Results 1 to 40 of 57

Thread: Forums Perception

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,084
    Mentioned
    196 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Forums Perception

    INTj: Rigid, Mechanical, Calculating, Analytical, Inventive, Creative, Philosophical, Passive, Unaggressive
    INTp: Analytical, Philosophical, Open-minded, Sarcastic, Bold, Creative, spontaneous

    Problem with this: Ok, to start off with, this totally defies logic. If model A is in anyway accurate, there is no way this can be the case. Take the ENTp for example. Most people think that the ENTp is impulsive, spontaneous, and creative(most of this due to people's idiocy with the EP group), which is true. In viewing the ENTp this way, most people totally disregard the idea of functional analysis. Though I don't think anything should be set in stone, its generally accepted by socionists that the function responsible for this is Ne. Now if INTjs and ENTps both use Ne in their ego block, wouldn't they both appear to be similar in this regard(not exactly the same) but they should resemble each other in their impulsiveness and creativity. Ne is often referred to as the intuition of possibilities. I find this to be odd(though its correct) when comparing it to what people think of Ni. I've seen several times where Ni is referred to as the intuition of "magical possibilities". Ok, if you don't see the problem with this, then you are probably brain dead. The ENTps weakest unconscious function 7, which most socionists refer to as the anti-thesis to the personality of that individual is Ni. Whatever the ENTp is, the INTp must be their anti-thesis, its a ideal of mathematical precision. Anything other than that would indicate a total failure in the model.
    So if Ne is about possibilities, originality, impulsivity, and creativity; then Ni has to be about absolutes, normalness, and static behavior. Or it could be the other way, where ENTps and INTjs are the ones that think in absolutes normalness and static behavior; though this would totally contradict the ideologies behind the functions and most notable socionists opinions. If this was the case, ISTjs would be the new INTj. But then again, most people here can't even tell me what the hell Ni is or supposedly is, yet for some reason they keep holding onto this stereotype of INTps and INTjs. The truth is, is there has to be something wrong with the crap that everyone is spoon feeding everyone.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    INTj: Rigid, Mechanical, Calculating, Analytical, Inventive, Creative, Philosophical, Passive, Unaggressive
    INTp: Analytical, Philosophical, Open-minded, Sarcastic, Bold, Creative, spontaneous

    Problem with this: Ok, to start off with, this totally defies logic. If model A is in anyway accurate, there is no way this can be the case. Take the ENTp for example. Most people think that the ENTp is impulsive, spontaneous, and creative(most of this due to people's idiocy with the EP group), which is true. In viewing the ENTp this way, most people totally disregard the idea of functional analysis. Though I don't think anything should be set in stone, its generally accepted by socionists that the function responsible for this is Ne. Now if INTjs and ENTps both use Ne in their ego block, wouldn't they both appear to be similar in this regard(not exactly the same) but they should resemble each other in their impulsiveness and creativity. Ne is often referred to as the intuition of possibilities. I find this to be odd(though its correct) when comparing it to what people think of Ni. I've seen several times where Ni is referred to as the intuition of "magical possibilities". Ok, if you don't see the problem with this, then you are probably brain dead. The ENTps weakest unconscious function 7, which most socionists refer to as the anti-thesis to the personality of that individual is Ni. Whatever the ENTp is, the INTp must be their anti-thesis, its a ideal of mathematical precision. Anything other than that would indicate a total failure in the model.
    So if Ne is about possibilities, originality, impulsivity, and creativity; then Ni has to be about absolutes, normalness, and static behavior. Or it could be the other way, where ENTps and INTjs are the ones that think in absolutes normalness and static behavior; though this would totally contradict the ideologies behind the functions and most notable socionists opinions. If this was the case, ISTjs would be the new INTj. But then again, most people here can't even tell me what the hell Ni is or supposedly is, yet for some reason they keep holding onto this stereotype of INTps and INTjs. The truth is, is there has to be something wrong with the crap that everyone is spoon feeding everyone.
    The forum is okay man... it's just your interpretation of it that's wrong....

  3. #3
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,084
    Mentioned
    196 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    The forum is okay man... it's just your interpretation of it that's wrong....
    Lol, see following, her post pretty much sums up everything

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Where on earth did you get that idea? The relationship between Ne and Ni (or Se and Si, or Fe and Fi, or Te and Ti) doesn't work like that (in Model A or otherwise).

    If you want to contrast Ne to the information aspect most similar to it, then use Se. If you want to contrast Ne to the information aspect completely opposite of it, then use Si.
    For all the talk about socionists and stuff, statements like that just make it look like you've never read any literature on the topic; I mean no, I don't use them as my ultimate guide, but your statement lacks any logic whatsoever. People have two sets of functions that are divided into two different categories; Valued and Devalued functions. These two groups are divided into conscious and unconscious sections.

    Now to do what you recommend, by comparing the Ego function to the PoLR function; you would get anti-correlation. Conscious functions are what we do, its our ego. We think with these functions, we act with these functions, or we don't act with these functions, and we disregard these functions.

    Take an INTj for example, with an +Ne(note I am not using the multidimensional functions just to play your game) creative function and a Se Polr function. The INTj will attempt to be creative and be original and see all possibilities. With the +Se PoLR INTj will not perform passive forms of involvement, meaning they are usually aggressive when they do this. The INTj energy level tends to be unstable. They tend to start things extremely strong, then they start to lose their willpower and begin to slack. They often have these big plans that they never put into action. But anyways that is besides the point. As I said the conscious functions are the actions, and the unconscious functions are the motivations. The 1 and 2 functions use the 7 and 8 functions as anti-thesis motivation. The 1 and 2 functions work in spite of the 7 and 8 functions. The INTj tries to act creative and original because it has a motivation to not be normal and conforming. The 5 and 6 functions are the positive energy that fuels the 1 and 2 functions. The INTj tries to act creative and original because it has a motivation to be rebellious and aggressive. The 3 and 4 functions occupy the conscious functions like the 1 and 2 functions. The INTj tries to act creative and original therefore the INTj does not like to do routine tasks and be passive.

    Basically model A works like this:

    Ego 1 2
    -Ego 4 3
    Motivation 6 5
    -Motivation 7 8

    1 and 7 will be true anti-thesis and 4 and 6 will be true anti-thesis.

    Anti-thesis must come from the unconscious. If you've ever studied a sociology class, all actions are the result of contradicting motivations. see Hegel
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  4. #4
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,084
    Mentioned
    196 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, note that Hegel was probably an INTp.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  5. #5
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,374
    Mentioned
    447 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are you suggesting that people cannot be aware of their motivations, and that they cannot be unaware of their actions?

  6. #6
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,084
    Mentioned
    196 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    Are you suggesting that people cannot be aware of their motivations, and that they cannot be unaware of their actions?
    Um no, I just told you what my motives were. I'm aware.

    Unconscious is hidden out of the context of the ego.... yes thats correct in a sense, its just a highly abstract sense that I don't care to explain and I will probably confuse myself in the process.

    Think of unconscious as being in a different league than the conscious functions. They are our hidden motives yes, its kind of like the implied message in a way.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    Also, note that Hegel was probably an INTp.
    Hegel was definitely not an INTp.

  8. #8
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    So if Ne is about possibilities, originality, impulsivity, and creativity; then Ni has to be about absolutes, normalness, and static behavior.
    Where on earth did you get that idea? The relationship between Ne and Ni (or Se and Si, or Fe and Fi, or Te and Ti) doesn't work like that (in Model A or otherwise).

    If you want to contrast Ne to the information aspect most similar to it, then use Se. If you want to contrast Ne to the information aspect completely opposite of it, then use Si.
    SEE

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

  9. #9
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,714
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ni is the clear perception of the kaleidescopic vortex of time.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    Take the ENTp for example. Most people think that the ENTp is impulsive, spontaneous, and creative (most of this due to people's idiocy with the EP group), which is true. In viewing the ENTp this way, most people totally disregard the idea of functional analysis. Though I don't think anything should be set in stone, its generally accepted by socionists that the function responsible for this is Ne. Now if INTjs and ENTps both use Ne in their ego block, wouldn't they both appear to be similar in this regard (not exactly the same) but they should resemble each other in their impulsiveness and creativity.
    No, because your natural outward behaviour, that is your temperament, which is what you are talking about here, is determined by your base function only. We should expect ENTps and INTjs to be very clearly different in that respect. They don't resemble each other at all when it comes to impulsiveness and creativity.

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta
    Ne is often referred to as the intuition of possibilities. I find this to be odd(though its correct) when comparing it to what people think of Ni. I've seen several times where Ni is referred to as the intuition of "magical possibilities". Ok, if you don't see the problem with this, then you are probably brain dead.
    There is a big problem with this, and the problem is that the Ni function is (totally incorrectly) associated with mysticism and the like.

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta
    The ENTps weakest unconscious function 7, which most socionists refer to as the anti-thesis to the personality of that individual is Ni. Whatever the ENTp is, the INTp must be their anti-thesis, its a ideal of mathematical precision. Anything other than that would indicate a total failure in the model.
    Okay, if you are right it's easy. Then the model must be wrong, because ENTp is clearly not the anti-thesis to the INTp.

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta
    So if Ne is about possibilities, originality, impulsivity, and creativity; then Ni has to be about absolutes, normalness, and static behavior.
    Which Ni is not. So we can conclude that either the model is wrong or your interpretation of it is wrong. Hopefully we can agree on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta
    Or it could be the other way, where ENTps and INTjs are the ones that think in absolutes normalness and static behavior; though this would totally contradict the ideologies behind the functions and most notable socionists opinions. If this was the case, ISTjs would be the new INTj.
    It is equally wrong to attribute those things to ENTps and INTjs. But it is an indisputable fact that ISTjs and INTjs have the exact same temperament and are very similar in outward behaviour, as is confirmed by every socionic description of famous representatives of those two types.

Posting Permissions

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