Issues caused by fascination fixation.

[BurnedOut]

This is I suppose one of the worst issues I've begotten as a result of being analytical in nature. While solving IQ tests, I hate them being time constrained. The same goes for the logic section of competitive exams. The main issue caused is I first start theorizing on the possible solutions to the problem. Then I pick one theory and try testing it and keep improvising it until I'm able to fit it to the problem. When that doesn't happen, I start doing the same with other possibilities. It's not that I don't get the answer but it takes a lot of time to solve a single problem which should not have taken a lot of time. I get hell bent on cracking the problem by using every possible angle. I end up getting an average score in IQ tests when I can clearly grasp a lot of complex stuff very quickly. It's ironic because since my childhood I've never really studied too much to secure straight As in schooltime because the portion was stupid and easy and on top of that I was precocious in understanding things which were not really meant for a kid eg. I was able to figure out how circuits work and the concept of processors, capacitors, operating systems, motors and basic electronics and figured out how to tinker with the bios of a computer and assemble and reassemble it, overclocking, tinkering with the game files, blah blah stuff solely on the basis of my curiosity and observation when I was simply 7-8 years old but I believe this can be done by any kid who is very curious about how things work. Anyway, coming back to the issue, this stupid thing about fascination fixation causes me to suck very badly at IQ tests and competitive exams in general but help me immensely to derive an original theory, writing, making arguments and assimilating seemingly complex concepts. In other words, problems which require mathematical heuristics and organization and tabulation in general seems to be something which is not my niche at all.

So, when I look at such a problem, (I've ADD, this makes it very hard for me to understand instructions quickly and interpret the stuff that has been written because as soon as I look at a question, I get dyslexic for a temporary period of time due to being overwhelmed by all the instructions), I end up misunderstanding the whole instruction and then repeat the process mentioned above. Then I try to use my working memory and conceptual thinking together to make sense of the facts which are impossible to do so without tabulation and diagrams. Then I try to make a diagram but end up scribbling on the paper because my head is half stuck at theorizing about the solutions and half stuck at understanding the instructions and remembering them. Then I end up achieving nothing kudos to my overactive brain which is dumb enough to not use linear deductions and easy heuristics to questions which are generally easy. This puts me behind of everyone in my class whom I'm able to constantly outperform in the faculty of analysis ie critical reasoning. Anyone facing a similar issue? If TLDR, I overanalyse things which is normal analysis for me and end up creating a chaos.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

Okay so I researched a little bit, this is what I'm referring to.

1. Flight of ideas
2. Circumstantial speech (which gives me a sherlock Holmes like ability many a times)
3. And inability to adopt an organizational approach to contain the ideas ie can't make anything coherent enough to be used in practicality

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

IQ tests improperly measure the coordination a brain can achieve given the balance of the connected specialized regions. You are good at the analytical thought so you can generate a breakdown and then make an assembly of parts at your own speed put together. Do IQ tests measure this? No. IQ test are very specific on convergent solutions to problems. They have no divergent, not analytical measurements. Analytical thought is not really convergent. It deals with mental construction or reverses engineering. IQ tests definitely do not measure the talents of people that reverse engineer analytically.

For some reason, I can know the significance of ideas. I understood at age 10 that space-time warps and I asked what does it mean for empty space to bend because empty means nothing. At 10 I asked, what does it mean for things to exist, what something and not nothing. I remember trying to calculate the number of centimeters in the width of the galaxy to make a relative size comparison of the galaxy marble in the movie Men In Black. Weird things.

I remember the tests I took.
I do not know if they mean anything.

Age 12 WISC-3 (125)
Age 21 WAIS 3 (108) (g 117)
Age 27 WAIS 4 (113) (g 130)

 

[BurnedOut]

IQ tests improperly measure the coordination a brain can achieve given the balance of the connected specialized regions. You are good at the analytical thought so you can generate a breakdown and then make an assembly of parts at your own speed put together. Do IQ tests measure this? No. IQ test are very specific on convergent solutions to problems. They have no divergent, not analytical measurements. Analytical thought is not really convergent. It deals with mental construction or reverses engineering. IQ tests definitely do not measure the talents of people that reverse engineer analytically.

