated, they themselves are not even always aware of them? For instance, when dealing with a FiSe, I grabbed something before she got to it and playfully said "You snooze you lose". She basically unleashed the wrath of hades on me and I was thinking she was probably triggered by something she is not aware of. Her reaction was very bizarre.

    I've also encountered something similar with a Fi-INFj (unhealthy subtype), who can't handle conflict at all, but she's okay belittling and bullying people who she deems beneath her. She particularly dislikes people who go against her code of ethics.

  18. #18
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    F-types use associative processes in their rationalizations and there's quite a lot of information about associative memory/processes; it's N-like rationalization processes. The only difference between Fe and Fi is the way rationalization is structured. Fi-types rationalize in isolation meaning disconnected from input; they're rooted in process and treat information as transient opposite to Fe-types. They emerge from rationalization with conclusions which give them a sort of moralist-like demeanor - even those who are devils incarnate. It would be myopic to imply that one type will avoid something more than another, or be more successful at something. Type is an information processing system and not the sum total of eggs in a basket. One can attribute certain perspectives to Fi but not specific outcomes......

    a.k.a. I/O

  19. #19
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    luls Delilah so true, they're all mistyped
    That's not outside the realm of possibility.

    But by all means, continue to use the "I know an X and they're not like that" argument, it makes for some brilliant discussions.

  20. #20
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Delilah conflict is something that by definition disturbs the peace and balance. So why would someone who values peace and balance intentionally engage in conflict?

  21. #21
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the answer to that is they think they are "helping" but sometimes even retreating or complying actually serves to escalate conflict, despite the counter intuitiveness of that statement. not to mention people rarely just roll over, they go an marshal resistance in some other manner. I would say people de-escalate a lot less than they think, they simply cling to an illusory moral highground in order to advance in a different direction. true conflict de-escalation occurs in psychological understanding, which is a sophisticated non linear process. the nature of crude Se is to some extent take a one size fits all or naive approach to conflict resolution in the same way any other low dimensional function may. I would identify "adequacy" mostly as a consequence of dimensionality. thinking "I value comfort" necessarily leads to not intentionally engaging in conflict more or less ignores all non linear approaches in snatching greater comfort by force, or through passive aggression

  22. #22
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    That's not outside the realm of possibility.

    But by all means, continue to use the "I know an X and they're not like that" argument, it makes for some brilliant discussions.
    I agree that the definitions of the functions are more telling than the descriptions of how x,y type behaves but even the latter is quite fundamental in order to understand the function description and the type itself. In particular, the functions represent some archetypes and for this their meaning is not one dimensional but multifaced, shaded; the same applies to the dimensionality, a 4D function represents the complete image of that function, which comprehends not just the good but the bad aspects too, because each function has them.

    Another thing to keep in mind is that we're not just one function, but a combination of 2, and sometimes the 2 cohabiting functions are of a pretty different nature from each other, like say a Fi-Se or a Te-Si will have to integrate the "ideal relationship" with the force (ESI), or the "master and command" mindset with the comfort part (LSE).... but if it makes little sense in these terms it instead acquires greater meaning if you add the other elements to those functions used, because Fi is not just "let's love deeply", Se is not just force and Si is not just comfort... etc.
    Last edited by ooo; 07-23-2018 at 09:23 PM.

  23. #23
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    sometimes the 2 cohabiting functions are of a pretty different nature from each other, like say a Fi-Se or a Te-Si will have to integrate the "ideal relationship" with the force (ESI), or the "master and command" mindset with the comfort part (LSE)....
    Te has nothing to do with "the master and command mindset", this is simply a misconception - it's Se in socionics, not Te. Maybe that's how it is in MBTI. Te+Si is about solving practical tasks that improve the immediate condition of a person or a thing.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Te has nothing to do with "the master and command mindset", this is simply a misconception - it's Se in socionics, not Te. Maybe that's how it is in MBTI. Te+Si is about solving practical tasks that improve the immediate condition of a person or a thing.


    BOOM.

  25. #25
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Te has nothing to do with "the master and command mindset", this is simply a misconception - it's Se in socionics, not Te. Maybe that's how it is in MBTI. Te+Si is about solving practical tasks that improve the immediate condition of a person or a thing.
    it is in socionics too if you realize that Te is an extroverted rational thinking function, ie. Te involvement is in the rationalization of the dynamic outside "objects", this can be mastery at best, it can even be a command in one of its many forms. evidently, we talk of 2 diff mindsets of "master and command", to you that's Se, because "socionics: Se= force", proving my idea that if you stick to a one dimensional explanation of what functions are, it can become quite dull.

    btw the socionic label for the LSE is "administrator", for an SLE it's "conqueror", master and command can apply to both. it's no coincidence because LSE's stack is the same of SLE but inverted, therefore they're quasi, but it's MBTI that doesn't explain these details.

