Are most of the people here insane?

[Dansk]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

 

[Wish]

Can you simplify your language - I did not understand a thing you said

 

[Oblivious]

What's he on about?

 

[Decaf]

Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

In that respect its quite a universal human behavior that accompanies intellectual insecurity. When encountered with a situation that casts into doubt a person's mental ability they often retreat to incomprehensibility as a defense mechanism. So, yes it happens here, and no I don't believe it is specific to INTPs except perhaps that there is a greater proportion of INTPs than some other types that invest their self worth in their ability to appear intelligent.

I personally delight in making complex subjects intelligible to others as best I can and I'm an INTP, but that is at best anecdotal evidence of the contrary to your assertion.

It should be noted that stress is necessary for growth and someone who reacts in a healthy way towards feeling the stress to be intelligent is more likely to give attention to that aspect of their self-education (not to be confused with formal education). Its also possible that subtle clues to someone's intellectually ability could be the cause of believing that in their intellect lies their true value. Of course that relies on a dodgy definition of intellect, but then so does the world view of someone who feels insecure about how intelligent they appear to others.

That is to say some of the folks that act in ways that make them appear insecure towards their intellectual ability may actually be quite intelligent, but have not grown into themselves yet (and thus are unable to express or apply themselves sufficiently).

 

[nexion]

Every so often, I will write something utterly incomprehensible purposely. I don't know if I have ever done so on this forum. We are concerned moreso with conciseness. Though I am terrified (and rightfully so) of revealing so much about my self and my thought processes that all of you fine (and some not so fine, perhaps) people can truly realize what and who I am. My posts speak about me more than anything ever has, and I am learning even more about my self from many of the things my subconscious blurts out in this forum. I try to write anything that pops into my mind when thinking about a particular subject and replying to it, you know? That way, I can at least maintain a semblance of genuineness...

but yes, I think my posts more than prove that I am entirely insane.

 

[Anchorite]

Am I insane? Well if somebody is insane they aren't aware of it. If they are then it kind of eliminates the point. I may very well be insane, but I'm really the wrong person to ask. You may be insane yourself. It's difficult to say.

 

[Anthile]

Well, I have seen real insane people and I can assure you that nobody here is actually insane.
Some minor mental disorders? Yes.
Stupid? Most certainly.
Pseudo-intellectual? More than you can shake a stick at.
Insane? Nope.

 

[nexion]

How do you define "minor"?

 

[Anthile]

How do you define "minor"?

People don't have to lock you away for your own good.

 

[snafupants]

perseus is the only member who might benefit from a padded room. the majority of us have varying degrees of neurosis and unhealthy ways of viewing reality.

 

[Claverhouse]

How do you define "minor"?

Slight nervous tics compared to full-blown Grand Mal Seizures ?






Claverhouse

 

[Melllvar]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

Got any examples? I really have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe I don't read enough of the threads. Or maybe I'm just so insane I can't recognize insanity.

The vast majority of what I read on here seems comprehensible and coherent. If it doesn't I usually just skim it or skip past it entirely.

 

[Cavallier]

It helps if you think of it as a game. (Then again I think everything is a game.) I love language and words. I collect words like other people collect stamps, or buttons, or whatever it is people collect. I hardly ever get to use "big words" IRL. Most of the reactions I get are "that's a damn big word". It's nice to know that at least a few other people around here enjoy words and language as much as I do. I still often get the "that's a damn big word" around here sometimes but I suspect mostly people just google a word they don't know and then maybe they've learned something new.

I do the same thing with ideas/philosophies/world views. I play around with them when I discuss things here as a way of better understanding them. Some of the members here do nothing but play with ideas. You hardly ever see their true selves not because they are insecure but because that's not why they are here. They don't need to validate themselves to a group of strangers they just want a forum in which they can play with ideas.