For some reason, I can know the significance of ideas. I understood at age 10 that space-time warps and I asked what does it mean for empty space to bend because empty means nothing. At 10 I asked, what does it mean for things to exist, what something and not nothing. I remember trying to calculate the number of centimeters in the width of the galaxy to make a relative size comparison of the galaxy marble in the movie Men In Black. Weird things.

I remember the tests I took.
I do not know if they mean anything.

Age 12 WISC-3 (125)
Age 21 WAIS 3 (108) (g 117)
Age 27 WAIS 4 (113) (g 130)

You have some pretty darn fluctuating scores. This goes against the maxim that iq scores are consistent. Is it that sometimes they are easy while sometimes they are hard? Or the crowd you are competing with is dumb?

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[TAC]

I'd imagine it is pretty common for an INTP's scores to vary. Knowing myself, I find it very difficult to be motivated to care about performance on a test (Indirect relationship; the more important an exam, the less I care). Currently struggling with myself with this for the CFA exam.
Also standard IQ scores are measured against global averages. Read a book that actually studied why certain races/geographic regions have differing IQ averages based on how historical events and and the growth patterns of civilization's. Europe as the control with 100. Jews and oriental slightly higher (110-115), Africa (85). Its mostly related to how quickly hardships moved them tribes to economies. Much of Oriental IQ gap is attributable to complex written language. Pretty interesting stuff.

 

[Black Rose]

At age 21 and 27 I was under severe stress so I found the tests difficult. The one I took at 12 may be more representative because are more resilient to stress. I was told that accounting for the date of norming you loose 0.3 iq points each year after you take a test. That would mean the test I took at 12 would take off 5 points leaving around 120 today. Considering I almost fainted on the test I took at 27, I think 120 better matches. My energy levels fluctuate and basic mental integrity/clarity. A friend I know looked at some of my papers and said I seem 118. I really do think that stress is the main cause of my low results. Energy and mental clarity play huge roles in what a person can do.

A blogger on IQ told me that IQ test measures different parts of the brain. So not all parts would be measurable on the test. Most tests are accurate only up to 0.7 for this reason.

 

[gps]

While solving IQ tests, I hate them being time constrained.

On this side of the pond we've reduced the reductionism implicate in single-number IQ tests by expanding intelligence into both how those to whom it's attributed LEARN and how this would-be `intelligence' is applied in The Real World

In the Real World much problem solving is performed via an iterative loop on an ongoing basis ... rather than some artificial deadline typically imposed by some ___J type or bureaucratic process acting on behalf of The State.

Those who do well on such time-limited tests demonstrate that they are good at time-limited tests.
Then when these test scores are used to qualify individuals for positions which entail or involve Real World problem solving they're left to exploit those good at Real World Problem solving who perhaps didn't do so well at contrived, artificial problem solving.

 

[BurnedOut]

On this side of the pond we've reduced the reductionism implicate in single-number IQ tests by expanding intelligence into both how those to whom it's attributed LEARN and how this would-be `intelligence' is applied in The Real World

In the Real World much problem solving is performed via an iterative loop on an ongoing basis ... rather than some artificial deadline typically imposed by some ___J type or bureaucratic process acting on behalf of The State.

Those who do well on such time-limited tests demonstrate that they are good at time-limited tests.
Then when these test scores are used to qualify individuals for positions which entail or involve Real World problem solving they're left to exploit those good at Real World Problem solving who perhaps didn't do so well at contrived, artificial problem solving.

Multiple intelligences theory is bullshit per se. The concept of IQ still has high validity coming to real life problem solving too. I researched on it recently

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[washti]

you seems wired to care more about exploring posibilities than achiving high test -scores. If you need these tests to get somewhere- have a goal and learn to solve them purly for top results.

