similarminds.com

[HatchBack176]

Kennuck -
http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/IntrovertedIntuition
"Introverted Intuition is a way of orienting yourself to your environment by consciously attending to the expected interpretations of things. In this manner of orientation, you hold agnostic about whether those interpretations are true. You view them as expected interpretations, nothing more. Your world is a world of expected interpretations defined by others; you navigate through those interpretations and use them without regard to whether they're true, always keeping the interpretations separate in your mind from the actual objects."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics
I can't help but associate deconstructionism, semiotics, and introverted intuition as the same way of thinking.


Also about beliefs on that same greenlightwiki page:
"Orienting by Ni, you are likely to view belief as something that simply arises within each person when they tune into it. If two people have different beliefs, there is no resolving it. I have my belief and you have yours. End of story. New ideas or evidence seem beside the point. If you think there's a bad moon rising, how could mere "evidence" persuade you otherwise?"

"More often than not, I resign immediately in the face of confrontation, because I can't possible see the benefit of arguing with someone over a point on which we each have firm beliefs."
Not to mention all the intjs chiming in saying that they're often right, and aren't in a big rush to explain themselves. I could be quite wrong, but do you see how I could see a connection here?



Another - Ya sorry about that. Here's how I meant for it to be read:

Example:
ASD: "I hate broccoli" (Someone states an opinion, but what does it mean to hate broccoli?)
PBS: How is that working out for you? (Invitaton to talk more about hating broccoli)
ASD: "I dunno, I just don't eat it" (An actual action is now associated with the opinion)
PBS: "Not even for a million dollars?" (Let's see what the opinion means in an imaginary context)
ASD: "I hate not having a million dollars more than I hate eating broccoli" (The imaginary context is accepted by the other person)
PBS: "So what would you do after you ate that broccoli for a million bucks?" (What happens after they eat that broccoli that they hate so much?)
ASD: "Go buy a ferrari, probably" (Good taste )
PBS: "Oh so you wouldn't throw up after eating 1 cubic inch of broccoli?" (There are thresholds and boundaries that don't get communicated by just saying you hate something)
ASD: "lawl, maybe!"
PBS: "What would you do if the only ferrari you could get had perfect everything, except it smelled of broccoli?" (Getting more into what specifically they don't like about broccoli)
ASD: "Well its the texture I don't like, the smell and taste are fine" (Oh!)
PBS: "You know what? I hate broccoli and ferraris!" (End)

Ya, it's a cherry-picked conversation and doesn't have anything to do with Uaaq, or even what I personally do in a conversation. I only mean to illustrate the idea of thinking in a "20 questions-esque" manner when you hear somebody state an absolute. What does/would the person actually DO with their BODY? How does the person evaluate the situation with extra complications?

I like your idea of tying the need for certainty in an uncertain world in with exploration. Have you heard of the OODA loop from John Boyd (this specific idea maybe isn't so interesting, but what's great is the many directions people have taken similar ideas)? Establishing things as changing feedback loops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_Loop

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/11/fake-selfishnes.html - Eliezer Yudkowsky is an INTP. It's not necessarily the specifics it's the way of thinking in the conversation.


Uaaq -
Hmm, sorry about that. I'm sure you understand the motivation people have to look like the "top dog" for social status reasons. That was wrong of me. The box I'm using to understand my posts is "How do ENTPs/INTPs/anyone get their flexibility?" The reason I'm interested is because I take it as a GIVEN that the poll/discussion represents an ACTUAL problem of INxJs. It's an oppurtunity to do some spring cleaning of my mind. Forums are horrible for these kinds of discussions because there is no real-time small-chunked feedback. Minor mis-understandings/mis-explanations can fuck with an entire post. Things which would probably be stamped out in a conversation. The paper-trail is nice though.

'Happier times, Happier places'
I had some confusion for a little while. thinking of how I could explain myself in a clear way. I just kind of sat here for half an hour. I started getting tired, so I closed my eyes. Forgetting everything that I was thinking about. Only concentrating on how my body was feeling. Bits and pieces of nostalgia crossed my mind as I thought of how utterly warm and secure I felt. It's interesting to think that this fat black guy cooing underneath his blankets could be so aggressive to people. What is it about my mental world that causes such a huge rift between how I would love to feel, and how I actually interact with people. As the old saying goes "You'd better check yo' self before you wreck yo' self"

Speaking "through" that feeling of comfort and gratitude for finding mental mates, as opposed to my ego. I feel like saying:
"How are you, Uaaq? Wouldn't it be great if we could stop time and just fly around together, like some kind of Peter Pan? I'm sorry I don't have my emotional priorities straight. I'd be lying if I didn't say it's BECAUSE you're smart that I would even try to insinuate you're below me. 'Happier times, Happier places' I regret not keeping my emotions open for the people I come across. It should be so easy you know. Do you want other people to be curious, well speak to that curious part of other people. Do you want other people to be friendly, well speak to that friendly part of other people. Embody it, and awaken it in other people. The ideas in my original post have been nothing but good for me. It's like a neat little Christmas present that everyone gets to unwrap. It's great that I can offer a little peace of mind to people. I've certainly done a nice job of mucking that up so far . The way people interact over the internet is almost pure mind-stuff. We're not in any particular danger, when I read your posts I can listen to my favorite song, I can daydream about us being the best of friends, I can write about you in my personal diary, basically whatever I wish. XoXo"


So the idea I had for clearness was:
"Kid threads"
When I return myself to a happier place and time. I focus on a pure feeling of bodily comfort and no thoughts. I then go from that nothingness and focus on all the extra structure I have to put on my thoughts and feelings to interact with the real world.
Something like putting yourself into the brain of a five year old and thinking of everything you have to build to understand something complicated that an adult says.

Nothingness/sleeping --->LoTs Of StRuCtUrE --->Expressed thought
Put another way...
Dreamy haze when you first wake up --->Brain starts to wake up --->awakeness/coherency
Put another way...
Confusion --->Curiousity --->Understanding

Building your understanding of things bottom-up and top-down. Through fits and starts, dead ends and roadblocks. Analyze<-->Synthesize. Through letting a problem just sit in your mind, going through your day letting random thoughts and various contexts interact with your problem-solving facilities allowing insight to work for you. Through making a problem more complicated allowing yourself to see the full-range of possibilities and relations.

[uuaq]

[uuaq]

PS, HatchBack and the everwatchful Kyle.

Please don't think I'm saying don't try to exercise Ne. All the experts agree you can do anything you want, and since you want, you should try. But from what you just said, you really don't seem to be using it perferentially. Of course, that's ok. Practice makes perfect. Your original notion of "using Ni, but focusing it outwardly" sounds like something of a start. But, and here I want to sound hesitant, not doubtful, in an Egon Spangler sort of way: that seems difficult.

Inutition is good at pattern recognition, but each has a distinct focus, a unique Attitude, i.e. either introverted or extraverted, the inner world and the outer world. Each of these is a distinct realm of possibilities and potentialities. And each is most deft in its own realm. If you want to be able to intentionally access Ne, I'm afraid you should bear in mind you are likely to run into exhaustion along the way, and that exercise of Ne in little bursts is more likely to make the Process comfortable than it would be to fluster yourself over not being able to employ it with the grace and charisma of an Ne-dominant. But that aside, how about some ways to develop non-dominant functions side by side with your functional prefences?

Lenore Thomson talks about left- and right-brain alternates during tertiary crises. For INJs, that's the right-brain alternates of Ne and the corresponding opposite Judgement. Now, before I go any further, the absolute last thing you should try to do is throw yourself into a tertiary crisis so you can practice Ne! But surely there has to be a more subtle, intentional way to invoke a few rep.s in your training regime, right? At this point in my very particular train of thought, I really do think an INTJ is not the best person to ask for advice. Make friends with INTPs, or any of the NPs if you can handle their antics. (Since they're all obviously watching and reading this thread, maybe we can get them to chime in with more than pickles.) That's usually very easy, and especially if they think you think they're better at something than you are! Seriously, though. The hardest part about it will be trying to glean a technique from their behaviors. There's no more a technique with Ne than there is with Ni.
_________________
INTJ, Contributor. 5w4. rxOe|I|.
Then he got an Idea--an awful Idea! The Grinch got a wonderful, awful Idea!

[Romana]

[Another]

[uuaq]

[nightwing]

Alright, I'm going to be throwing in a wild card - I haven't read every post throughly.

Hatchback, Kennuck has a point -

[HatchBack176]

Uaaq -
Yes, you wanted me to talk in my own words. I figured another Introverted Intuitive would appreciate it. I wanted to clear up some of the confusion so that you could go BACK to the original post and understand it. It is actually interesting seeing how INTJs react to the information, but I'm wondering if you could comment on the original post without reference to Functions (Ni, Se, etc.).

Another -
If somebody is going along with what you're saying THE SUBTEXT is that you're speaking meaningfully with the person. You don't have to be some psychic reader guessing outloud. It's kind of funny that on the topic of certainty you want more directness instead of subtlety
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport

Nightwing -
"Type indicates preference not ability or behavior" Funny!

[vinny]

I dunno what the hell you people are talking about, I only know this thread is about closemindededness. Everyone is prone to closemindedness, not just INTJs. When you are too self-absoerbed into your point fo view, you cannot see anything outside it. The only way to avoid closemindedness is to suppress the instinct to argue immediately, and listen to someone who has a different, and often opposing point of view. Often, a new and different point of view is hard to digest because it goes against all your beliefs and paradigms, and the people who says it often has a harsh tone and not exactly music to your ears. But nevertheless, it is good to hear people out. Like Lenka said I was NF rather than an NT, I still don't know if its true or not, but i think there is some point ub what she says. Although it seems like i don't agree with her in the past few threads, inside my mind it is quite a different story.

