arriving in too many logically solid conclusions and unable

[Ms. Kensington]

to choose the right one

Oh that. I think my problems are almost opposite to that i.e. arriving in too many logically solid conclusions and unable to choose which is the "right" one. I generally need some quantitative criteria in order to make a choice reliably. E.g. if I have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on some qualitative or hidden criteria it is annoying. If i have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on which would be the most healthy to eat or most profitable to grow etc then it gets easier as I can quantify the decision making process and arrange them according to that.

What could it mean?

Well it seems to mean that I don't have Ti in Ego-Block (Of course it might just mean that this is not a reliable way to identify Ti). However I can't figure out whether my answer points more to Ni or Ne in Ego-Block or Fi or Te in Ego-Block (well it somewhat points to preference for Te but not necessarily Te in Ego-Block..fkhsdkjhf). For now it just suggests that Ti is not there. I have registered this piece of evidence but I'm not yet sure what to do with it and how to integrate it with the enormous amount of other, often contradictory, evidence I have collected during the past year

Well, I agree with everything in the first quote of yours. What does that mean?

this is from another thread but i have been wondering about this. Someone take a stab at explaining this functionally.

[Exodus]

I think it is mostly about Ne, which is concerned with seeing all the different possibilities & connections. Irrational Reasonable types are the most likely to want to put off making a decision, until it became very clear that it was the right one.

Rational (and especially rational-subtype rational) Reasonable types would be somewhat less likely to get caught up in that kind of thought process.

[Slacker]

Yeah, I have a really hard time with that kind of thing too. The worst thing is ordering stuff off a menu. It's like I have three choices that all look good, and I can't evaluate which is the best choice.

[XoX]

If that is strongly related to Ne then MsSM must be a Ne-subtype INTj or ENTp (or Ne subtype INFj or ENFp).

[Ms. Kensington]

I think it is mostly about Ne, which is concerned with seeing all the different possibilities & connections. Irrational Reasonable types are the most likely to want to put off making a decision, until it became very clear that it was the right one.

Rational (and especially rational-subtype rational) Reasonable types would be somewhat less likely to get caught up in that kind of thought process.

But what I don't understand (and this is probably due to being such a strong Ne type myself) is how this is done. Do the types that don't do this pay attention only to their immediate surroundings, like .. even though Slacker Mom's example is not quite the same, but say there are three menu items that will satisfy her hunger equally and there are one pro and one con to each of the three choices, would someone who is not Ne just say, ok i randomly pick dish 1, or say, oh i pick dish 1 because i saw it first? It is as XoX said, that the criteria needs to be defined in order to pick the "right" course of action. Why is it that non Ne types (if we assume that is phenomenon is an Ne one) don't need this extra bit of info in order to proceed?

[Exodus]

If that is strongly related to Ne then MsSM must be a Ne-subtype INTj or ENTp (or Ne subtype INFj or ENFp).

Or an irrational Si type.

I think it is mostly about Ne, which is concerned with seeing all the different possibilities & connections. Irrational Reasonable types are the most likely to want to put off making a decision, until it became very clear that it was the right one.

Rational (and especially rational-subtype rational) Reasonable types would be somewhat less likely to get caught up in that kind of thought process.

But what I don't understand (and this is probably due to being such a strong Ne type myself) is how this is done. Do the types that don't do this pay attention only to their immediate surroundings, like .. even though Slacker Mom's example is not quite the same, but say there are three menu items that will satisfy her hunger equally and there are one pro and one con to each of the three choices, would someone who is not Ne just say, ok i randomly pick dish 1, or say, oh i pick dish 1 because i saw it first? It is as XoX said, that the criteria needs to be defined in order to pick the "right" course of action. Why is it that non Ne types (if we assume that is phenomenon is an Ne one) don't need this extra bit of info in order to proceed?

I think Resolute types just don't really care as much about which is the theoretically "best" option. This may relate to the "being perfect" interpretation of Ne.

[krieger]

It's a democracy thing. You use the occasion as a means of reaching a 'guideline' (judgment) rather than an 'answer' (perception).

[Slacker]

It's a democracy thing. You use the occasion as a means of reaching a 'guideline' (judgment) rather than an 'answer' (perception).

