- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
It's extroverted sensing that develops later, helping us engage in the present moment. Not extroverted feeling. Though Fe surely still plays its part in the mix.
INFJ's and being more present
- Thread starter IzzyIzzy
- Start date
It's extroverted sensing that develops later, helping us engage in the present moment. Not extroverted feeling. Though Fe surely still plays its part in the mix.
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
As an INFJ, no, it's part of the main body of functions that we use all the time. If you were an Fe-inferior, I'd give it some credit...
...because that, yes.
Just to clarify, it doesn't mean that we don't use the undeveloped functions, we use all of them all the time (though not necessarily simultaneously), but what it means is that we most likely only later learn to appreciate its use, how it is beneficial to the use of more dominant functions, and learn to control it. LOL, just think about it, if you didn't have or use Se at all, you would literally be trapped in your body - you would be forced to use Si instead or be completely numb to all of your external reality, you wouldn't see, hear, feel, etc. It is an even more terrifying thought imo than an existence in a matrix-like construction.
G4RiiM
Banned
- MBTI
- .
I have this thing where I zone out. I get "lost" in space, thought. everything around me just fades and kinda gets muted. when people talk to me in this state I usually just miss everything they say. IS this relatable to you?
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 5w4
I'm not. I'm really, really not, nor do I care to be "in the moment" most of the time. It isn't natural, and my brain isn't at its best in that state.
That doesn't mean I'm not paying attention, but I'm not "in the moment" in my natural state.
In certain situations I can force inferior Se to be at the forefront, but that is for short intervals and I need to come up for air. This is the best state of mind for a few situations. PVP gaming, or even some situations in PVE, when I'm grooming horses (especially horses I don't know well, or know sometimes kick or bite), when I hear or see something in the forest while hiking, etc. Even when I'm on high alert, though, my brain works best if I balance Ni/Se. If our dominant function wasn't a strength for us, it wouldn't be dominant. We'd have died out.
Trying to be in the moment during yoga or similar is stressful and counterintuitive. I'm convinced this is only a healthy and relaxing state of mind for sensors.
During lectures and that sort of thing, I usually learn less if I try to "be present" because I'm distracted by trying to get out of my brain and "be in the moment".
If I'm looking directly at the speaker/screen/chalk board it usually means I'm not paying attention because I'm trying so hard to focus that I'm just thinking, "Be present. Focus!" instead of using my brain the way it learns best.
When I'm listening to someone talk and they demand I "pay attention", I will be so preoccupied by acting like I'm paying attention that I won't hear them. It isn't like I don't look at people when they talk, I do, but I must look sort of like I'm looking through them, or something.
I'm in my late 40s, and my Se is well-developed. I notice the benefits of it, and I utilize it, it's just more natural, and I function better if I allow my brain to work with the stack it was meant to.
I mis-wrote, I meant to suggest Se. However, we are talking about time. A human construct, a human concept. And there are only three states to be in: past, present, and future.
Since its all in the mind, I purposed the past and future thinking are autopilot functions, and present minded thinking is turning off the autopilot function and grabbing the controls to pilot yourself, requires mental awareness and mental energy, and can't be sustained 24/7. We need autopilot to cruise. So Se (the five senses function is that awareness...just tap into them).
Also observing ego it's a very good learned skill set it's knowing what time it is plus many other interesting present minded Concepts
Roses In The Vineyard
Well-known member
- MBTI
- INFJ
I find that being only in the moment to be an empty mundane experience and far too many people don't spend enough time in their own thoughts but rather do anything to avoid them through work and entertainment.
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
I think this is more of a philosophical approach. Scientifically, it would look a lot different.
Scientifically it would be observing ego
We call them Drifters, they're locked in a habitual pattern hypnotic trap laid down by the devil...*smirk*
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
LOL, and what scientist would ignore the core of what is taught by physics and biology to make such a claim?
I'm sorry, but you seem to me to be preaching and insisting on non-existant validity in a way that I really don't find credible.
What are your sources?
Scientific basically means the experiment can be duplicated and repeated under lab conditions with the same variables. Quantum mechanics with the aid of the "two slit" experiment has proven scientifically that consciousness has a direct influence on matter. Our mind has potential undiscovered.
Are you suggesting that time is not in three states - past, present, and future?
Sure, I'm preaching if that works for you. I merely suggesting my way I use my mind to get in the present moment.
1. Using my Observing Ego
2. Using my 5 senses
3. Making a decision
4. Taking actions
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
I'm so against preachy stuff that I'm completely ignoring it so that I don't start attacking you for how uncivilised this method of promotion is. I hope that you can understand it and leave it in our further discussion because it simply has no merit if it isn't supportable by some framework (which you still haven't provided).
I am familiar with the double-slit experiment, and based on what I have learned so far it doesn't prove anything of the sort. You are putting two unrelated elements of Quantum physics into one box. However, since there is a chance that I might be wrong, I'm giving you the chance you convince me. You claim that it has been proven as you say, so this conclusion should theoretically be reproduceable, right?
I don't dispute time because it is an inseparable part of our reality. Space can't exist without time and without space there is also no time. This is why we talk about "spacetime". The concepts we have derived to describe our position in spacetime are as such, but if you consider how the brain processes data - tbh, it suffices to only consider the fact that it takes time because it's a process - it is biologically impossible at the current evolutionary state to experience the concept of present as it is, because whatever we perceive is already in the past once the brain has processed it. In the same vein, the future isn't humanly determinable because there are too many factors to take into account to make any prediction with absolute determinacy. There is one aspect in which I can admit that it isn't truthful, namely at the moment at which it happens - at which point it is often too late to act upon it preemptively (for the aforementioned reason) - and you'll end up reacting, just the same as if you never predicted it. And the further into the future you go (metaphysically, that is), the less determinable the future becomes. If you take this line of reasoning further (in both directions), you'll end up with a number of theories that are still being discussed among physicists, one of them being the many-worlds-theory.
Surely, the mind does have potential yet undiscovered, but you should take things into account that relate to the mind and its physical representative - the brain. What you have been doing just now,... I could explain it to myself as such: you internalised external aspects and externalised internal aspects, without considering the role of the objects of your arguments separate from the claims that you present. I don't think you see the objects for what they are, but rather use said objects to support false claims made by... whoever... without even knowing what you are talking about. I suggest you take a look into the matter before taking that route, because it is just too easy to see through and expose the bullshit if your claims don't have a solid foundation. I can understand that it easy to fall for such claims, and if I hadn't looked into the matter of Quantum Physics myself, I may have believed you at some earlier point in time, but that claim is just ridiculous at my current level of
Last edited:
Headstorm
On a mountain path.
- MBTI
- Ixxx
- Enneagram
- 5 9 x
Maybe 'being in the present' needs a little better definition to actually debate this? If we would try to define the present moment in a scientific way we get stuck here I think.
Regarding the topic I think it would be justified to say that being in the present is having our attention, our focus on sensory input. We use our senses all the time. When walking I need my senses so I don't trip. But my main focus could be on anything. When in the moment, I would thus have my focus on the walking itself, and not on anything else.
Regarding the topic I think it would be justified to say that being in the present is having our attention, our focus on sensory input. We use our senses all the time. When walking I need my senses so I don't trip. But my main focus could be on anything. When in the moment, I would thus have my focus on the walking itself, and not on anything else.
*sigh*
You offered no insights or disproved my reasons about being present minded. To censor a "male" infj is not wise. Since we're 0.05% of the population.
Man, talk about preachy...sheesh
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
In these terms, I like the word "mindfulness"
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
Oh, but I did. I'm sorry if you can't see it. Let me explain: I was arguing that your way of argumentation was flawed based on the gaps in your reasoning which led to wrong conclusions.
In between, I repeatedly told you to speak up, asked you to speak resonably and explain, in case that I do turn out to be wrong. What part of what I did is censorship?
And if I may point out another flaw in your reasoning, from this quoted post? You claim authority over the rarity of a type, which is based on a test that is inherently flawed and moreover, since the makers of said test can only make assertions based on the number of people who took their test, their numbers are consequentially incomplete, leading again to false conclusions. Do you see the pattern?
Also, even if you were trying to base your argument on the numbers presented by them, even that number isn't the percentage you wrote down.
About the preachy bit: I was disputing your argument logically, which is not preaching - if anything, it's teaching
If nobody tells you that you are stating false facts and wrong conclusions, how will you learn? Why not take it as the opportunity that I'm providing?
It's my understanding that INFJs use both logic and abstract in our views of the world. You seem to rely heavily on logic and science, facts.Oh, but I did. I'm sorry if you can't see it. Let me explain: I was arguing that your way of argumentation was flawed based on the gaps in your reasoning which led to wrong conclusions.
In between, I repeatedly told you to speak up, asked you to speak resonably and explain, in case that I do turn out to be wrong. What part of what I did is censorship?
And if I may point out another flaw in your reasoning, from this quoted post? You claim authority over the rarity of a type, which is based on a test that is inherently flawed and moreover, since the makers of said test can only make assertions based on the number of people who took their test, their numbers are consequentially incomplete, leading again to false conclusions. Do you see the pattern?
