Yes, definitely Demonstrative>Ignoring
I imagine most people would find their Ignoring Function obnoxious
Yes, definitely Demonstrative>Ignoring
I imagine most people would find their Ignoring Function obnoxious
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
The important thing is that the two are more like you Contrary's functions that they are like you Quasi-Identical's functions. The whole Stronger/Weaker beyond just Strong/Weak terminology is just confused and no one ever really knows the answer to the questions in regard to them because there are no ways to measure function strength.
Another thing...
When seen as value systems and/or decision biases, they don't exist. The opposite of these things is what is used. They only exist in as far as they signify very simple perceptive tools.
I never really know what you're talking about.Originally Posted by labcoat
--------------------------------------------
Anyway, my answer to the question: When people present information to you which is in a form of your demonstrative function, this typically makes you get defensive and look to defend and argue back on the basis of the views of your creative function. Sometimes the demonstrative function is used to show how pointless it is and that the information is therefore better portrayed through the creative function. See quasi-identical for instance the classic INTj-INTp arguments on the internet that go on for ever... INTj give some Ti, INTp gets annoyed and counters with some Te, eventually the INTp becomes vague with some extreme Ni, this annoys INTj how tries to counter, then the INTp Te comes out again etc etc..
When someone gives you information in the form of your ignoring function, you just want them to get the fuck away from you because it's not even worth mounting a defense.
So consequently, one will entertain the demonstrative function more. Strength in comparison to the ignoring function is sort of irrelevant, as they are both among the more developed functions, it is more relevant to say the demonstrative function is expressed more.
I never really know what you're talking about.You think anyone knows what you're talking about with this?Anyway, my answer to the question: When people present information to you which is in a form of your demonstrative function, this typically makes you get defensive and look to defend and argue back on the basis of the views of your creative function. Sometimes the demonstrative function is used to show how pointless it is and that the information is therefore better portrayed through the creative function. See quasi-identical for instance the classic INTj-INTp arguments on the internet that go on for ever... INTj give some Ti, INTp gets annoyed and counters with some Te, eventually the INTp becomes vague with some extreme Ni, this annoys INTj how tries to counter, then the INTp Te comes out again etc etc..
Pot/kettle thing and all.
All I was saying is that INTjs are more like ENTjs than like INTps. This is not a difficult to understand assertion is it?
I disagree.
ENTjs ignore(truth and justice).
I don't like talking to them because they are robber barons.
INTps ignore(ideas and adventures).
I don't like talking to them because they are party poopers.
No offence meant!
I'm just using
Last edited by CheGuevara; 11-08-2009 at 06:59 PM.
Ni-INTj --- Harmonizing Analyst ----
DCNH rox
SoI disagree.
ENTjs ignore
I don't like talking to them because they are robber barons.
INTps ignore
I don't like talking to them because they are party poopers.
No offence meant!
I'm just using
-valuers because they don't value truth and justice. Whoever doesn't value truth and justice deserves to be murdered or something like that.
No, that's not what I meant.So
But I am of the opinion that capitalists should not be allowed to take part in any political decisions because they don't value truth and justice (
Ni-INTj --- Harmonizing Analyst ---
DCNH rox
Imo the simplest conclusion from Model A is that the Demonstrative function is stronger and less valued than the Ignoring function. However, recently these divisions have struck me as more significant:
Contact-Bold-Unvalued (Role and Demonstrative)
Contact-Cautious-Valued (Creative and DS)
Inert-Bold-Valued (Base and HA)
Inert-Cautious-Unvalued (PoLR and Ignoring)
In this respect, the Demonstrative tends to show, whereas the Ignoring doesn't.
Accounting for all of these:
Valuedness=2*Valued+Accepting
Strength=2*Strong+Bold
From this, the Situational functions are more balanced in both strength and value, while the Evaluatory functions are more extreme in both strength and value.
So yeah, Demonstrative is stronger and less valued than Ignoring. I haven't changed my mind, just obfuscated my original statement.
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
from what I've gathered and read, demonstrative is strongest. Whether more valued I'm not sure, but I think demonstrative too.
hahaha love this postI disagree.
ENTjs ignore
I don't like talking to them because they are robber barons.
INTps ignore
I don't like talking to them because they are party poopers.
No offence meant!
I'm just using
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I disagree. There's typically a huge difference between introverts and extraverts, granted in some cases it may not seem as apparent for various reasons but in typical day to day people the difference is pretty obvious.
Also, as already pointed out a few times, the demonstrative function is used more than the ignoring function, so from that point of view also, the INTj-INTp are more alike than INTj-ENTj.
Yawn, fwiw....You think anyone knows what you're talking about with this?
Pot/kettle thing and all.
I don't know, I was just saying I don't know what you are going on about - usually.... Anyway, I think I used the same terminology as the thread opener and stuck to the topic, so....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
