when i read that part I was like, yeah that makes it easier, but usually I don't resort to it or otherwise break stuff down unless im struggling and at that point im liable to just grab a calculator or write it outOriginally Posted by squark
but i dont think doing so is autism that seems like a perfectly reasonable approach, it was his more convoluted ones that i think that from my point of view seemed sort of Ptolemaic in their unnecessary complexity
Ok yeah. The first one, the way he did 27 + 12 was pretty convoluted, and I wouldn't do it that way. But I will convert numbers into simpler ones for ease of manipulation in my head like he did with the tens.
I think what I like in the examples @unsuccessfull Alphamale posted is how it shows that the guy has a deep sense of how numbers build up from each other as parts and utilizing that quickly. That's what I don't focus on this to this degree myself consciously (though adding 27 and 12 together does rely a bit in the background on something similar) but I found it easy to follow the examples by trying to imagine how these parts would "feel" to me while adding / subtracting. I really felt tuned into them that way. The descriptions do sound convoluted if fleshed out like that but I can see how "feeling" the parts like that aids the calculations in some cases. Maybe I'm assuming too much about how the guy thinks though lol, this is just how I was following the descritions myself.
I made some drawings of how I see numbers and years
1 to 20
20170724_223435.jpg
1 to 100
20170724_223459.jpg
Looking back in time
20170724_223706.jpg
Negative numbers
20170724_223549.jpg
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
I have this. It's severe, not as severe as it was in my childhood. But I have this and I'm a sensor.
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Who's to say that the senses "merge" in synesthesia and they don't just tend to split from one sense in the first place? People who are blind from birth tend to see sounds, for instance. Who's to say that senses are anything more than a concept people use to represent ideas? Each of them, existing only based on those ideas, could be defined or re-defined on a whim. Do you feel dizzy ever? That's not really feeling like touch sensory-wise. You're just representing the concept of dizziness through whatever sense-construct you have availible.
Also, most cases of synesthesia are from little kids looking at letter magnets or calendars and not understanding abstraction, so the association gets hardwired in their brain as an attempt to grapple with things they can't understand. It makes sense why it'd be associated with autism, since there's a lower ability to understand abstractions in general and a bigger gateway for it to develop. Most cases after that come from LSD.
I would associate synesthesia with Sensing > Intuition in general based on how it develops. Not everything weird-seeming is intuitive...
with talk like that you're going to lose your beta card, Wyrd
pretty soon people will want to be SEI and then where will we be
Exactly!
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Could you explain a bit more. Or make some drawings?
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Never on my life I've experienced something similar. It's crazy. I don't even picture most of the times words, letters or numbers in my head, it's simply a dark void with voice over, the image that I have most of the times when I talk, write, read or do maths is what I'm seeing with my eyes, nothing more beyond that (unless I'm zoned out, in which case Im possibly not even hearing or putting attention).
I think synesthesia (or the lack off it) could be related to brain hemispheres. Ppl with this could be using both hemispheres at the same time more often that ppl who don't have synesthesia, who would be using hemispheres more laterally.
Talking about functions, the only pattern that I see in most of ppl in here showing this tendncy is not having Te as a lead function. Which makes me think that Te is related to left hemisphere OR a lateral use/work of hemispheres more than working both at the same time.
Last edited by Kiba; 07-26-2017 at 02:00 PM.
Why are you using the wording "severe"? Like this is some illness?Anyway, how does your synesthesia manifest? I'm curious.
It's funny, apparently I'm not alone with seeing mostly what's in front of me with my eyes.
As for the theory of the relation between synesthesia and strength of Te or between any of that and hemisphere use. The facts don't really confirm the strength of the relation if it even exists. LII and other LSI along with me in this thread don't have low Te, yet have reported synesthesia. Then some F types had synesthesia, some didn't. Same for T types as far as I could see. Then, I'm personally balanced in terms of how I do use both hemispheres, however they are often used for different tasks, so in that sense they aren't always communicating. Yet I do also have synesthesia.
Your definition of "idea" doesn't seem to say much if you apply it on everything without discrimination...
As for how synesthesia develops, this has nothing to do with ability for abstraction, it's not about hardwired associations for things they can't understand. I have no idea where you got this really weird theory from.
