Arsal

Way to visualise intertype relationships: people can be connected in two basic ways: either by direct energy flow from one to the other, or by a lining up of the functions through mutual exchange with some third object. Extraverted and introverted functions are modelled in accordance with their energy flow from or to the environment, and so functions of the same attitude cannot easily directly flow into each other, whereas functions of opposite attitude can. Any energy-object has a rating for its capability of interacting with each of the functions, and some basic arithmetic on these values we can obtain an energy flow rating. This flow will have a "direction", in analogy with the viewpoint at which the "Length" function was arrived at. I think I will study circuit diagrams so I'll be able to model this in a formal science manner. though on second thoughts I'm pretty sure I wouldn't need to

You need 1000 posts to do it.

basically I've extended the notions of analysis and synthesis a lot further than they usually would go so it would be unintuitive. Like, describing Se as synthesis probably isn't too informative. Perhaps separate labels for Je and Ji are needed? or a different dichotomy all together. I dunno.


I like the bit at 2:17.

Yeah that's right. So to me, it's that D's are internal synthesis + external analysis, A's are external synthesis + internal anlaysis

I don't think inductive is quite the same as what I mean with Synthetic, in that synthesis is not necessarily a reasoned out process. You're not saying "I think this is the case because my observations say it is the case", the association is simply -perceived-.

- I think Phn, Nmn or abstract/concrete has connotations that would relate to E and I and other irrelevant things, but I'm almost certain that there would be some nuanced philosophical distinction that would map almost perfectly to N and S
- With how I'm understanding Analysis and Synthesis, it maps the other way around. I would completely associate Ti completely with the Analysis description, so we need then to extend the concept of Analysis to also cover Aesthetic analysis. The concept doesn't seem to relate to Je as well but I'm sure it could. Synthetic statements, such as "All creatures with hearts have kidneys", or "all bodies have weight" are observation based. They synthesise in the sense that they take two otherwise unrelated ideas, and then put them together - as opposed to analysis which uses only what we're given, and shows how we can get from our set of propositions to our conclusion.
- I like the J/P type distinction except for the fact that it uses the letters J and P (so that, if it used D and A (directive and adaptive) instead, or something similar, it would be fine).

Yeah (almost, maybe). The main idea here is to frame MBTI in terms of already existing dichotomies of philosophy.
- by aesthetics I don't mean the study of beauty, but the overall "feel" or "aesthetic character" some thing has. I believe feeling can be characterised better in this way than by "values" or whatever (since T's have values too, and F is used for more than just values)
- phenomenon, I think, refers to the immediate characteristics of something, whereas noumenon seems to be the abstracted idea of it, which I believe characterises S vs. N quite nicely. Abstract vs. Concrete is a simpler way of putting it; I'm not yet sure of the difference between these two dichotomies.
- objective in the sense of the objective world, that which exists independently of the observer, and subjective as in the sense of the subjective world, or that which exists solely with respect to the person. Pod'lair uses this terminology too I believe, as did Jung.
- Analysis is a process by which a conclusion is formed using only the content given to you, and some kind of rule-based process. Synthesis is an association based process, whereby we add content that was not already there, and not by any strict rule process. I believe that Analysis describes the J functions, and Synthesis the P functions (so, J-dom = Analyst, P-dom = Synthesist).

Thanks!

I agree with that, however I still think there is judgment to be placed on them, eventhough they may not be "good" or "evil" as such.

Cool. That is a genuine smile because I am looking at a picture of my friend. I did that on purpose.

My smile was huge when I was a kid and has shrunk. I posted a picture of myself smiling on the pictures thread. Girls used to tease me to get me to smile because it was so easy and my smile was so big. I would also blush very, very red.

what do you want it for? I could make one later if it will help you.

I wish I could post a video like that, but I'd have to make one. That's the only video I have!

Why did you change? I see nothing bad in being that way. It's just realism to me. If I could change my view I would, but people keep reaffirming it time and time again.

what's up with that rep comment? ha. I can't tell if you are sincere or sarcastic.
I'm just curious to know what you really meant to communicate.

Thanks!

I'm not sure if cool is type exclusive.

If you're interested in philosophy, I will draw your attention to the following distinctions:
- Aesthetics vs. Logic; (note: not ethics vs. logic)
- Phenomenon vs. Noumenon; (or concreta vs. abstracta)
- Subjective vs. Objective; (or rational vs. empirical?)
- Analytic vs. Synthetic.

Where girls go to your place with lemonade, diverse alcoholic beverages, etc. Mix them into disgusting drinks in attempt to create proper cocktails~ but, inevitably, fail. Then we sit in a circle and gossip about the latest this and that's while holding our weirdly looking sex on the beach. Then we blast the music hard and we go party party (esfp style) then we go to the center of the city and go bar stomping. We dance like crazy and practice our rejection skill towards desperate guys that are well in their 20's. Meanwhile the clock decides to notify you that it's past 4 a.m. Which means all the bars close. So then you decide to either go eat fast food, do weed, or go home. Consequently you wake up well in the afternoon and go online.

Today I host cocktail party

It will apply to any function relationship, using different models of bonding, and then following up on the already developed theory to predict interactions. In fact, it will even work for an arbitrary size group of people - all we have to do is find a way of creating a version of the discipline which is homeomorphic to that of the types.

For now though don't worry about this analogy. We need to have a basically complete model of pair interactions already in order to implement it.