I admire your thirst for knowledge as 8-9 year old. I cared only about candies and harry potter. BTW are you not bored by being constantly so damn serious about yourself? Its kinda disturbing. <mommy feels for you>

 

[BurnedOut]

you seems wired to care more about exploring posibilities than achiving high test -scores. If you need these tests to get somewhere- have a goal and learn to solve them purly for top results.

I admire your thirst for knowledge as 8-9 year old. I cared only about candies and harry potter. BTW are you not bored by being constantly so damn serious about yourself? Its kinda disturbing. <mommy's feels for you>

You have a point about me being serious about myself. My world revolves around me and I face from social isolation. Naturally, I'm more of a protagonist in a zombie apocalypse. That's what I think at least

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

At age 21 and 27 I was under severe stress so I found the tests difficult. The one I took at 12 may be more representative because are more resilient to stress. I was told that accounting for the date of norming you loose 0.3 iq points each year after you take a test. That would mean the test I took at 12 would take off 5 points leaving around 120 today. Considering I almost fainted on the test I took at 27, I think 120 better matches. My energy levels fluctuate and basic mental integrity/clarity. A friend I know looked at some of my papers and said I seem 118. I really do think that stress is the main cause of my low results. Energy and mental clarity play huge roles in what a person can do.

A blogger on IQ told me that IQ test measures different parts of the brain. So not all parts would be measurable on the test. Most tests are accurate only up to 0.7 for this reason.

0.7 is still very high.
They have discovered this technique of directly predicting iq by brain scans. Grey matter density in the various lobes of the brain directly indicate the amount of intellect possessed by someone. However I can relate the stress thing, I've anxiety and mental instability to a good extent. This either makes me superhuman at cognition or a complete moron

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

" Issues caused by fascination fixation."

As opposed or contrasted with target fixation ... possibly when blended with ADD or ADHD?
What happens when `the thing' -- the attention-fascinating, attention-captivating target -- changes from one shorter-than-statistically-average interval to the next?
Especially if the subjective manifester-experiencer has limited capacity for figure-ground reversal?

A space-filling tetrahedron seemingly EXISTING in a field of space-time can become a backdrop for a would-be `digital'/binary time-manifesting suchness whose figural existence is leverage off a field of tetrahedra manifesting thusly FILLED space.

It MUST experientially BE difficult to manifest `wisdom' above and beyond one's capacity to`love' it.
No?

 

[BurnedOut]

" Issues caused by fascination fixation."

As opposed or contrasted with target fixation ... possibly when blended with ADD or ADHD?
What happens when `the thing' -- the attention-fascinating, attention-captivating target -- changes from one shorter-than-statistically-average interval to the next?
Especially if the subjective manifester-experiencer has limited capacity for figure-ground reversal?

A space-filling tetrahedron seemingly EXISTING in a field of space-time can become a backdrop for a would-be `digital'/binary time-manifesting suchness whose figural existence is leverage off a field of tetrahedra manifesting thusly FILLED space.

It MUST experientially BE difficult to manifest `wisdom' above and beyond one's capacity to`love' it.
No?

Wisdom is independent of one's capacity. For wisdom is mostly practicality punched into a small pill of figurative lines. Moreover about fascination fixation, I don't want to sound like Freud but I suppose we do derive a sexual pleasure (by sexual I mean a good high and a feeling excitement and reinforcing behavior) from any kind of favorite activity. But makes the situation different is the inability to reach one's predefined satisfaction point within a desired time span for an ADDer. I suppose concentration span is directly correlated with the thermostat of hormones whose alloys are defined by biology.
In my scenario, i get a high from exercising intellectual capacity for generation of new sensory based deduction or the creation of new abstract entities. However the fascination fixation issue for certain things is the inability to derive excitement from an activity which is commonly associated with the one that gives you a high. More like a fucked up case of tolerance to drugs which can work two ways.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

I just found a better word to use than the word "intelligence". The better word is bandwidth. Working memory actually exists all throughout the brain, not just the frontal lobes. This means all parts of the brain uses information and the amount of information is the bandwidth. So if we measured the total bandwidth of all parts of the brain this would be more objective than IQ tests because this would account for how some people with ADD can do incredible things by high bandwidth in other areas well still having a poor attention span.