I can't come up with "answers" and only seem to be able to create "guidelines" and I'm a P type. I don't think it's a P/J thing. I think it's Ne. We see too many possibilities and it's hard to focus on one.

[krieger]

You may be right. I think that one holds for the thinking types though. It's harder to predict what NF's do when they are tasked with coming to a logical decision. Maybe you momentarily propell yourselves in an alpha NT or gamma NT state..? That would be in line with my earlier suggestion. Plus there would be even additional insecurity around not acting in ones favoured state.

[XoX]

If that is strongly related to Ne then MsSM must be a Ne-subtype INTj or ENTp (or Ne subtype INFj or ENFp).

Or an irrational Si type.

Like...ISFp? I don't know. Never thought about that before. Or ISTp too perhaps.

[Exodus]

If that is strongly related to Ne then MsSM must be a Ne-subtype INTj or ENTp (or Ne subtype INFj or ENFp).

Or an irrational Si type.

Like...ISFp? I don't know. Never thought about that before.

Maybe ISTp. Just a thought.

[Ms. Kensington]

If that is strongly related to Ne then MsSM must be a Ne-subtype INTj or ENTp (or Ne subtype INFj or ENFp).

Or an irrational Si type.

I think it is mostly about Ne, which is concerned with seeing all the different possibilities & connections. Irrational Reasonable types are the most likely to want to put off making a decision, until it became very clear that it was the right one.

Rational (and especially rational-subtype rational) Reasonable types would be somewhat less likely to get caught up in that kind of thought process.

But what I don't understand (and this is probably due to being such a strong Ne type myself) is how this is done. Do the types that don't do this pay attention only to their immediate surroundings, like .. even though Slacker Mom's example is not quite the same, but say there are three menu items that will satisfy her hunger equally and there are one pro and one con to each of the three choices, would someone who is not Ne just say, ok i randomly pick dish 1, or say, oh i pick dish 1 because i saw it first? It is as XoX said, that the criteria needs to be defined in order to pick the "right" course of action. Why is it that non Ne types (if we assume that is phenomenon is an Ne one) don't need this extra bit of info in order to proceed?

I think Resolute types just don't really care as much about which is the theoretically "best" option. This may relate to the "being perfect" interpretation of Ne.

whoa did someone suggest that i could be ISFp? nahh

also it still doesn't answer my question of how decisions are made without the pointer that Ne types need. If non Ne types dont care what is the best option so what? I think theoretically is a better word. It's like their world is totally different

[Exodus]

also it still doesn't answer my question of how decisions are made without the pointer that Ne types need.

The Se motto: Just do it.

[Ms. Kensington]

also it still doesn't answer my question of how decisions are made without the pointer that Ne types need.

The Se motto: Just do it.

do what? which?

[Exodus]

also it still doesn't answer my question of how decisions are made without the pointer that Ne types need.

The Se motto: Just do it.

do what? which?

This is why we have Socionics.

[XoX]

also it still doesn't answer my question of how decisions are made without the pointer that Ne types need.

The Se motto: Just do it.

do what? which?

Whatever pops into your mind first. When the first thought comes -> act. Then after action wait for the next thought and when it comes -> act. Then stay in that loop for the rest of your life. Remember to sleep occasionally. (I think this is more ESFp than ESTp though)

[Jonathan]

I think it is mostly about Ne, which is concerned with seeing all the different possibilities & connections. Irrational Reasonable types are the most likely to want to put off making a decision, until it became very clear that it was the right one.

Rational (and especially rational-subtype rational) Reasonable types would be somewhat less likely to get caught up in that kind of thought process.

I think that having some trouble deciding suggest (in Socionics) [EDIT ir]rational type. I think it's a misconception to think that only Ne is concerned with different possibilities and connection; Ni is also concerned with possibilities. Filatova's description of ILI mentions that ILIs sometimes see a few different ways of doing something and may have trouble deciding.

Anyhow, XoX mentioned how he resolves the "dispute":

If i have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on which would be the most healthy to eat or most profitable to grow etc then it gets easier as I can quantify the decision making process and arrange them according to

That sounds like a Te way to decide; therefore probably Ni would be involved.

Another possibility to consider is that Ne may still be involved, but not as an ego-block function.

