hey look guys, i'm psychic.

More like Se notices things but doesn't know what to do with them.
 
saru said:
More like Se notices things but doesn't know what to do with them.
Click to expand...

No... That's exactly what I was trying to dispute.

Se can work out things with information AND know what to do with it. Probably more so than an Ne dominant.
 
I understand, and thats what I'm trying to dispute as well.



Also, I think we're talking about two different things, and calling it the same thing.
 
saru said:
More like Se notices things but doesn't know what to do with them.
Click to expand...

Actually, it does. Se is one of the most (if not the most) action oriented functions that seeks to use what it sees right infront of it, and it WILL do it.
 
IndigoSensor said:
Actually, it does. Se is one of the most (if not the most) action oriented functions that seeks to use what it sees right infront of it, and it WILL do it.
Click to expand...

Again, not really what I was referring to in that post.
 
hard to articulate, which is why I didn't try to articulate it, lol.
 
Well, from my understanding, there really isn't much way you could explain it outside of taking the direct literal meaning of what you said. As in, you saying that Se notices everything around it but does not know how to properly use it. I can't see how you could have meant something else from you saying that. Further, I quoted it because as I said in a previous post, that is incorrect. This is why I ask if you could explain this more because if there is another meaning to what you said it might be helpful to some to further understand what you are trying to talk about. If this is what you want, then it is worthwhile to at least try to explain it.
 
IndigoSensor said:
Well, from my understanding, there really isn't much way you could explain it outside of taking the direct literal meaning of what you said. As in, you saying that Se notices everything around it but does not know how to properly use it. I can't see how you could have meant something else from you saying that. Further, I quoted it because as I said in a previous post, that is incorrect. This is why I ask if you could explain this more because if there is another meaning to what you said it might be helpful to some to further understand what you are trying to talk about. If this is what you want, then it is worthwhile to at least try to explain it.
Click to expand...

I misspoke, I don't mean it doesn't know what to do with it... More like... It doesn't know what... ugh I can't find words in the english language for this crap. Either that or my memory of words is just shotty.
 
IndigoSensor said:
I agree, that really is a better example of Ne more then anything.
Click to expand...

Disagree... that wasn't Ne. Maybe the bit about the father coming out and being a redneck seemed Ne-ish but it was still all connected in relevance. Ne would have shot a tangent off somewhere else, Ni needs things to be connected in relevance as his example was.
 
bickelz said:
Isn't Ni capable of taking a conclusion and expanding on it in a linear fashion of probable future events based off of the conclusion.

Ne: Central event --> possible extensions of an event or all the possibilities of what could have happened if an event took place. "X,Y or Z could have happened but it also could have been A or B".

Ni: Central event --> linear calculation of one possibility that is seen as most likely to happen by Ni. "After event happens, go to A, then A goes to B..."

These are what I understand to be a difference between Ni and Ne with imagining the future.
Click to expand...

You win, you're right Royal and Indigo are wrong about that being Ne.

Ne would have more then likely in his example involved several possible outcomes instead of 1 solid one.
 
IndigoSensor said:
Ok, what exactly do you disagree with this?



No, INFJ's do not use Ne in the theory of jungian cognitive functions. All SP and NJ types work on the Se/Ni axis and do not use Si/Ne at all. This goes counter to cognitive theory due to the fact that Si and Ni do similar things indifferent manners. Further, Ne and Se do similar things in different manners. Saying someone crosses into both axis is like taking two gears, putting them together, and expecting them to both turn clockwise while hooked together.

If you do think that INFJ's do have Ne, then please explain how it is actively used, and how it can subistute in place of Ni and or Se, and how using this does not break down the theory of cognitive functions.



This is ok for explaining Ne and Ni in a brief sentance.
Click to expand...

Actually, we use all functions but have a preference of a few over others. When I take the cognitive functions test I score universally high in Ni, Fe, Ti, Ne, Te, and Se with Si and Fi being my least used. Think of your functions as 2 sides of a rope thats being pulled over a line, occasionally your line gets stuck and you have to run around to the other side (given a specific situation) to pull the rope in the opposite direction in order to make progress.

If an infj ONLY used Ni, Fe, Ti, Se, and nothing else we would be vastly different than anyone who didnt, and quite frankly, we really arent all that different, but thats because we make use of all functions. Even if not equally so.
 
If you read what I said I said I lean to it being Ne over Ni. However, that the example is a bit small and you could potentially see it being either way depending on how you look at it. Further, as I saw it, that was a series of possibillites thus leaning me to see that as Ne. Either way saru has asked not do belay that portion of this discussion of that anymore so I will leave it at that it could be seen differently depending on the angle you look at it due to it being a small example.
 
I'm Psychic.
 
IndigoSensor said:
If you read what I said I said I lean to it being Ne over Ni. However, that the example is a bit small and you could potentially see it being either way depending on how you look at it. Further, as I saw it, that was a series of possibillites thus leaning me to see that as Ne. Either way saru has asked not do belay that portion of this discussion of that anymore so I will leave it at that it could be seen differently depending on the angle you look at it due to it being a small example.
Click to expand...

Sure it can be seen different ways (wrongly) by different people. It wasn't very Ne though, I understand some people are mistaken on the definitions of the N's but Ne wouldn't have been quite as relevant, which is exactly what Ni looks for.
 
I said this in a later post, there are several theories out there in regards to how (and which) functions are used. Some only refer to the main 4, some refer to 8. I am of the opinion that only the 4 come into play in human consciousness due to the fact that two functions of the same attitude and lifestyle would be a moot point. Further, the majority of theorists on cognitive functions tend to lean to the main four being the only players. It's a matter of opinion on which functions are used in what way. I see it as using the main four because it makes the most sense when attempting to apply personality type to an individual and explaining their behavior.
 
dont forget i have like crazy adhd, which effects this jank more than you can know. In fact, I was taking that 150 question test, and got bored by like the 45th question and it took every cell of strength to not answer randomly. I just finished it because I knew it would drive me crazy for WEEKS until I got it done. get it dun.
 
IndigoSensor said:
I said this in a later post, there are several theories out there in regards to how (and which) functions are used. Some only refer to the main 4, some refer to 8. I am of the opinion that only the 4 come into play in human consciousness due to the fact that two functions of the same attitude and lifestyle would be a moot point. Further, the majority of theorists on cognitive functions tend to lean to the main four being the only players. It's a matter of opinion on which functions are used in what way. I see it as using the main four because it makes the most sense when attempting to apply personality type to an individual and explaining their behavior.
Click to expand...

In consciousness? If thats the case we only use 2. Since introverted functions are often in the realm of the subconscious mind, especially introverted intuition which cant be controlled consciously, it just picks up on things and makes connections based off of data we already have, and data we are taking in currently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top