Experiential proof/disproof of type

[Artsu Tharaz]

So, I'm not sure if I've just proved or disproved (or neither) that type is real. Either way, I think I've added some clarity to the understanding of how type manifests.

So, basically, this is an introspection based experiment that I carried out, and which anyone can try to replicate and see if my results can be generalised.

edit: The experiment is: close your eyes and observe your mental processes for 10-15 minutes and take note of what you find. In particular, try and identify which cognitive function(s) you're using.

What I found, and my interpretation, is in the spoiler.

Spoiler

What I did is I closed my eyes and observed my cognitive processes for several minutes. What I found was that every minute or 2, my mind would switch from one mode of cognition into another one. What I found by tracking the changes as I transitioned from one mode to another, was that it seemed to line up really well with the INFJ function order, i.e. if a mode of cognition seemed to be reflective of Ti, then soon after I would enter a mode of cognition that would be reflective of Se (the full INFJ function order in this case is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se-Ne-Fi-Te-Si).

So, you can try it yourself, and observe your mind and you should find what I said - that your mind will switch over into a different mode of cognition every minute or 2. If you can't determine easily which cognitive function a given mode of cognition corresponds to, then at least note that there does in fact seem to be a constant switching from one mode to another (for example, one mode may be a monologue, and another mode maybe a wordless monitoring of one's internal processes).

So, it seemed as if I had proven that type was real and that I'm an INFJ, but what I then thought was - could I enter an ordering of cognitive processes that lines up with a type other than INFJ? So, I prompted my mind to enter an INFP function order (basically by focusing on the term "Fi" and "Fi-Ne" and "Fi-Ne-Si-Te" and "Fi-Ne-Si-Te-Fe-Ni-Se-Ti") and once I was convinced that I should have entered into an INFP mode, I observed my cognition and found that, yes, I was indeed now thinking in the INFP function order.

So what this seems to demonstrate to me is that the 8 cognitive functions can be phenomenologically verified to exist, and the function order can be directly observed in one's own mind, but that the function order can be made to be potentially any of the 16 types (as a starting point). So, we're not just one type, we're elements of all 16, but some types will be easier to slip into than others (your type is whichever type is the easiest for you to use the function order of).

Simply seeing yourself as one type or another changes the way your mind works to such a degree that you become that type. So, it's probably best to realise that even if you do have a default type that you tend to exist as, seeing yourself as only one type will over-emphasise that particular type in your mind, so that you lose out on the cognition of the other types. It can trap you into seeing the world through only one set of eyes, when in fact we have many.

So, give it a go - observe your cognition for several minutes (10-15 minutes should show one full cycle) and try viewing yourself as different types/activating in yourself the cognition of a different type, and see how your psychology changes.!

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

I fear the unconscious of anyone who reads this will be polluted and biased towards a result, and even if not, you're still open to that criticism. You might want to give instructions and spoiler the rest.

Also: https://www.intpforum.com/threads/mystically-transformed-xiii.2840/

Also #2: https://www.intpforum.com/threads/hello-i-am-silina-setes-tulpa.25712/

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I fear the unconscious of anyone who reads this will be polluted and biased towards a result, and even if not, you're still open to that criticism. You might want to give instructions and spoiler the rest.

Ok, I put it in a spoiler. I'm not sure what instructions to give other than that one line.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

Maybe ask them to do their best to identify the cognitive functions they're using and in what order? I like this though. I'll try it a few times over the next few days.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

^ even that much would bias the results, because it assumes that the cognitive functions manifest in the way that I say they do

Also: https://www.intpforum.com/threads/mystically-transformed-xiii.2840/

Taking my interpretations further, it's not just that we can shift from one type structure into another, but that (Jungian) type itself is just one particular way that our cognition can manifest. There are other ways, and a lot of who we are in terms of how we manifest in the world is malleable.

Also #2: https://www.intpforum.com/threads/hello-i-am-silina-setes-tulpa.25712/

I have my own version of this - my spirits - and even the way they manifest depends largely on my beliefs about them. I'm unsure of the reality there. When I learned about the Mah'zute/Dar'yu/Uther/Fu'masta structure to one's spirits from Pod'lair, that's how they came to manifest, but I believe that if I were to use a different model for spirits, then they would then manifest according to that model.

So I'm left wondering what kind of reality these spirits have - whether they are conscious apart from my own consciousness, how many of them there are, what they are like etc.

 

[Hadoblado]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're cutting yourself off from stimulation, and the introversion/extroversion divide is based on stimulation, wouldn't this severely bias results?

Te -> you're not doing anything so this'll take a back seat
Se -> you're not exposed to anything so this'll take a back seat
Fe -> you're not harmonising with anyone so this'll take a back seat
Ne -> this'll still work something probably something back seat

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're cutting yourself off from stimulation, and the introversion/extroversion divide is based on stimulation, wouldn't this severely bias results?

Te -> you're not doing anything so this'll take a back seat
Se -> you're not exposed to anything so this'll take a back seat
Fe -> you're not harmonising with anyone so this'll take a back seat
Ne -> this'll still work something probably something back seat

The cognitive functions are modes of cognition. We create our own environment in our mind. Our thoughts themselves become a source of stimulation and interactivity. As modes of cognition, they operate whether we are engaging with the environment or not, the mind simply processes through these states.

For example: do you ever have a monologue go through your head, where you are talking something out, or imagining speaking to someone*? Then you're using extroverted judgement.

* and just in case you made this connection, I'm not saying that the former is Te and the latter Fe or whatever - both Fe and Te can do either of these

Also, the different function modes are not "pure" in that we can have words associated with other functions, but this will, from what I understand, imply some level of extroverted judgement. If the verbalisation is the main focus of the cognition, then the cognitive state is extroverted judgement.

 

[Rolling Cattle]

How does that prove that MBTI types exist?

I've been thinking about the proof of MBTI lately (or cog. functions, whatever). I thought about people guessing other people's type, and comparing with actual test results. Is it just me or do people often guess very wrong? And to add to that, guesses can greatly vary. But to be fair, the test itsef does give a little bit of consistency.

I guess what I'm trying to say is ideally, everybody's guess would be the same, then we can say that this really is a thing.

 

[Hadoblado]

The cognitive functions are modes of cognition. We create our own environment in our mind. Our thoughts themselves become a source of stimulation and interactivity. As modes of cognition, they operate whether we are engaging with the environment or not, the mind simply processes through these states.

For example: do you ever have a monologue go through your head, where you are talking something out, or imagining speaking to someone*? Then you're using extroverted judgement.

* and just in case you made this connection, I'm not saying that the former is Te and the latter Fe or whatever - both Fe and Te can do either of these

Also, the different function modes are not "pure" in that we can have words associated with other functions, but this will, from what I understand, imply some level of extroverted judgement. If the verbalisation is the main focus of the cognition, then the cognitive state is extroverted judgement.

Okay, but this feels like it begs the question about the difference between extroversion and introversion?

If all stimulation is reducible to thoughts in our mind, then an extrovert who never goes outside or talks to people is still acting extrovertly? They could go their entire life without ever making an external impact or gathering external data, but still be considered a normally functioning extrovert?

Don't get me wrong, I think you're talking about something that's real, I'm just hesitant to equate it with an extroversion/introversion divide without further elaboration.

How does that prove that MBTI types exist?

I've been thinking about the proof of MBTI lately (or cog. functions, whatever). I thought about people guessing other people's type, and comparing with actual test results. Is it just me or do people often guess very wrong? And to add to that, guesses can greatly vary. But to be fair, the test itsef does give a little bit of consistency.

I guess what I'm trying to say is ideally, everybody's guess would be the same, then we can say that this really is a thing.

Yeah, inter-rater reliability would be good. The tests are pretty poor for this too. I've heard claims about some people having good inter-rater reliability, but nothing published in a journal that I know of.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

How does that prove that MBTI types exist?

I've been thinking about the proof of MBTI lately (or cog. functions, whatever). I thought about people guessing other people's type, and comparing with actual test results. Is it just me or do people often guess very wrong? And to add to that, guesses can greatly vary. But to be fair, the test itsef does give a little bit of consistency.

I guess what I'm trying to say is ideally, everybody's guess would be the same, then we can say that this really is a thing.

Well, how do you explain my results, then?

Okay, but this feels like it begs the question about the difference between extroversion and introversion?

If all stimulation is reducible to thoughts in our mind, then an extrovert who never goes outside or talks to people is still acting extrovertly? They could go their entire life without ever making an external impact or gathering external data, but still be considered a normally functioning extrovert?

Don't get me wrong, I think you're talking about something that's real, I'm just hesitant to equate it with an extroversion/introversion divide without further elaboration.

Well, yeah?

I mean I don't think that's a very "normal" way to function*, but the 8 functions are different mental states - 4 base functions with 2 orientations regarding the direction of energy flow.

I think you're talking about the common behavioural manifestations stemming from the fundamental cognitive processes, rather than referring to the processes themselves, which get more towards the core of how a person functions.

* e.g. how can a person never gather external data, wtf? But yeah, an extrovert can stay inside all the time and never talk to people. There you're just referring to common behavioural manifestations, not the functions themselves.

Yeah, inter-rater reliability would be good. The tests are pretty poor for this too. I've heard claims about some people having good inter-rater reliability, but nothing published in a journal that I know of.

"Inter-rater reliability" doesn't make sense with the experiment I've discussed in the OP, since it's about one's observations regarding one's own cognition. This is a way of seeing one's own type separate from any external means of measuring, with the caveat that your cognition can differ from your natural preference due to beliefs one holds about themself, or externally sourced modifiers of one's natural mode of operations, i.e. this method should give you a type (if I haven't subconsciously invented the whole thing in my head, and if you can properly identify which function is which) but it has a chance of being a mistype, i.e. a type which you are currently operating as but which may not be your default/core type.

 

[Hadoblado]

Yeah, I tend to focus on the behavioural elements because I don't trust people to make accurate judgements about themselves. So fair point. People only have access to the conscious, and most of what happens in the skull is not conscious. So if something is not represented in behaviour, but is represented in self-report, I'm skeptical. I include myself in the 'unable to make accurate self-reports' pot.