  26. #26
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    338 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    This is all crap. Stop using empiricism and guess and checking.

    Replace extraverted with inductive and introverted with deductive and then you will understand all the functions.
    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

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    244
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    No. I find it unreasonable that people mindless recite cannon and keep on hitting the same issues year after year, decade after decade.

  28. #28
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    338 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    No. I find it unreasonable that people mindless recite cannon and keep on hitting the same issues year after year, decade after decade.


    What was EDI-I again in normal people language? Just being stuck having dilemmas with ethical component won't make a person ethical type. Just saying. There are more constructive ways to approach this and people are not going change in huge volumes towards one's subjective desire.
    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
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ethicative?

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    282
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraph View Post
    What's an unhealthy subtype? I've never heard of that... Or do you mean that Fi subtype is unhealthy compared to Ne subtype?
    I just meant she's an unhealthy Fi dom. Not that any subtype or type is more or less unhealthy than the other.

  31. #31
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    very imaginative @domr lol, I like that one

    btw im not sure of the correlation of inductivism/deductivism related to E/I, and not sure it comes off more human than extro/intro, they're terms that we use in common speech

  32. #32
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    338 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is an article that mentions process types being more deductive and result types being more inductive.
    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

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    244
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    There is an article that mentions process types being more deductive and result types being more inductive.
    Process/Result doesn't exist. It's baseless speculation.

    Here is the big picture idea.

    Introversion -> Deductive
    Extraversion -> Inductive

    Sensation -> Pratical
    Intuition -> Theoretical

    Thinking -> Logical
    Feeling -> Ethical

  34. #34
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i think that for some elements the deductive/inductive correlation is off.

    take Ne and Ni, Ne is deductive, it collects frames and draws parallels and conclusions, while Ni is often about inducing the personal vision in one's own world, or creating images out of that vision.

    take Te and Ti, Te deduces from their reality, Ti follows its own induced logic.


    the terms are ok for a "logical" approach, but they don't relate to extro/intro-version.

  35. #35
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    338 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    You make your big picture out of thin air?

    Anyways LII's tend to be helluva lot more inductive than their mirrors... also big picture sounds more inductive. Which seems to be getting something out of something.
    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

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    244
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    i think that for some elements the deductive/inductive correlation is off.

    take Ne and Ni, Ne is deductive, it collects frames and draws parallels and conclusions, while Ni is often about inducing the personal vision in one's own world, or creating images out of that vision.

    take Te and Ti, Te deduces from their reality, Ti follows its own induced logic.


    the terms are ok for a "logical" approach, but they don't relate to extro/intro-version.
    I said that you need to look at the etymology of the words to understand what they mean.

    Prepositions/Prefixes
    In is the exact same as intro; into.
    De is away from an a place. Ex is from away from a place, starting inside that place. Very close to synonyms.

    Roots
    Vert is turn.
    Duct is lead.
    It's similar to a left/right vs up/down difference between these words.

    So these words are essentially interchangeable and there is a reason why I flipped introvert (into) to deduction (away). You need to stop thinking of functions are individuals and rather as part of blocks. It might be easier if you ignore the 4 functions and just focus on the perception and judgement at a fundamental level.

  37. #37
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    You make your big picture out of thin air?

    Anyways LII's tend to be helluva lot more inductive than their mirrors... also big picture sounds more inductive. Which seems to be getting something out of something.
    Yeah, process is deductive and result is inductive. Has nothing to do with intro/extro.

  38. #38
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would also like to add that process and result are meaningful categories that add to the structure in a productive way; they're not mere synonyms for something else

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    244
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    I would also like to add that process and result are meaningful categories that add to the structure in a productive way; they're not mere synonyms for something else
    They are trash like DCHN. The only Reinin dichotomy that is meaningful is aristocratic/democratic.

  40. #40
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    I said that you need to look at the etymology of the words to understand what they mean.

    Prepositions/Prefixes
    In is the exact same as intro; into.
    De is away from an a place. Ex is from away from a place, starting inside that place. Very close to synonyms.

    Roots
    Vert is turn.
    Duct is lead.
    It's similar to a left/right vs up/down difference between these words.

    So these words are essentially interchangeable and there is a reason why I flipped introvert (into) to deduction (away). You need to stop thinking of functions are individuals and rather as part of blocks. It might be easier if you ignore the 4 functions and just focus on the perception and judgement at a fundamental level.
    I know that in- and de- duction have a meaning somewhat similar to intro/extro- version but it's no coincidence these words are used in a logical context and not to emphasize the orientation of someone, that is better rendered by extro or introversion. An introvert doesn't necessarily draw a conclusion by scanning all the outside possibilities (=deduction), but he's nevertheless always internally oriented.

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
  •