Also, even if you were trying to base your argument on the numbers presented by them, even that number isn't the percentage you wrote down.
About the preachy bit: I was disputing your argument logically, which is not preaching - if anything, it's teaching
If nobody tells you that you are stating false facts and wrong conclusions, how will you learn? Why not take it as the opportunity that I'm providing?
Pretty sure that humans are the only animal in the animal kingdom that have the concept of time in their mind on a conscious level.
The post asked for infj insights in staying presented minded. I'm an INFJ male offering my insights on staying present minded. I'm not here to argue over science or being schooled. What I offer may not work with you, but perhaps speaks to some INFJ.. now if the poster asked for scientist's perceptive on staying presented minded, I would had skipped over this post. I'm not a scientist, I'm INFJ.
It's bad enough in society to being misunderstood by 99% of the population. But to suggest, or in your tone, bullied into censorship of my insights..then what's the point of joining an INFJ forum only to have my unique insights osterized...if I wanted that I would had stayed on Facebook. I hope you have a good day, I said all I can on my concept of managing time.
Ginny
Shrrg
- MBTI
- INFJ IEI
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/sp
You chose to start arguing about it. You could have just not replied (in each instance), it was all just a little fun after all.
I'm not bullying or censoring you, you could have opted out at any time without consequences. I'm sorry that my replies have made you feel bullied, but in my defense, my points were accurate. I don't rely on logic and science, but it's a fun topic to engage in, especially when you want to make claims of the kind that you made when you started arguing about that little quib.
It just becomes problematic when you bring ideology into such topics without also bringing in the foundation that goes with it. You said "google it", like anyone would without a proper idea that could spark interest. And you're hurt when it falls upon deaf ears.
INFJs are never just one thing, we can use logic, be interested in science, use it to bring tangibility to our ideas and views, to make them indisputable. *
I was trying to encourage you, that's why I repeated the notion of me being wrong, giving you the opportunity to bring life to your idea.
You don't need to reply to this, but I'm asking you to consider this. We are all looking for truth, ultimately. If positions aren't open to be disputed when someone is interested in the matter, then how will we ever find it?
*That you feel the need to use your personality type as an excuse to victimise yourself is a shame. Looking at what you wrote here, I think that you have some old wounds that need tending to, and we're glad to help you if you decide to open up about them. You talk about your unique type as if I - and most people on the forum - hadn't lived through the same thing, over again. To put this down to type (and gender) is imo - and I'm sorry to say that - disgraceful. Adding to that, you talk about this as if only INFJ males were the treated the worst. In the end, it never comes down to types, or gender, but how you feel about you. You deserve to be secure in expressing yourself. But to do that, you need to see and adress your issues, just like everyone else. We're all the same here (mostly
), we're all individuals that happen to share a personality type, and we recognise that. We will help you, if you want to be helped - that is a given.Good day
I know this was a draining experienced thread, and not what I expected from my fellow INFJs. I represented a lone wolf spirit through out my entire life, seems I best operate when I am away from my own pack. As far as this forum goes, thanks, but no thanks.You chose to start arguing about it. You could have just not replied (in each instance), it was all just a little fun after all.
I'm not bullying or censoring you, you could have opted out at any time without consequences. I'm sorry that my replies have made you feel bullied, but in my defense, my points were accurate. I don't rely on logic and science, but it's a fun topic to engage in, especially when you want to make claims of the kind that you made when you started arguing about that little quib.
It just becomes problematic when you bring ideology into such topics without also bringing in the foundation that goes with it. You said "google it", like anyone would without a proper idea that could spark interest. And you're hurt when it falls upon deaf ears.
INFJs are never just one thing, we can use logic, be interested in science, use it to bring tangibility to our ideas and views, to make them indisputable. *
I was trying to encourage you, that's why I repeated the notion of me being wrong, giving you the opportunity to bring life to your idea.
You don't need to reply to this, but I'm asking you to consider this. We are all looking for truth, ultimately. If positions aren't open to be disputed when someone is interested in the matter, then how will we ever find it?
*That you feel the need to use your personality type as an excuse to victimise yourself is a shame. Looking at what you wrote here, I think that you have some old wounds that need tending to, and we're glad to help you if you decide to open up about them. You talk about your unique type as if I - and most people on the forum - hadn't lived through the same thing, over again. To put this down to type (and gender) is imo - and I'm sorry to say that - disgraceful. Adding to that, you talk about this as if only INFJ males were the treated the worst. In the end, it never comes down to types, or gender, but how you feel about you. You deserve to be secure in expressing yourself. But to do that, you need to see and adress your issues, just like everyone else. We're all the same here (mostly
Good day