Last, I suspect a lot of INTPs enjoy playing with their intuition. I'm willing to bet most of the time when you see a post that's unintelligible to you that member is making intuitive leaps and playing with language for the fun of it. We've had a bit of an Alice in Wonderland theme going on lately and I think the rabbit hole is a good metaphor for what's going on. You make a post that references only the subject of an intuitive leap you've made related to the thread. You just presented the forum with a rabbit in a waistcoat. Then another member sees the rabbit for what it is and decides to follow it with a post of their own. Before you know it you and this other member have fallen down the rabbit hole. Others might leap in as well or might make intuitive leaps of their own and you end up with very odd conversations indeed. Get it?

This is why I love this place. It's true that some inevitably (probably all at one point or another) try to make themselves sound important and hyper intelligent for personal reasons. However, most just want to play or have discussions about topics of interest. Those are the same thing for most members. Playfulness is found in the intellectual or mental arena for most INTPs. We get irritated when somebody blunders in and fails to recognize that there is a "game" going on. It can really kill the mood. Though if you say/introduce something interesting it nullifies the irritation. We are kind of like kittens like that. If you watch for a while you start to pick up on what's going on I think.I hope you don't take this playfulness for arrogance too often though.

Or, you know, I'm just insane.

I really have to stop writing such damned long comments.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Keep in mind the apparent insanity is possibly just a language barrier. It also good fun to play around with insane thought processes, even when you recognize their irrationality.

I can't promise I'm sane though. I probably am, but I'm paranoid that the moment I become certain of my sanity is the moment I truly have gone insane. Though neither am I convinced of the sanity of humans as a species.

A few people here might fancy themselves insane, imagining in some discombobulated way, that it makes them special or superior.

 

[Reluctantly]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

Metaphors...about...animals...omg that's hilarious.

I'd like to hear more! Over lunch!

 

[Cavallier]

Perseus is a legend that goes beyond the borders of INTPf.

 

[jzono1]

Look deep into my eyes. What lurks beneath the surface?

Who needs sanity anyway?

 

[Fukyo]

Look deep into my eyes. What lurks beneath the surface?

Who needs sanity anyway?

Your avatar sure looks like it's lacking a few screws.

 

[jzono1]

My avatar?

It's a self-portrait.

 

[loveofreason]

A few people here might fancy themselves insane, imagining in some discombobulated way, that it makes them special or superior.

*smug content*

Except for the odd Ti-dom being super-succinct and hyper-logical (not looking at words at all ) the job of challenging normative expression here falls to the Ni-doms.

Mostly it's just INTPs having fun pretending the world will fragment around them. As if.

 

[Jesse]

When I post it's usually to put something into concrete form for my self and not for others amusement. So I take little effort in explaining things methodically or even in the proper grammar. Also What is your definition of insane? There are so many I've lost count.

 

[DarkGreen]

 

[Words]

Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

First, I have to wonder: 1. Does this fallacy of intended incomprehensible expression exist? Are the words really incomprehensible? 2. To what extent? How rampant is the activity? 3. To what group? 4. To how much of the group? How rational is the generalization?

My intuition tells me that if your proposition were true, it would be caused by not just one factor but by many things. Maybe you've secluded this answer because of the clarity of the known collective-value of intellect. A disoriented mind will mislead itself and 'cheat' in order to fulfill the goal of getting the 'high score'. But wait, the word 'mislead' can serve to emphasize a point: what does the person truly value? why linger around falsehood?. If both truth and appearance are valued(if both Ti and Fe are valued), then intermittent contradictions occur. I think this 'state of confusion' is the cause, but what causes the internal dissonance? maybe every bit of value factor...but what causes the 'arrangements of values'? maybe every bit of experience...which maybe related to choice.

On the other hand, the benefit that is 'feeding' intellect-related ego is not the only acceptable answer in the scenario of 'intended confusion'. It could be out of aesthetics or boredom or all the possible mix of all possible 'intentions'. Still, why does 'pride' stand out? Because of this community's collective disposition(which relates to value)?

In that respect its quite a universal human behavior that accompanies intellectual insecurity. When encountered with a situation that casts into doubt a person's mental ability they often retreat to incomprehensibility as a defense mechanism.

I will try to fuse 'self-defense mechanism' in my model. The mechanism makes me think of a subconscious activity but I googled and found out it was in the unconscious level. If the reaction is unconscious, how does 'value' play a role in this? Values seems to be very hard to manipulate. But if value reaches growth beyond specific ego then the mechanism fades as the mechanism relies on value. If the action is a 'self-defense mechanism', then 'the state of confusion' or 'internal imbalance' is the producer of said mechanism.

Still, I think there is much awareness when writing something with intention; this makes the reaction difficult to qualify as a 'defense mechanism'.

-------

On a personal note, there is a part of me that values pride and 'face' and this often leads to misguided thoughts and intentions. Still, this subconscious value cannot defeat the other value of meaningful discussion. And yet still, I fear that I may fall prey as I have already fallen before. Though I can't remember writing for the sake of being seen as intelligent(I may have), I do remember having committed other equally regretful acts.

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

I just have a serious problem commiting my attention. That normally leads to me staring off and not saying anything to anyone. Which in turn leads to me eventually thinking to myself, people probably think i am out of my mind or something, coming to their house and staring at their wall.

So i just have a little extra urge to put my intelligence out there when given the opportunity. At the same time though, most of my effort is in vein and further develops my insecurities. This is a very minor problem for me though, it causes subconsceous behavior that makes me look like a fool sometimes, but it is nothing i dwell on.

It is funny though, when people tell me i am wrong, i more or less just laugh at them and persist to prove i am right by tearing into the reasoning behind them telling me im wrong, or the details they give to support their opinion. (Only if i really feel i am right though, i am very quick to concede when someone gives a reasonable opinion) On the other hand, any time anyone just directly calls me stupid instead of trying to give a reasonable arguement, i mirror their attitude and can get pretty pissed, fast.

Not much of this is relevent to the original topic of course, i just kind of focused on where someone mentioned that peoples obscure posts stem from insecurities that cause a need to emphasize your intelligence.

On a final note, im sure im not insane. Or maybe my girl just tells me that so i feel better about myself.

 

[The Gopher]

I remember this from I while back

My final thoughts (for this post is many times the length of your own): you speak of sanity. If you walk the line; if you maintain the status quo simply to maintain your sanity, stop. Insanity is the most beautiful thing in existence. let your inhibitions go, and discover your true self. Sanity is conformity, for it is they who determine the definition. Please, my friend, I beg of you, lose yourself in relation to others; determine your own sense of identity, discover it as a road, and walk boldly down it each and every day, be you though tired and lonely, and you will have to resist adversity. It will be worth far much more than anything else you do in life, I am sure. Lose sanity. It is useless anyway.

This is SPART... this is cool

 

[nexion]

Ugh... you just had to quote me, didn't you?

course... I wasn't talking about genuine, "holy shit I see other worlds" insane, unless you're into that...

 

[The Gopher]

Ugh... you just had to quote me, didn't you?

course... I wasn't talking about genuine, "holy shit I see other worlds" insane, unless you're into that...

:smiley_emoticons_mr

 

[dark]

Quite often I am called, crazy, weird, insane, and well any other word someone can think of that correlates to these, but I am not really sure they mean I am. To be honest, I think this is how people are telling me I am different, since most the time it happens when I turn to someone and explain an idea to them and turn back to what ever I was thinking about.

I don't think I am insane, but one could never know. I do relate with Renfield quite well. But that is probably because he is really human, and very intelligent, not saying I am interlligent, I don't believe I know enough to think that, but I like talking to intelligent people. But those psuedo-intellegents go on about trivial bull of day to day life that I personally find extremely mundane. Those are they people I think have a Fe and probably an Se, I may be wrong with the letters since I am still learning, and can only recite information they have learned, but intuitive leaps can not happen for them, but I notice a lot of them act like it did after they learned so much and concluded some one elses intuitive leap. Those are the real insane people, and others who fake things inorder to look a certain way... wtf am I talking about. Um on another note, this last paragraph probably makes no sense, but, insanity it is fun to play with others thought processes, ask questions, see how they tic, sometimes I may know the answer and only want to see how others respond, while other times I genuinely don't know so I ask, this happens most.

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

On second thought i probably am insane, i am just in denial because i have not killed anyone.

Yet.

 

[Decaf]

On second thought i probably am insane, i am just in denial because i have not killed anyone.

Yet.

When your brain stops comparing your cognitive perception to your observations, you begin the process to evident insanity (technically if the comparison has stopped entirely you are completely insane even if your perception perfectly reflects the real world). Insanity is a reality disconnect.

When the imagined reality of an individual becomes "free-floating" we naturally fear the potential dangers involved, but it can be quite benign. However, one thing an insane person can not be in is denial as that would require an understanding that in some light (that you are refusing to see) your actions violate your own principles. Acceptance is to love as denial is to hate. Insanity is complete obliviousness.

If your insanity sanctioned the killing of another person you would at that moment believe that killing that individual would not be a symptom of insanity. So congrats, you are evidently not one of the dangerous crazies.

Yet.

 

[nexion]

:smiley_emoticons_mr

Oh God. Not the bats.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

My intelligence is only above average. Some of my friends and colleagues think I am far more intelligent than I am but all I do is adhere to a process that I will outlined below. My skills involved understanding systems, programming, mathematics and design. Practice makes perfect. Use of language only fulfils the technical necessity of the trade I am involved in; I will never be a Noam Chomsky.

The necessities of my theories, arguments or propositions is that they must be logical, must have causal structure and links, must fulfil conditions of being validated or invalidated and must have evidence.

One of hobbies is formal debating. I find it enjoyable and fulfilling.

In my younger years I was much more imaginative and excelled in the liberal arts but that died just as fast as it manifested. Hell, it got me through high school english.

I try and avoid speculative mental masturbation at all costs; it produces misconceptions and false conclusions.

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

Awwwww Decaf, ruining my fun as always with your technicalities. Thats okay though, i know im not insane.

BUT! You say that technically if the comparison has stopped entirely you are completely insane even if your perception perfectly reflects the real world. This raises questions, because, either i am insane, or my friends grandmother (who believes that she heard a woman speak to god in tongue, beleives that the lord took her husband(cancer) and my friends father(suicide), and openly speaks out loud to god when she is intoxicated. Along with many other things but i believe those examples are enough, i dont want to speak too badly of the woman since she is actually pretty cool.) But yeah, ones of us be da crazies, which one be it.

 

[Geminii]

Sounds a little too much like Alice protesting she doesn't want to go among mad people.

 

[Decaf]

Along with many other things but i believe those examples are enough

According to my definition (which I think is strong, if not entirely official) she may be. In order to have stopped stabilizing comparisons entirely it needs to encompass all areas of life. It sounds like she may at most be partly insane, but of course she is part of a shared opinion on that matter, so its a little more complicated. If everyone around you expresses an opinion, is it insane to believe it without physical proof? People are a part of a person's observations and depending on your values can have more impact on your world view than what your senses tell you. She is likely completely sane even if we disagree with her conclusions.

Insanity operates similarly in isolation as it does in a community, but I suspect given sufficient exposure she would likely adapt to her environment like most people.

Yeah, I'm a party pooper, but really you just got me thinking and when I think I type, so there, float

 

[terraxceles]

This might be the only forum I've come across where I have to double and triple read some posts to make sure I understand everything that's being implied. It's maddening really, I don't know whether to call it insanity or pure egotism.
:smiley_emoticons_mr

Spoiler

Nah, I'm joking. Cavallier said it best methinks. This is why I prefer to mostly lurk the forums rather than joining in; I've tried going down "the rabbit hole" on other forums and I'm almost invariably tempted to come to hard conclusions three lines into the reply, which seems contrary to the purpose of "the game" itself. Ah well, I'll just sit and watch I guess.

 

[cheese]

When your brain stops comparing your cognitive perception to your observations, you begin the process to evident insanity (technically if the comparison has stopped entirely you are completely insane even if your perception perfectly reflects the real world). Insanity is a reality disconnect.

When the imagined reality of an individual becomes "free-floating" we naturally fear the potential dangers involved, but it can be quite benign.

I agree with what you're saying. It's interesting to note that it sounds a lot like the use of iNtuition. If Ss are anchored to context, Ns are unhinged; the former derive meaning through a number of variables which through their interplay point to one meaning, but the latter have to consciously choose their meaning. It is actually a mild form of reality disconnect, as you say, except that sane Ns are are still within swimming distance of dry land. It's not surprising that Ns are more often considered weird or crazy than Ss. If you don't appear to interpret environmental signals relative to other signals present at the same time - if instead each signal sparks off a diverse string of interpretations unrelated to the present context - then you may well come off as nutty. That's Ne, anyway, and accounts for the things Cav pointed out, that may seem mentally unstable.

I think some forms of insanity - reality disconnect, as you say - truly are close cousins to creativity. With more interpretive options at hand, you have more possible combinations, ie a higher appearance of originality.

I think the difference between that type of insanity, and sane Ne use, is that the former has lost the instinct that the sane have for determining which interpretation actually corresponds to reality - land is out of sight, and they're simply surrounded by an ocean of possibility. Those of us who feel they sometimes can't tell what's real/if they're truly here/in a dream/hallucinating seem to be experiencing a significantly dimmer instinct; they may well be walking that notorious fine line.

Anyway, I suppose my point to the OP is that madness is just failed creativity (or perhaps it's the other way round) and some of what you're seeing here is just the style of thinking that, unbounded and unrestrained, will lead to genuine detachment from reality - but as it is now is simply a form of play. It's like uncontrolled brain-storming, but with your eyes open.

 

[Minuend]

I just think incoherently and bouncy. It is only later that I realize I might have stopped mid-thought somewhere.

I don't come across many posts that are confusing, though. Maybe you need to be confused to understand confused.

I don't use a very complicated language, so that probably helps. I'm just too lazy and uninterested in figuring out all the details about an idea. I got an general understanding and I'm pleased. It's more fun that way.

 

[BigApplePi]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

What about this?:

If I knew what I was talking about, would I convey my knowledge to you as to what I was talking about in a way you would know what I was talking about? Yes I would. But that would occur only if I knew what I was talking about in a way adequate for you to know what I was talking about -- on the average.

I can't speak for you but how do you know if I were as sure you are as insane as I am sure I am insane, then what makes you think you could possibly be more sane than I am -- on the average?

Furthermore I'd ordinarily want to add that the extraordinary is quite ordinary among the extraordinary with ordinary extraordinary exceptions, but I won't say that -- on the average.

If intelligence is defined as the ability to deal with stuff, then I know for sure there is so much stuff out there I can't deal with then I am forced to try to deal with some of it in here. This dealing can give others in here the misconceived impression of intelligence when the truer impression should be one of double dealing ignorance to you out there -- on the average.

 

[typus]

I can't speak for you but how do you know if I were as sure you are as insane as I am sure I am insane, then what makes you think you could possibly be more sane than I am -- on the average?

If you are as sure of your own insanity as of his while inconspicuously removing quintessential parts of inquiries to make esoteric points about averages, then why would he even doubt the sanity of anything while not knowing how he'd know what he needs to know in order to come to a conclusion such as poor people in Africa -- on the standard deviation?

 

[BigApplePi]

If you are as sure of your own insanity as of his while inconspicuously removing quintessential parts of inquiries to make esoteric points about averages, then why would he even doubt the sanity of anything while not knowing how he'd know what he needs to know in order to come to a conclusion such as poor people in Africa -- on the standard deviation?

While one has to admit the poor poor people of Africa are possibly pretty poor, know this: he knows of no reason to know why removing teeny tiny points would have anything to do with one's self assurance of the sane doubt of the insane on the average -- within half a standard deviation.

 

[typus]

While one has to admit the poor poor people of Africa are possibly pretty poor, know this: he knows of no reason to know why removing teeny tiny points would have anything to do with one's self assurance of the sane doubt of the insane on the average -- within half a standard deviation.

You are completely ignoring the outliers; in all possible meanings of the word, in all continents of the world! However, what I can assure you with a marginal sincerity and security is that insanely sane doubts of insanity are not helped at all by a non-flawed epistemology giving one the ability of relating to, pertaining to or creating certainties in others about insanity calculus parameters relating to, or of, yourself and your own insecurities while defining the tea pot we all crave -- above the median.

 

[BigApplePi]

You are completely ignoring the outliers; in all possible meanings of the word, in all continents of the world! However, what I can assure you with a marginal sincerity and security is that insanely sane doubts of insanity are not helped at all by a non-flawed epistemology giving one the ability of relating to, pertaining to or creating certainties in others about insanity calculus parameters relating to, or of, yourself and your own insecurities while defining the tea pot we all crave -- above the median.

Just because there is an attempt to share an epistemology doesn't mean it fails to be flawed. If one continues to think within the box by ignoring extranianities and craving its cozy contents within, one can lie below the median calculated contentedly.

 

[Melkor]

No, I am super sane, a rare variant of insanity that in fact makes me so much more sensible than you that you can't possibly contemplate it, thus, it drives you mad.

 

[Words]

That's Ne, anyway, and accounts for the things Cav pointed out, that may seem mentally unstable.

So your point is that N's 'craziness' is only superficial? Isn't there a true tendency for N's to form mental instability? If the connection from observation and perception is thinner, doesn't the tendency for a 'break' become wider?

But that would occur only if I knew what I was talking about in a way adequate for you to know what I was talking about.

This makes me think about the times wherein one expresses with incomplete understanding. But then, is understanding ever truly 'complete' when understanding means sufficiently connecting everything?

How much clarity(connections) is needed to form understandable expression? By situational norms. But if it is by norms, then the common definition of understandable expression, of understanding, relies on the commonality(norms). (?)

To get something out of something is more difficult if that something is purely a matter of perception that ignores the commonality of understanding. If your perception is qualified, you understand. If not, then no. Is this why Ni forms the more the difficult form of expression? And is Ne second?

Now that I think about it, Ti builds a subjective understanding. If paired with Ne, it becomes worse. (?)

 

[Anthile]

That's odd, coming from you. While Ni is arbitrarily specific, Ne is specifically arbitrary. It's that easy.

 

[snafupants]

Because representation on the forum is textual, folks could come off any way they please - barring those youtube type threads. Some might find it the height of hilarity to come off as a cheerful constituent of your local funny farm, for reasons beyond my comprehension. By the way, the above comment by Anthile, although unnecessarily abstract, is so true.

 

[typus]

Because representation on the forum is textual, folks could come off any way they please - barring those youtube type threads. Some might find it the height of hilarity to come off as a cheerful constituent of your local funny farm, for reasons beyond my comprehension. By the way, the above comment by Anthile, although unnecessarily abstract, is so true.

So you say that someone's representation here might be... contextual?

 

[snafupants]

So you say that someone's representation here might be... contextual?

Almost completely so for some people. In real life, when folks don and doff different demeanors it's potentially more obvious, because you have a personality baseline and visual things to look at and compare; on a forum, however, it's a free for all where your imagination is in charge of how much you divulge, distort, or gloss over. So, yeah, contextual.

 

[BigApplePi]

This makes me think about the times wherein one expresses with incomplete understanding. But then, is understanding ever truly 'complete' when understanding means sufficiently connecting everything?

There are too many ways to understand for understanding to be complete.

How much clarity(connections) is needed to form understandable expression? By situational norms. But if it is by norms, then the common definition of understandable expression, of understanding, relies on the commonality(norms). (?)

Sticking to norms would help, but we are motivated with or without strict norms to achieve some end. We need clarity adequate enough to achieve that end. Anything more is gravy.

To get something out of something is more difficult if that something is purely a matter of perception that ignores the commonality of understanding.

Understanding is more than perception. It is interpretation worked with intuitively.

If your perception is qualified, you understand.

Don't grasp that.

If not, then no. Is this why Ni forms the more the difficult form of expression? And is Ne second?

Since Ni is subjective it's going to be harder to convey to your own Ni though it may work. Ne is objective so it stands a better chance.

Now that I think about it, Ti builds a subjective understanding. If paired with Ne, it becomes worse. (?)

Again if Ti and Ne are expressed and it coincides with your Ti and Ne, we have a hit. But if it doesn't, the miss may be severe.