But then again, you have to sort out the intention of the person who says these words, are they meant to hurt you or do they want to snap you out,
Becuase some people just like to give you BS and screw your mind up, making you do some unnecessary thinking.
_________________
Patience and endurance is necessary to solve any problem.

8w5 or 5w8

enneagram types I will never be: 3,1,6

[vinny]

[uuaq]

[uuaq]

(My apologies to everyone that I apparently have lost all sense of concision! I didn't intend for this entry to be so lengthy, especially following my reply to HatchBack, because my original "tertiary crisis" quip was only meant as an aside. This is here to publicly answer a public request, and again: I am embarrassed to've whittled so much life out of Lenore Thomson's erudition. Romana, you should get this book at your soonest convenience. It's brilliant.)

[HatchBack176]

MY NOTES FOR FUTURE PURPOSES FIRST, NOT MY REPLY.
My motivation for the original post was based on a thread that specifically had to do with INXJs, especially INTJs. Created by another INTJ. Citing function theory doesn't make the poll/thread disappear.


haha, ya for all the objectivity or whatever there is a lot of attraction to drama/controversy. I use that whenever I can. In my defense though, it's as simple as starting a new thread if people want to discuss something else.


I had in mind everyone else changing. This definition is a good one.
catalyst - A substance which increases the rate of a chemical reaction, but itself remains unchanged at the end of the reaction.


Mental Models, Repetitions/Patterns, Mental Organization, Novelty/Context, Structures required to even have beliefs in the first place, Contradictions, Resource Constraints (working memory, stamina, emotional stability), How thoroughly and quickly do they cycle through the Jungian Functions, Cognitive biases/fallacies, reframes, Informaton warfare, tactical/strategic, push/nudge into the net you created by thinking of the ending, Generics and Generic patterns, tentativeness,


Picks out words to re-define. Fairness, context-independence.

People are obstinate which implies a negotiation possibility

Negotiation = Take what can be taken
How can you negotiate without a position? Your brain will do the work of filtering information for you, even if you try to take in all of reality. Brain Constraints.
Facts are not malleable. What does that mean for the objective layer?

Whole new categories where negotiation can apply. Physical (fighting, taking, speed, willpower), representative democracy (one represents many), process of evolution, memes (law, fairness, religion), personal mental world

I would dare put forth that in virtually all instances (excluding the clinically deranged, including curmudgeons), no one even notices "closed-mindedness" unless the one doing the noticing has a position and an agenda to "take what can be taken," in this case: the title of who's rightest. Respond.

Presuppositions. Right off the bat, if I walk up to you and start talking. I'm looking for your attention and making a request for you to respond in english or at least assume you understand it.

As I scope out the world around me I notice that dead people don't do anything but take up space. Survival is like the supergoal of humans.

Getting behind your statements isn't actually needed. Only the credible display. I see what you're saying though. Let's toss out incapacity for certitude. Now "greater flexibility" only occurs, relatively, on the spectrum of certitude.

Life - The actions and decisions you make, in sequential time.[/b]

[HatchBack176]

REPLY:

haha, ya for all the objectivity or whatever there is a lot of attraction to drama/controversy. I use that whenever I can. In my defense though, it's as simple as starting a new thread if people want to discuss something else.

I had in mind everyone else gaining greater flexibility. This definition is a good one.
Catalyst - A substance which increases the rate of a chemical reaction, but itself remains unchanged at the end of the reaction.

You make an important point. Our mental models statistically (in a mathematical Bayesian sense or even logically in a Godelian sense) approximate reality. A key and enduring source of novelty/uncertainty. So let's throw out 'closed-minded' and throw in 'obstinate'. I don't think someone will need either word once we've summoned the potential of flexibility/adaptivity.

Another point you're making that I'd like to package is "Behavior is geared for adaptation, and present behavior is the best choice available. People always do the best they can with the resources they have available at the time.
"Power is essentially amoral and one of the most important skills to acquire is the ability to see circumstances rather than good or evil. Power is a game--this cannot be repeated too often--and in games you do not judge your opponents by their intentions but by the effect of their actions. You measure their strategy and their power by what you can see and feel. How often are someone's intentions made the issue only to cloud and deceive! What does it matter if another player, your friend or rival, intended good things and had only your interests at heart, if the effects of his action lead to so much ruin and confusion? It is only natural for people to cover up their actions with all kinds of justifications, always assuming that they have acted out of goodness. You must learn to inwardly laugh each time you hear this and never get caught up in gauging someone's intentions and actions through a set of moral judgments that are really an excuse for the accumulation of power."


Given the need for survival, the filters our brains apply to our experience of reality, the many forms in which power or force can manifest itself, limited resources if nowhere but the attention you can give, and the tentativeness of any judgment or "proper" action we take in a given moment of time. I'll say that you're always taking positions on lots of things

It's interesting to compare the AIDA process with the OODA loop. Marketing, Attention Economy, military strategy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_economy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_Loop

[Romana]