[aestrivex]

I think that having some trouble deciding suggest (in Socionics) rational type. I think it's a misconception to think that only Ne is concerned with different possibilities and connection; Ni is also concerned with possibilities. Filatova's description of ILI mentions that ILIs sometimes see a few different ways of doing something and may have trouble deciding.

so you mean irrational, right?

[Jonathan]

I think that having some trouble deciding suggest (in Socionics) rational type. I think it's a misconception to think that only Ne is concerned with different possibilities and connection; Ni is also concerned with possibilities. Filatova's description of ILI mentions that ILIs sometimes see a few different ways of doing something and may have trouble deciding.

so you mean irrational, right?

Yep, I've been making typos lately. I hate it when I make a typo that causes the meaning to flip to the opposite of what was meant.
Thanks for pointing that out.

[XoX]

I think that having some trouble deciding suggest (in Socionics) rational type. I think it's a misconception to think that only Ne is concerned with different possibilities and connection; Ni is also concerned with possibilities. Filatova's description of ILI mentions that ILIs sometimes see a few different ways of doing something and may have trouble deciding.

so you mean irrational, right?

Hmm...the thing is that ILI is an irrational with strong subconscious Ne. So ILI descriptions can talk about ILI being concerned about possibilities even if possibilities have nothing to do with Ni.

[XoX]

Anyhow, XoX mentioned how he resolves the "dispute":

If i have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on which would be the most healthy to eat or most profitable to grow etc then it gets easier as I can quantify the decision making process and arrange them according to

That sounds like a Te way to decide; therefore probably Ni would be involved.

Another possibility to consider is that Ne may still be involved, but not as an ego-block function.

Yes. It is good that you reminded about this. I do think this points to Te>Ti preference. But I would think that a Ti-PoLR and Te hidden agenda type like ENFp and ESFp could act like this addition to "real" Te-types like INTp. Though I'm not sure how Te hidden agenda manifests in them. Perhaps ENFp would just use Fi and decide based on if they _like_ tomatoes, carrots or strawberries most. I would have problems which such decisions based on subjective likes and dislikes (points away from Fi,umm) Or would ENFps often need the quantified Te-information to support their Fi in order to arrive to resolute decisions.

[Phaedrus]

Anyhow, XoX mentioned how he resolves the "dispute":

If i have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on which would be the most healthy to eat or most profitable to grow etc then it gets easier as I can quantify the decision making process and arrange them according to

That sounds like a Te way to decide; therefore probably Ni would be involved.

Another possibility to consider is that Ne may still be involved, but not as an ego-block function.

Yes. It is good that you reminded about this. I do think this points to Te>Ti preference. But I would think that a Ti-PoLR and Te hidden agenda type like ENFp and ESFp could act like this addition to "real" Te-types like INTp. Though I'm not sure how Te hidden agenda manifests in them. Perhaps ENFp would just use Fi and decide based on if they _like_ tomatoes, carrots or strawberries most. I would have problems which such decisions based on subjective likes and dislikes (points away from Fi,umm) Or would ENFps often need the quantified Te-information to support their Fi in order to arrive to resolute decisions.

I posted this in another thread some days ago. No one has commented on it yet, so here it is again:

I think my problems are almost opposite to that i.e. arriving in too many logically solid conclusions and unable to choose which is the "right" one. I generally need some quantitative criteria in order to make a choice reliably. E.g. if I have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on some qualitative or hidden criteria it is annoying. If i have to pick one of tomatoes, carrots and strawberries based on which would be the most healthy to eat or most profitable to grow etc then it gets easier as I can quantify the decision making process and arrange them according to that.

Parents consider me lazy person. It is sooner anything, this connected with the fact that I develop great zeal neither to the domestic works nor to the work on the vegetable-garden. If it is placed to me, let us say, to wash out floor once a week, I him will wash out, but is not more than one time. When they charge something to me, I love so that all instructions would be exact and concrete: if should be placed salt into the soup, then it is how much precisely ladles, if it is necessary to weld something, then how much specifically minutes this is cooked… I do not love, when they once more indicate to me that I must make. It occurs, that only I will be going to remove in my room (when to me annoys disorder, I I make this with the pleasure), as mom he will say that I must remove — and immediately entire my desire it vanishes. [...]

I am sufficiently indecisive, especially into some the debatable questions: I weigh all variants, and if nothing re-weighs — I fall into difficult situation.