What's this babble. Is this your Ne DS possibly? Or not type related delusion. I mean you are talking as if the concepts of these socionics functions and types were real things directly affecting things fundamentally in realitywith talk like that you're going to lose your beta card, Wyrd
pretty soon people will want to be SEI and then where will we be
Yes. And variations of the clock pattern is common. I was very surprised when i googled synesthesia and saw similar drawings to mine. Because it feels very private. A day dream that has been following me my whole life to the point that i am almost unconscious of it.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
I believe Nietzsche most likely had it even though it was not even called synesthesia at the time. He certainly had an interest in it. The term is relatively new but the experience is not. I do not think of it as any kind of disorder. I suppose anyone here could have a form of it and not even know it unless they have something to compare it to. IOW, some of you assume you are "normal".Before there was a name for it people were just artists, musicians, poets and philosophers. It is explained in various ways in history if you know what to look for.
Internet makes the world smaller and you find out that perception is very unique to each person. Doesn't matter if we can agree on what we see because we are using words, for the most part, to agree. If someone paints you a picture of what they see you might be surprised. I know this from seeing my EII sister's art which is very emotionally based. If we could get into other people's minds and share their perception we might be shocked at what we really see. They don't say beauty is in the eye of the beholder for nothing. I find beauty in things others find ugly and I do wonder sometimes what is wrong with them. Why don't they see what I see...
You could link it to any of the four basic Jungian dichotomies if you read enough about it. Personally I believe it is an evolutionary thing that we will see more of in the distant future, not less. I am aware that sometimes it comes from some kind of injury but did that trigger a dormant gene or area of the brain... Our brains are forming new neural pathways all the time. At least mine is. I can't say for others but I have reason to believe it is true for me. This is not a fantasy in my mind, it is based on years of personal research into things like perception, lucid dreaming and reading so many stories that I have lost count of them. I personally see it as advantageous on many levels. Trust me these people I have read about are breeding. It runs in my family and I assume those who have it will pass it down to their children even if it skips some of them.My ESE sister does not have it even if it is in her genes but she has a different dad.
There is an emotional type synesthesia too which I think mine is close to as well because emotional events triggered some of it. At least that is my current idea on why I experience the taste of metal, like copper pennies, when I hear certain words. I was telling another forum member about this recently. My idea is that I may have been caught with pennies in my mouth at a very young age, too young to actually remember, and that I was caught by an aunt who was a strict disciplinarian type. I can imagine the fear I felt which might have led to linking of some sort. I actually feel I can trace back much of it to her when I think about it. I remember later experiences with her that make this more likely to be the initial cause of metal words.
I also associate people with color and can either project or associate in my mind. Sometimes both. I have done it with various forum members but I don't usually tell them. I don't know why it happens because it doesn't happen with everyone. I think it is a mix of emotion + intuition which is different from the metal taste. I can link that to intuition (knowing the cause without memory) and with emotion. Yes, I have also used LSD and if it is the trigger then I am happy to have found it but I don't think it is the primary cause.
@Wyrd research also shows that people with autism that also have synesthesia are often savants too.
http://neurowiki2014.wikidot.com/ind...ed-synesthesia
I find this rather interesting because I think Descartes experienced weirdness with his senses.
I can totally relate to the following whether it is linked to him having synesthesia or not. I would relate it to Ni too but there may be more to it since some Ni leads cannot relate to it when I ask them.In the First Meditation, Descartes lays out several arguments for doubting all of his previously held beliefs. He first observes that the senses sometimes deceive, for example, objects at a distance appear to be quite small, and surely it is not prudent to trust someone (or something) that has deceived us even once. However, although this may apply to sensations derived under certain circumstances, doesn’t it seem certain that “I am here, sitting by the fire, wearing a winter dressing gown, holding this piece of paper in my hands, and so on”? (AT VII 18: CSM II 13). Descartes’ point is that even though the senses deceive us some of the time, what basis for doubt exists for the immediate belief that, for example, you are reading this article? But maybe the belief of reading this article or of sitting by the fireplace is not based on true sensations at all but on the false sensations found in dreams. If such sensations are just dreams, then it is not really the case that you are reading this article but in fact you are in bed asleep. Since there is no principled way of distinguishing waking life from dreams, any belief based on sensation has been shown to be doubtful. This includes not only the mundane beliefs about reading articles or sitting by the fire but even the beliefs of experimental science are doubtful, because the observations upon which they are based may not be true but mere dream images. Therefore, all beliefs based on sensation have been called into doubt, because it might all be a dream.