Fun fact: Some people can simulate and create anything they want to in their head.
Fun fact number 2: Animekitty cannot see anything in his head at all.

 

[gps]

But makes the situation different is the inability to reach one's predefined satisfaction point within a desired time span for an ADDer.

Have you ever tried the strategy employed by those assembling jigsaw puzzles?
What if you attained SOME satisfaction from assembling pairs of pieces in the border/frame; if so this piecemeal joining of pieces might result in the boundary frame being assembled ... even if lose momentum and let your work-in-progress set until you come back to it.
Then if you can experience sufficient satisfaction from joining/connecting any still-free pieces to the boundary frame it would seem that this process might result in achieving the supervening goal.

Though I'm not sure my mental processes qualify much for ADD I am aware that they do qualify as atypical for those with the same dominant eye as dominant hand.
I have a dominant left eye and have a picture of me coloring with my left hand as a child; they -- the ubiquitous bastards of `family' and `society'--`switched' me to right handed as a child.
I tend to toggle back and forth between left-hemisphere and right-hemisphere modes of thinking as a form of `reality testing' for each half of my brain.
If something seems `real' or valid for one half but not the other the resulting cognitive dissonance can find me toggling back and forth until I get a working model which `works', `seems to fit', or such for both modes of thinking.

When the number of factors or facets gets too large to juggle in my mind I'm inclined to encode them in a computer program and use algorithms to manipulate the factors/facets encoded in data structures.
If what I'm mentally modelling is primarily spatial and to-scale and it's too complex to visualize with any degree of completeness or clarity I can resort to graph paper, a CAD package, or generating a picture via turtle graphics algorithmically.

When it comes to mentally modelling any sufficiently large, complex system I suppose every INTP theoretician can experience something akin to ADD in that we all have to sleep sometime ... or can be interupted before we experience a satisfactory stopping point.
While crafting some rather large programs while at work my fucking phone would ring and all the mental balls I had been juggling all fell to the ground; after the phone call I had to `pick up' and start over.
I'm sure we've all experienced this.
So whether the interrupt manifests as some sort of internal watchdog timer with a short interval as with ADD ... or `The Real World' provides the interruptions it seems we all have to find ways of progressing on problems which can't be completed in one concerted coherent effort.

 

[BurnedOut]

I think it terms of words predominantly and then in pictures for hardcore brainstorming. My performance purely depends on how uncluttered my mind is or the amount of energy left in the brain. Coming to motivation, I lose motivation very quickly if the thing I'm doing is not of too much practical validity(sounding like an intj I know and I hate fiction)

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

Animekitty cannot see anything in his head at all.

Hmmm ... not even when you transition from eyes open to eyes closed as per persistence of vision?
If you `see' as a sighted person this would entail that your occipital lobe is working.

I'm not aware of which regions of my brain are active when I imagine/visualize with my eyes closed but I wouldn't be surprised if other parts of my brain `paint pictures' or generate metaphorical CGI on my occipital lobe `black board' or `projection screen'.

 

[BurnedOut]

Hmmm ... not even when you transition from eyes open to eyes closed as per persistence of vision?
If you `see' as a sighted person this would entail that your occipital lobe is working.

I'm not aware of which regions of my brain are active when I imagine/visualize with my eyes closed but I wouldn't be surprised if other parts of my brain `paint pictures' or generate metaphorical CGI on my occipital lobe `black board' or `projection screen'.

There's an irony though. He managed to get a good iq score despite this. If that was really the case then he cannot give any nonverbal iq test nor participate in any fields of science except chemistry. In other words, it's impossible for you animekitty to be an intp theorist.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[gps]

In other words, it's impossible for you animekitty to be an intp theorist.

