No Such Thing As Potential

[isptn]

also I'm tempted to say its Te devaluing just because humanity and its greatest minds have made productive use of the concept "potential" for milennia and yet we have forums poster x thinking he's somehow going to explode that on the basis of some kind of Ti diddy

I also think it would probably never occur to Jack to waste their time on any of that

Not at all. Notice my intention that I stated in the very first sentence. I noticed a preference for perceiving possibility in terms of the whole situation over a quality possessed by individuals or objects, and I wanted to know what people's thoughts were on what this preference might correspond to in socionics. But it seems many people took the title of the thread literally and thought I was making some kind of statement about how potential literally does not exist or isn't important. I have no interest in convincing people of looking at it in this way because to me, how people arrange and define concepts doesn't particularly matter so long as it's valid and works for them. I don't believe that it's better to perceive possibility in the way I described, perceiving individual potentials is equally valid and useful, and I actually do use the concept of potential though I tend to prefer the other way or notice it first.

[Bertrand]

Not at all. Notice my intention that I stated in the very first sentence. I noticed a preference for perceiving possibility in terms of the whole situation over a quality possessed by individuals or objects, and I wanted to know what people's thoughts were on what this preference might correspond to in socionics. But it seems many people took the title of the thread literally and thought I was making some kind of statement about how potential literally does not exist or isn't important. I have no interest in convincing people of looking at it in this way because to me, how people arrange and define concepts doesn't particularly matter so long as it's valid and works for them. I don't believe that it's better to perceive possibility in the way I described, perceiving individual potentials is equally valid and useful, and I actually do use the concept of potential though I tend to prefer the other way or notice it first.

cool, it corresponds to Ti/Se valuing

[niffer]

I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts as to what this viewpoint corresponds to, in terms of type.

There is no such thing as potential. Possibilities do not belong to people or objects, rather they are simply implied by the rules of the universe. It is possible within the rules of the universe for a person to become a famous singer, and whether that actually happens has little to do with the person's innate abilities and more to do with what they actually manage to do. The person's singing abilities could be average or below average, but if they play their cards well, it is possible to be successful, and this has been done before as not all famous singers have great voices. By the same token, not everyone with great singing abilities will manage to become a famous singer. In other words, it's what you do, not what "potential" or "talent" you have, that influences outcome. If something is possible to be done, then it's possible for anyone and becomes a matter of what they manage to do with their resources. If something is not able to be done by someone at a given time, it's because they currently lack the resources to reasonably pull it off, but the possibility remains a given, it has nothing to do with the person lacking potential but rather with limitations of the situation at that time. So I find potential, as in possibilities within a person or object, to be a useless concept to me, like a train ticket when you already have a plane ticket to the same location. It doesn't get me anywhere new or provide any information not already covered by something else.

This looks like a strong understanding of the nuances of, yet a devaluing of, Ne.

(I'm obviously thinking of 4D Ne demonstrative, Se HA (wanting to "make it real"), LIE.)

[niffer]

cool, it corresponds to Ti/Se valuing

For a supposed Te valuer you are fucking unconstructive.

[Bertrand]

For a supposed Te valuer you are fucking unconstructive.

luuuungs!!

niffer is bullying again!

[niffer]

even after resigning as a mod ... there is no escaaaaaaape

[Myst]

cool, it corresponds to Ti/Se valuing

Actually, his disinterest in discussing understandings seemed devalued Ti to me.

[Bertrand]

yeah I was assuming a lot here, this could either be Ti doing Te (as I had assumed, somewhat baselessly), or Te doing Ti. the diference being either the expression or the values are subconscious and its hard to know which are which. i.e.: it could be Te values, given a subconsciously and post hoc Ti structure, or a conscious and valued Ti structure giving rise to Te implications and statements. I had assumed the latter, but it could be either. its some kind of complex interaction between 3d+ ti and te. Ni/Se seems clear and its hard to tell whether its Ne polr or Ne demonstrative (or something else even), because if Te valuing it may be a brilliant Ne insight with seemingly problematic Ti (ignoring). it feels like could be that because of how it might be an accurate reflection of the outer situation in a Te valuing sense. devalued Ti means its less important how other people think of and collectively think of "potential" it really only matters from the point of LIE that it works in a Te sense for them and could be impressed on others as more or less atomic data point and still work in reality

my criticisms of the whole idea seem grounded in Ti Ni and to some extent Fe and Si (how this is going to work in the world as a Ti nugget keeping in mind its an iconoclasm to some degree)

[Myst]

I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts as to what this viewpoint corresponds to, in terms of type.

Coming back to this thread now.

To answer your question about type, I would think your way of seeing this topic is some kind of interest in Ne (potential of objective situation) but at the same thing a very idiosyncratic approach to it (so it doesn't sound like ego Ne) and your flexibility for ways of getting around along with your focus on resources instead of the focus on Se willpower like for example @bnd put it in #31 seems like Te ego. I don't really see Se valuing or at least I don't see you get at this from a primarily Se pov, though your ego not seemingly being Ne is what people have been commenting on in the thread. Hard to say what your Ne is like because at the same time you do have a focus on Ne even if very idiosyncratic. Your relativeness (not sticking to the most logical understanding) and general disinterest in discussing understandings (Ti) would seem like Te valuing again unless it's just Ne valuing being relative. XLI in any case is what I would guess from this too. LII is third option only but not entirely excluded. I guess same result as in your type thread so far, at least there's some consistency lol.

There is no such thing as potential. Possibilities do not belong to people or objects, rather they are simply implied by the rules of the universe. It is possible within the rules of the universe for a person to become a famous singer, and whether that actually happens has little to do with the person's innate abilities and more to do with what they actually manage to do. The person's singing abilities could be average or below average, but if they play their cards well, it is possible to be successful, and this has been done before as not all famous singers have great voices. By the same token, not everyone with great singing abilities will manage to become a famous singer. In other words, it's what you do, not what "potential" or "talent" you have, that influences outcome. If something is possible to be done, then it's possible for anyone and becomes a matter of what they manage to do with their resources. If something is not able to be done by someone at a given time, it's because they currently lack the resources to reasonably pull it off, but the possibility remains a given, it has nothing to do with the person lacking potential but rather with limitations of the situation at that time. So I find potential, as in possibilities within a person or object, to be a useless concept to me, like a train ticket when you already have a plane ticket to the same location. It doesn't get me anywhere new or provide any information not already covered by something else.

OK commenting on this too. My reasoning if I was forced to say anything about potential and talents (since by default I just don't even think at all about this topic) would be more like, perseverance and willpower is what matters first and foremost, how much effort and push you put in for the goal that you want to get, in the face of direct obstacles too. Sure yes you will also need to have or acquire resources of course and whatnot. I don't really think tho' that all people will want to try to pull it all off for hard things. The end conclusion is the same tho', you can get what you want if you go at it persistently enough, potential is not a concept I use much, it doesn't give me anything either.

Out of curiosity, if someone comments on your talents/potential in a positive way, how do you feel about that?

People of course have different abilities and strengths, and it can be important to consider these, but low abilities need not stop a person from reaching their goal because there are many paths to it. If one path is blocked or not likely to lead to good results within reasonable investment, one can simply look for a different path to the same destination. There is almost always a way, if you do your research. If you want to know how to do something, it's a matter of looking for information via internet, asking people, books, etc. There are resources everywhere. If you missed your bus and are stranded, there are usually many possible ways to get home, or to gain information about ways to get home. If you want to accomplish something but lack the skills or abilities to do it in the typical way, there are usually other ways it can be done. Awareness of your abilities can help you choose a path, but it doesn't have to limit your destinations. It usually doesn't take special abilities or brilliance to accomplish something, it can be a matter of locating the right resources and information, utilizing them well, finding a way to make your goal happen, etc. No one strategy is absolutely essential, there are many approaches to accomplishing one's goals and too many to name. Of course, that's not to say absolutely anything can be done and all things are possible, but I find there are generally more possibilities than most people are aware of.

Here I see some neat flexibility with using information and methods to get somewhere, it's reminiscent of Te creative descriptions with that kind of flexibility (or perhaps Ne, depending). Agreed with the conclusion. I just again start from how much I want the thing then I will be driven to find a way to get there no matter the obstacles (Se rather than Te or Ne in ego).

[isptn]

Out of curiosity, if someone comments on your talents/potential in a positive way, how do you feel about that?

Compliments are nice. But if the person is too pushy about it, acting like I have some kind of obligation to use my talent so that it won't go to waste, that can be annoying to me. If I wanted to do something then I would, and if I don't want to then what's the point?