This, however, does not pertain to mathematical beliefs, since they are not based on sensation but on reason. For even though one is dreaming, for example, that, 2 + 3 = 5, the certainty of this proposition is not called into doubt, because 2 + 3 = 5 whether the one believing it is awake or dreaming. Descartes continues to wonder about whether or not God could make him believe there is an earth, sky and other extended things when, in fact, these things do not exist at all. In fact, people sometimes make mistakes about things they think are most certain such as mathematical calculations. But maybe people are not mistaken just some of the time but all of the time such that believing that 2 + 3 = 5 is some kind of persistent and collective mistake, and so the sum of 2 + 3 is really something other than 5. However, such universal deception seems inconsistent with God’s supreme goodness. Indeed, even the occasional deception of mathematical miscalculation also seems inconsistent with God’s goodness, yet people do sometimes make mistakes. Then, in line with the skeptics, Descartes supposes, for the sake of his method, that God does not exist, but instead there is an evil demon with supreme power and cunning that puts all his efforts into deceiving him so that he is always mistaken about everything, including mathematics.
In this way, Descartes called all of his previous beliefs into doubt through some of the best skeptical arguments of his day But he was still not satisfied and decided to go a step further by considering false any belief that falls prey to even the slightest doubt. So, by the end of the First Meditation, Descartes finds himself in a whirlpool of false beliefs. However, it is important to realize that these doubts and the supposed falsehood of all his beliefs are for the sake of his method: he does not really believe that he is dreaming or is being deceived by an evil demon; he recognizes that his doubt is merely hyperbolic. But the point of this “methodological” or ‘hyperbolic” doubt is to clear the mind of preconceived opinions that might obscure the truth. The goal then is to find something that cannot be doubted even though an evil demon is deceiving him and even though he is dreaming. This first indubitable truth will then serve as an intuitively grasped metaphysical “axiom” from which absolutely certain knowledge can be deduced. For more, see Cartesian skepticism.
FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE
"Can anyone at the end of this nineteenth century possibly have any distinct notion of what poets of a more vigorous period meant by inspiration? If not, I should like to describe it. Provided one has the slightest remnant of superstition left, one can hardly reject completely the idea that one is the mere incarnation, or mouthpiece, or medium of some almighty power. The notion of revelation describes the condition quite simply; by which I mean that something profoundly convulsive and disturbing suddenly becomes visible and audible with indescribable definiteness and exactness. One hears - one does not seek; one takes - one does not ask who gives: a thought flashes out like lightning, inevitably without hesitation - I have never had any choice about it.
There is an ecstasy whose terrific tension is sometimes released by a flood of tears, during which one's progress varies from involuntary impetuosity to involuntary slowness. There is the feeling that one is utterly out of hand, with the most distinct consciousness of an infinitude of shuddering thrills that pass through one from head to foot; there is a profound happiness in which the most painful and gloomy feelings are not discordant in effect, but are required as necessary colors in this overflow of light. There is an instinct for rhythmic relations which embraces an entire world of forms (length, the need for a widely extended rhythm, is almost a measure of the force of inspiration, a sort of counterpart to its pressure and tension). Everything occurs quite without volition, as if in an eruption of freedom, independence, power and divinity. The spontaneity of the images and similes is most remarkable; one loses all perception of what is imagery and simile; everything offers itself as the most immediate, exact, and simple means of expression. If I may recall a phrase of Zarathustra's, it actually seems as if the things themselves came to one, and offered themselves as similes. ("Here do all things come caressingly to thy discourse and flatter thee, for they would fain ride upon they back. On every simile thou ridest here to every truth. Here fly open before thee all the speech and word shrines of existence, here all existence would become speech, here all Becoming would learn of thee how to speak.") This is my experience of inspiration. I have no doubt that I should have to go back millenniums to find another who could say to me: "It is mine also!"
Last edited by Aylen; 07-26-2017 at 07:23 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
This helps to partially explain why some have great troubles dividing with 10n (n=0,1,2,3...).
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.
I get it sometimes. Not sure it is related to type, though. Could just be an artistic type of thing, but I'm sure that's represented somehow on this forum with symbols... It's been a while 😅😂
I made two more. The week and the year:
20170728_182355.jpg
20170728_182326.jpg
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
counter clockwise is the spin in the universe *-*
I was talking about this with someone and they were explaining it to me and I'm thinking isn't this normal? I took a test online it told me I probably had it
IDK if I really have it then I've lived with it so long it feels normal.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote