no_name

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    765

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by no_name

  1. Posted · Edited by no_name

    7 minutes ago, A_v_E said:

    @no_name  right, then I can cultivate the land for myself, fish the river I want, breath the clean air I own.

    this is why there is no way to steal, you only take back what is yours by right of birth.
    Society is not owned, society is yours.

     you always take back what is yours, what is on the earth is all yours, no one have a right of property over you or your way to sustain in this life.

    everyone who claim right of property is a thief and shoulnd't be dealt with differently than through violence.

    I don’t see why you can’t fish the river you want, as a bum any bench is practically yours on the street. I am pretty sure you wouldn’t be happy if someone came and took all your belongings, so there are rules protecting them which work both ways. What you might think is yours by the right of birth might not agree with what someone else think is yours. Given how you are not the only human on this planet, there are some rules set.
     

    If you want complete and absolute freedom from societal rules you can move to an inhabitable island somewhere or Mars.

  4. Posted · Edited by no_name

    5 minutes ago, Blackhawk said:

    No it's not my fault.

    You guys really need better arguments other than always just say: "you are just lazy".

    It's just a convenient way for you to falsely believe that you are right, that you are awesome, and that there doesn't exist any problems anywhere because all problems are "just laziness".

    A grown man is crying that he is so poor and helpless because he has no interests in life, and somehow that’s the worlds fault.. 

  5. Posted

    Just now, Blackhawk said:

    It's not my fault that I don't have any interests in life, because it's beyond my control. I can't go like: "Ok now I will force myself to be passionate about writing books" or something.

    It is your fault. If you sit on your ass all day and expect interests to just find you, obviously that won’t happen. You need to explore and try new things to find your interests. Finding doesn’t happen if you don’t do the action of looking.

  6. Posted

    1 minute ago, Blackhawk said:

    No it's not my laziness talking. There is no job which I would like to have. Other than be a pornstar or sell sex, but I'm a guy so that's out of the question.

    Yea and that just makes the problem even worse. Because it means that we are born as slaves and die as slaves, and there's no way out of it.

    Tell that to people who are doctors, scientists finding cures for diseases, astronauts in space, movie stars, authors who write self help books helping millions of people, etc.

    Your problem is not slavery, you don’t have any interests in life, and if you did, you were too lazy to follow them and instead played them down and built all these negative believes.  

     

  9. Posted · Edited by no_name

    8 hours ago, thisintegrated said:

    I've seen no real evidence that "Ne = no conscious Te".  I should be able to say I'm a NeTiNiFe, for example.

    So you don’t believe the +-+- system has any grounding to it? I don’t see how someone could be Ni and Ne or Ti and Te, in my head there exists a clear preference.

    Also in your example there someone who has Ne and Ni as their first 3 functions, wouldn’t that person be some kind of hallucinating psycho? Don’t they need an S function to survive? 

    As an Ni dominant I appreciate and understand Ne, but it gives me anxiety if I had to do it and I don’t like doing it. E.g., if you were to ask me to brainstorm, I would get tired of it and start clinging to some one item instead that I find most interesting, yet I do like it when someone does the brainstorming for me and shows me other options 

    I do not understand why you can’t have an NiFiTiSe for example though, but I am still just learning so maybe there is a reason..

  10. Posted

    22 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

    That's also my view, but this changes when you start talking about typology (and claims about the frequency one uses the functions). Once you start talking about correlations to behavior (and correlating the functions with each other), you're in the realm of science. What are the justifications for combining these functions into types?

    Logically I would think the justification is as follows: According to Carl Jung, the 4 functions are Sensing, Intuition, Feeling and Thinking. Each person must have these 4 functions - you can’t have a person who doesn’t use thinking or feeling. You can’t use these function in equal amounts 25%-25%-25%-25% throughout your day, if I was to follow you for n days and record these percentages, I would get a breakdown of what your natural preferences are.

    If you are indeed studying psychology and expect it to be an exact science, you are in a wrong field and should switch to actual hard sciences instead. There is a lot of judgement and not easily quantifiable concepts, many are not even well defined and are still in the process of defining. 

    While big 5 have a basic statistical model, all what it’s doing is finding correlation between words, big 5 concepts are nothing useful, they are just words. What use will it do for you to know that you are conscious or neurotic? What do these things even mean? 

    My original post mentioned that I don’t know why the concepts of cognitive functions are not studied more, why are there no studies about this, why are there no proper tests created to identify those functions? Is it because it’s too complicated? There is no reason why a cluster analysis, regression analysis or some decision tree can’t be built around these concepts.

  11. Posted

    @Carl-Richard so what I was trying to say is that cognitive functions are also merely descriptions. In my first post I mentioned that I am surprised that they aren’t more popular, because I think they are extremely valuable. For example, knowing whether a person is an introverted thinker or extroverted thinker could help to pick out a job for them that’s suitable, or help them in school (right now teachers use the same mold on everyone while every kid is different)

    And it’s ok, no problem.

  12. Posted · Edited by no_name

    10 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

     are the cognitive functions scientifically valid?

    How is depression or introversion scientifically valid? 
     

    Also, by cognitive functions I am referring to the 8 cognitive functions. Then by typology I am referring to the ordering and stacking of these functions. So there are 4 things actually -> functions, typology, Myers and Briggs/MBTI, Myers and Briggs/MBTI test

  13. Posted · Edited by no_name

    23 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

    This would be critical Fi.  Meaning you are critical of people's personal views/beliefs/feelings.  So yeah I guess INFJ does fit you.

    A related question - what can a person do with their critical function? Is there any hope to fix it? 

  14. Posted

    1 minute ago, thisintegrated said:

    Also, xxFx types rarely engage in long Ti-heavy theory/debate, without some emotional cause.  They may talk about ideals, what's right, someone's feelings/experiences, and may use Ti to support all this, but rarely do they go all in on Ti for Ti's sake.

    I am engaging because it’s annoying to me when someone is talking about something so convincingly and stubbornly when they don’t have much/any knowledge in it, I feel like it’s not right (so there is an emotional cause :$)

  15. Posted

    1 minute ago, thisintegrated said:

     

    haha, okay that makes sense.  I never think of INFJs as Ti users as usually it's their Fe that comes through more strongly.  It's an uncommon type.

    Sorry to keep bugging you, what would be an example of an Fe coming out strongly? What, for example, would it be sounding like in this discussion or in the discussion about Russian propaganda? 

  16. Posted

    18 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

    It's possible.  All I know for sure is you're an NT.

    But Ni users are Te users.  So assuming you're a Ti, you should be a Ne.

     

    I did consider INTJ, but INTJs are Te users, and are typically more "goal-oriented", not caring about theories or discussions without a specific end-goal.

    INTJs, INTPs, and ENTPs are often mistaken for one another, and need more examination than most other types..

    I am an NF ?. I just have a strong Ti because of work. 

  17. Posted · Edited by no_name

    17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

    I keep repeating it because you keep refusing to engage with it. To me it's starting to feel like you're intentionally steering away from the original topic and turning it into a meta-discussion. I've already acknowledged that my knowledge of things like statistics is limited, but I don't see how that should make you unable to recognize the existence of some stats. Without being evasive and trying to psychoanalyse me, can you atleast acknowledge the fact that if you search "MBTI is unscientific" on Google, it gives you pages upon pages of relevant articles? Is this fact not the least bit relevant?

    I am not refusing to engage with it. I keep telling you MBTI test and cognitive functions are different things. @thisintegrated is also telling you that the test to find out what your personality type is, is flawed indeed, and you shouldn’t rely on a test to find out what your personality type is. I told you that there is a difference between depression and a test for depression. Yet you keep saying that MBTI is flawed because the test is not good. You are not willing to understand what I am saying, so I try to spoon feed it to you and break it down - like asking you to tell me what is big 5 predicting. 

  18. Posted

    Just now, thisintegrated said:

    INTPs have Ni in their "Critical Parent" function slot.  Ne sees many possibilities, and Ni narrows them down to "the one truth".  From what I saw in your post about Russian TV propaganda, it looked like Ni.

    But why it would be critical Ni? I am Ni dominant 

  19. Posted · Edited by no_name

    17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

    Right now I'm in studies mode, because that is what MBTI is lacking.

    But you don’t show any understanding of these studies, you are just repeating the same thing over and over instead of trying to reason things out.

  22. Posted

    21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

    Why should I? I didn't make Big 5 or invent the field of psychology, so of course I'm citing other sources when I can. This is not about me.

     

    I am trying to get you to do this because I want to help you to understand this. You will not gain an understanding if you are repeating someone else’s idea without understanding it. I am just trying to help you! 

  23. Posted · Edited by no_name

    @Carl-Richard can you stop using other sources/repeating things you’ve heard and think for yourself and tell me what is big 5 trying to predict? Every statistical model is evaluated based on some criteria to see how good it is. I am trying to get you to think for yourself and not repeat things you don’t understand.

    Also, I am not writing this to offend you, I am genuinely curious about this quality, how is it that you feel comfortable to be so opinionated on a topic you know very little (if not nothing) about? 

    @thisintegrated I agree, he is not a Ti

  24. Posted · Edited by no_name

    10 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

    significant factor for predicting said things or not, and that can be tested, and here MBTI fails just as much as star signs do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    What exactly is big 5 predicting? Please stop using these big worlds, when you don’t understand the basics, it’s making my hair hurt.
     

    Also, do you understand the difference between a test, which is something you would get on 16perspnalities.com, and the concepts themselves? The MBTI test is just trying to help you find your personality type, like depression tests are trying to tell you whether you have a depression, the test might not be good, it might tell you you don’t have a depression while you still do, but that doesn’t mean that depression isn’t real because the test for it is not good…

  25. Posted · Edited by no_name

    12 minutes ago, something_else said:

    Discovered is a strong word. ‘Invented’ is more correct. It’s not like these cognitive functions actually exist in the brain to be discovered, that would be absurd. Sounds like a word play issue but I argue that in this case it is important.

    And I’m pretty sure MBTI does have cognitive functions. IIRC each type has a cognitive function stack. I.e INTP is (Ti Ne Si Fe), INFP is (Fi Ne Si Te)

    MBTI does not mention the cognitive functions anywhere. The function stack is from typology. All of these are different (yet interrelated) things - Carl Jung’s cognitive functions, typology, MBTI.

    “In his 1913 classic, Psychological Types, Carl Jung propounded the basic theoretical framework for what is now the most popular personality system in the world.

    Although Jung spoke generally of introverts and extraverts, he eventually delineated eight psychological functions (Ni, Ne, Si, Se, Ti, Te, Fi, Fe) as a more accurate means of understanding the types. More specifically, he focused on identifying an individual’s dominant function, as well as, to a lesser extent, the auxiliary function.

    Because Jung never developed a standardized personality assessment tool, his ideas were slow to catch on among the general public. It was not until Isabel Myers and her mother, Katherine Briggs, entered the scene that Jung’s theory began its ascendance toward widespread recognition. Myers and Briggs developed the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®, or what is commonly known as the MBTI®, as a way of applying and popularizing Jung’s ideas.

    While Jung spoke mostly in terms of a type’s preferred functions (e.g. Ni, Se), Myers and Briggs introduced and emphasized the notion of preferences (i.e., E, I, S, N, T, F, J, P). Although still rooted in Jung’s theory, Myers and Briggs likely saw the preferences as more amenable to objective assessment than Jung’s multi-dimensional functions. Despite the different emphases of a preference versus function-based approach, these two approaches can and arguably should be used in tandem.

    In many respects, Myers and Briggs were correct in seeing the preference-based approach as more user-friendly, since it is more easily comprehended and requires less background knowledge. However, individuals seeking a deeper understanding of themselves and their personality type must eventually dive into the functions.

    More recent advances in type theory have highlighted the importance of understanding the less conscious functions, particularly the inferior function, which we will soon discuss. This can be seen in Marie-Louise Von Franz’s exploration of the inferior function in Jung’s Typology (1971), as well as in Naomi Quenk’s 1993 book, Beside Ourselves, later renamed “Was That Really Me? ”

    For the last decade or so, Elaine Schallock and I have continued to refine and advance type theory, including intensive explorations of the preferences, functions, inferior function, function pairs, and functional stack. All of these elements will be enumerated in this book, providing you with the most up-to-date information for accurately identifying and understanding your personality type.”