Does INTP stand for

It's Not Theoretically Possible

?
If so it might only be such in your theoretical model of animekitty.

I suppose theories can be promoted or formulated via the use of syllogism, for example.
He also models theoretically via one-or-more programming languages.

Would you have us believe that INTPs who compose music as per music theory CAN'T do so unless they can PICTURE or dePICT the music in their mind's ear?

Seems like you're projecting YOUR visual cognitive bias onto Animekitty, dude.

 

[BurnedOut]

Does INTP stand for ?
If so it might only be such in your theoretical model of animekitty.

I suppose theories can be promoted or formulated via the use of syllogism, for example.
He also models theoretically via one-or-more programming languages.

Would you have us believe that INTPs who compose music as per music theory CAN'T do so unless they can PICTURE or dePICT the music in their mind's ear?

Seems like you're projecting YOUR visual cognitive bias onto Animekitty, dude.

No, the whole point is, he can in fact use spatial processing. However coming to imagining things in vividity like he claims not to imagine, I face the same issue.

I was being sarcastic bro, chill

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-06/uosc-fk062006.php



This is what I face. Good news for all the intps who love learning.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

I am going with my type being INTJ when making the following claims so please stand by. The difference between Te and Ti is that Te is inductive and Ti is deductive. So it seems that I would not be a good theorizer because theorizing means having perfected the premises behind deduction inferences. but the way I operate it would seem is that I care very little about getting my logic perfect and clean and I am more about bringing to the table information that completely changes how we view a subject matter. Ne for the INTP builds up a set of linked information that is what builds a theory. Ni in INTJ's looks for gaps in knowledge so it is not interested in linking together data (of which deductions can be made), INTJ's look for whats missing in their knowledge and others knowledge and then comes to conclusions based on current information which is subject to change when new information is found (usually by Ni).

INTP's have a set of information all interlinking that Ti perfects its deductive reasoning on. They theorize by having a perfect system. INTJ's are not like this so we cannot theorize in that way. What we can do is find evidence for why something is and constantly test it by expanding what we know, by looking for what is missing.

I think that is a good summery. To add: Visualization has been associated with Ni but if we are to believe Carl Jung, Ni is about the subconscious and having insights emerge from it that are very unexpected, that is those insights are like interference patterns that come from overlapping waves. Patterns just energy and they need not be visual. Intuition is an irrational function so it does not follow logic nor values in a conscious fashion. My insights simply happen, I usually quiet my mind to receive them.

 

[BurnedOut]

I am going with my type being INTJ when making the following claims so please stand by. The difference between Te and Ti is that Te is inductive and Ti is deductive. So it seems that I would not be a good theorizer because theorizing means having perfected the premises behind deduction inferences. but the way I operate it would seem is that I care very little about getting my logic perfect and clean and I am more about bringing to the table information that completely changes how we view a subject matter. Ne for the INTP builds up a set of linked information that is what builds a theory. Ni in INTJ's looks for gaps in knowledge so it is not interested in linking together data (of which deductions can be made), INTJ's look for whats missing in their knowledge and others knowledge and then comes to conclusions based on current information which is subject to change when new information is found (usually by Ni).

INTP's have a set of information all interlinking that Ti perfects its deductive reasoning on. They theorize by having a perfect system. INTJ's are not like this so we cannot theorize in that way. What we can do is find evidence for why something is and constantly test it by expanding what we know, by looking for what is missing.

I think that is a good summery. To add: Visualization has been associated with Ni but if we are to believe Carl Jung, Ni is about the subconscious and having insights emerge from it that are very unexpected, that is those insights are like interference patterns that come from overlapping waves. Patterns just energy and they need not be visual. Intuition is an irrational function so it does not follow logic nor values in a conscious fashion. My insights simply happen, I usually quiet my mind to receive them.

Don't fall in the rut of determining whether you are an intj or no. It took me two years to reach a conclusion that hybrids of mbti types exist.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk