Leave Out All The Rest by Linkin Park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterpark
Printable View
Leave Out All The Rest by Linkin Park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterpark
I daydream like crazy and always have. I don't see how this is limited to Ni dominant types. Maybe it's an intuitive thing and different intuitives do it differently? I don't know.
Thanks. I wonder if someone can socionize it.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSpin
.
That seems like the exact opposite of how it should be.
Still doesn't make sense.
opposite?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kioshi
what kioshi wrote seems to fit the enfp-narrator infp-taciturn thing
what doesn't make sense to you?
Actually, I'm not trying to do that; sorry if it sounded like that. I've mentioned many times that I disagree with those who tries to reduce people to their ego block.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
What I was doing was speculating that Ne in an INj person may have some similarities to Ni because it's "focused" by the rational function. Other people have suggested similar things in the past. I was merely trying to assess people's reaction to that idea, not proposing it as a definite thing.
Also, it does seem to me that perhaps people of different types who use Ni do seem to use it in a way that has a different "flavor," and I was trying to see if anyone noticed that or had interesting things to say on that.
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana
No function is limited to its dominant types.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
To focus your thoughts on the taste of red wine, chocolate cake, or on the warm sensation of a hot bath - while not thinking of anything else much - is :Si: . But who'd say that only Si dominants do that?
Everyone uses all functions, and the difference is what Diana mentioned. So to say "this is what everyone does " - ok, this can be applied to all functions. So?
Daydreaming helps you to:
Relax
Manage Conflict
Mentally Rehearse
Review Events
Maintain Relationships and the Emotions Involved
Relieve Boredom
So, how do you propose using this Ni=daydreaming theory to cover the above aspects/uses of daydreaming in Model A and/or the whole id, super-id, ego, and super-ego thing?
Can you first tell me what your view of Ni is, apart from "internal dynamics of fields"?
Ni = daydreaming is a gross oversimplification of what I said, by the way. But please tell me how you'd define it.
His father could have been been ESTJ, I am not sure, there isn't enough info online, however the other 2 are ENTJs. Conrad Black's wife is ESTJ by teh way. And both he and the younger Vidal have the same misguided idea of what being is involved in being an aristocrat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
I can't use Ne easily as compared to my Ne dominant father and sister.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
I think that functions are the same in socionics as in Jung.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
Art is not about daydreaming, daydreaming is very useful, but to get published you need much much more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
You should take up a career in daydreaming then :PQuote:
Originally Posted by implied
Me too, but that's just absentmindeness, my ENTP father does the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSpin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder
You should ask THEM.
Go f yourself you virgin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Transigent
Rowling is ISFJQuote:
Originally Posted by Expat
You haven't got a clue about these people, or about the types.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dioklecian
Barbara Amiel is ESTj? How? Why? She is sheer :Fe: and :Se: . Do you even know what it means to be ESTj in socionics? Based on what do you make this kind of assertions? Like the argument you used to type Augustus as INTp, "his statues sort of look like Putin"?
EDIT: and ok, Transigent insulted you, you insulted him back. Now drop it.
I agree with many of Ann's points in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
If you will use the impolite style of transgender guy, I will not respond to you anymore. [u]Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
Dio, you may ignore me all you wish, but I told you to drop the matter with Transigent, so I'm kicking you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dioklecian
For starters, I was not the only one who interpreted what you were saying as suggesting that daydreaming = Ni or Ni = daydreaming. Nor am I the only one who used the term daydreaming in referring to your theory. In fact, you yourself have suggested that Ni is "building up whole consistent stories in your minds, spontaneously" yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
A number of people who are not Ni base, creative, nor polr have said that they daydream a lot. Admittedly, some may have been referring to "mind-wandering" (though I've no idea what the difference is between daydreaming and mind-wandering as most people use those terms synonymously.) Yet, you didn't accuse them of oversimplifying what you said. Is it any wonder, then, if I might be misinterpreting what you're trying to say?
***
I suppose he could be overcomplicating the ego, though it's just as likely some people are attempting to oversimplify it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
This is where my questions regarding how the Ni=daydreaming/storybuilding fit into model A and the id/ego stuff came in. But I'm assuming first something else would need to be cleared up….
I see the functions as INFORMATION elements (as in types of information our minds are capable of processing), not as actions in and of themselves. Daydreaming is an action that can be active and/or passive. Mind-wandering is an action though likely a passive one. "spontaneously building up whole consistent stories in your minds" is an action that can be active and/or passive (some people might even link this to the narrator dichotomy). I'm having a really hard time finding the INFORMATION in any of these. Perhaps you can clarify it for me?
I don't think Expat is trying to say or imply that ALL daydreaming is related to Ni, but rather that one manifestation of Ni is a very particular kind of daydreaming in which a sequential scenario is developed and followed over a long period of time.
Expat, I'm curious: how would writing biographies be more easily attributed to Te as an 8th function than a 1st?
Would this include me attempting to work a new character into Harry Potter? Someone that I believe is lacking (no it's not myself, heh)? I've done it before with other stories... whilst I'm trying to drift off to sleep, attempted to see how the story could have been made a little bit better, or expanded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilly
I'm not going to pass judgment on this one, but it would appear to fall under Expat's interpretation.
Yes, I think so, and Gilly does know what I mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSpin
Generally speaking, it wouldn't. I am was referring to Lord Black's case only. As far as I know (and I don't know that much about him), writing biographies is sort of a hobby, which he does somewhat leisurely. Despite his career as a newpaper tycoon, writing non-fiction himself doesn't seem to be a main interest. He wrote his first biography, on FDR, basically because he had a long fascination for FDR and a vast collection of papers and memorablia, and based his biography largely on those.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilly
I wouldn't have said that Black is Ti EP based only on that, though. It fits my general impression of him.
Perhaps it isn't any wonder.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
Anyway, note that even in the quote above, I tried to explain what I meant more precisely than "daydreaming".
You're asking me to frame MY understanding of functions the same way YOU frame them. I never stopped for a moment to wonder about whether "information elements" is a good name or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
I have written my own views on the functions before, especially in the "Te views thread" in Gamma. I think that, for instance, to see :Se: as a pure "information element"' in the sense of "perceiving information" makes one overlook the very significant aspect of Se in terms of driving someone to take action. The same for all the functions.
So, strong Ni leads one to tap into their own thoughts away from the immediate physical reality - as Augusta said, "his thoughts are not in the now, but in what was or will be" - which is closer to the "intuition of time" aspect, which as I have said is too limiting since it does not take into account the "dreamer" aspect more usually associated with INFps. If you are tapping into your own thoughts away from physical reality, that becomes also a source of "information", does it not?
The "sequential process" as Gilly described - "if I do this, this will happen, and then this" - is another, less "out there" manifestation of the same inclination.
The way I see it, simplistically, it is this:Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
- Ni as base: a strong preference for inner reflection for long periods of time, following consistent scenarios, either totally imaginary (writing a novel) or following scenarios about the future or the past. I see the "novel-writing" bit as "über-Ni" if you will, just like sinking in a hot tub for hours while drinking wine and listening to music, while not thinking of anything else, is über-Si. In the case of Ni as base, the scenarios and/or sequential thoughts will be connected either to the Te reality or the Fe reality.
- Ni as creative: this is more visible in the "sequential thought" and "future scenarios" aspect, since it is "at the service" of Te and Fe. With Te - is this going to work in the longer term? With Fe - what will be their emotional response in the longer term?
- Ni as role: relatively little inclination to do the above as the person keeps "coming back" to the Si immediate reality of what they are sensing and what's in front of them.
- Ni as PoLR: of course Si EJs also "daydream", but they don't priorize it at all in relation to reacting to what's in front of them, and would have difficulty doing that the way a Ni IP does - they'd keep thinking they have to do something "real". And who can guess what will happen anyway? Better to deal with things as they come. Etc.
- Ni as dual-seeking: Se EPs are inclined to do things impulsively, following their Se perceptions and drives, without thinking of the consequences - but very often wishing they had, so they are attracted to people who think up what-could-happen scenarios before just acting.
- Ni as HA: Se IJs are more confident in their own ability to think of the consequences before acting than Se EPs, but whenever they do it "too much", they get anxious and wonder whether they should not just do something before it gets "too late".
- Ni as 7th: Ne EPs can easily focus on one specific scenario or on possible sequences and consequences but find it less stimulating than Ne.
- Ni as 8th: Ne IJs can equally do it, but it's not something they see as too important. For instance, since they are not likely to act on Se impulses, do they have to worry too much about consequences?
Not a very accurate ending. I daydream a lot, but when I'm with other people, I keep thinking what other people's emotional response IS (in the present). I also sometimes try to figure out how others will react in the future, but I mostly just keep thinking of my personal interpretation of the present and past. I act first and analyze later. I think this is the majority of my daydreams. I sometimes think of a hypothetical future situation that I like and I think about everyone else around me and what attitude they have towards me and I make a "to do" list to get there. But it's not quite the same as thinking of their emotional response in the long term. Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am. They are not important for what they are. I don't go around pleasing people and other Fe dominants don't do that either.Quote:
- Ni as creative: this is more visible in the "sequential thought" and "future scenarios" aspect, since it is "at the service" of Te and Fe. With Te - is this going to work in the longer term? With Fe - what will be their emotional response in the longer term?
Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?
Which is also defined by:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristiina
Which is what I had in mind with "emotional responses in the longer term" - ie what their opinions are of you. I don't disagree with what you said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristiina
I daydream about, uhm, sex.
Do you go about your day with a permanent hard-on, or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by FDG
No because I don't daydream all dayQuote:
Originally Posted by KSpin
That's not entirely my point. Is it just cool in Italy to talk about wanting sex all day or something? I certainly know it wouldn't be practical to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by FDG
Depends on the company of course, I don't talk about sex with my boss at work (only sometimes), or with my family membersQuote:
Originally Posted by KSpin
Rephrasing it makes a world of difference. It's not the same thing from my PoV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
Of course I meant wouldn't, rather than would.