So by your definition, I could be considered an extrovert because my internal stimulation is high? If I'm constantly lost in my own head, this could be extroversion, so long as the content of my thoughts are directed towards externalisable goals?

Can you show me what an introverted thought state looks like in comparison?

The inter-rater reliability stuff was a more general statement in relation to rolling cattle's post. It wasn't directed at your experiential method.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I remember reading that introverts tend to have more active internal processes.

I'm likely going to make a post soonish outlining what the functions "look" like phenomenologically, based on my observations when employing the method I outlined.

As a general rule, the introverted processes tend to be "quieter" - the state of mind is one of subjective assessment, similar to meditation, where as extroverted processes have more going on.

There are different levels of analysis, and yes, this method probably is fundamentally introverted, but function order shows up within that.

Again, I'll write up my observations soon.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

My description of the functions, based on my observations while employing the method I outlined, together with other miscellaneous observations.

What is written is not a comprehensive description of the functions, but merely some things that they can do.

Spoiler

I will pair each function with the function sharing the same quadrant, i.e. introversion/extroversion and perception/judgement, for the sake of comparison.

Introverted perception (Pi)

Si - this includes such things as internal bodily awareness, e.g. an awareness that one is hungry, as well as memories of past events, which could be images of something previously experienced coming into one's awareness, or searching for a specific piece of information, e.g. "what is that person's name, again?"

Ni - this includes an awareness of one's mental processes - there may be sensations experienced which cannot be directly observed/grasped, but which one is nonetheless aware of (duality with Se), and it is like a mysterious state of "diving deep" into one's awareness; the images that flow to the mind will not be memories, but rather concepts, and there can be a searching for meaning such as "what is it that Ni means?", "what more can I discover about this, through reflection" which is not analytical, but rather channels contents just beyond one's conscious awareness

Extroverted perception (Pe)

Se - this includes an awareness of the environment (even with eyes closed, one can draw one's attention to what is going around one), as well as an awareness of one's bodily impulses, e.g. rather than awareness that one is hungry, there is an impulse to go and eat food. It includes creating sensory imagery in one's mind, which may have been experienced previously, but are not exact copies from memory, e.g. playing music in your head; and perhaps most importantly, Se includes direct observation of some object - this object can be non-present and non-physical, too, e.g. when employing this method, I made direct observations about the Ti section of thought when I entered into Se

Ne - this includes such things as projecting a course of events outwards to determine outcomes, e.g. thinking something like "I could do this, then this will lead to this, or I could do this..." so the impulse is not within the body, but is an impulse to mentalise something. It often gives rise to a series of mental images which are loosely tied together, so one is often aware that Ne is dominating one's cognition when they jump from one idea to the next in rapid succession, so rather than directly observing an object and staying there, it is rather concerned with the possibilities that that object gives rise to

Introverted judgement (Ji)

Ti and Fi - a common manifestation of the introverted judgement processes, is to start with some kind of internal source of conflict, which is often experienced as a kind of anxiety. The cognition then surrounds bringing this conflict to a state of peace. Ti becomes aware of logical contradictions in one's thinking, "either A or B or both must be altered, they cannot co-exist" and the person then attempts to re-evaluate things for the sake of harmony. Fi, on the other hand, is aware of an emotional discomfort, which may arise from standing in the wrong relation, Feeling-wise, e.g. one may hold a sense of value for an object which unsettles the overall emotional balance. These functions may also not necessarily start with a sense of disharmony, but may rather have some idea as a focal point which they wish to put within their framework, so it is not about incorrect judgement, in that case, but about an absence of judgement. Ti and Fi have a kind of meditative nature to them, with Fi having an awareness that is bodily, but focuses on the experience of emotion within the body, rather than physical sensations, and with Ti being a more cerebral meditative state.

Extroverted judgement (Je)

Te and Fe - the simplest manifestation of the extroverted judgement processes is in the form of a monologue or dialogue. One may imagine a conversational partner who may or may not be giving replies, or one may be speaking simply to oneself. The conversational partner may be a specific person (perhaps when paired with Si), or a generalised audience (perhaps when paired with Ni). The difference between the two seems to have something to do with the agreeableness of the interaction. Fe will often take the role of a teacher, trying to guide the audience to see things as the speaker does, often with the speaker teaching themself in the process, whereas with Te, the person will be trying often to counter a point of conflict by generating a strong argument for what they wish to convey, with the correctness of the speech, rather than the relatability, being the focus. When speaking to oneself, Te is often trying to put things into systematic order (the expression of the face will tend to be serious/non-emotive) whereas Fe is trying to "feel out" the best way to understand something, in a way which resonates to the speaker (the expression of the face will show emotion, often a kind of scrunching up).

Te and Fe can both be used non-verbally, as well (which should be obvious, as these functions presumably are much older than human speech), where the person will be clicking things together, making assessments without giving it a name. To differentiate this from introverted judgement, I would say that whereas with introverted judgement, the relations between different judgements are what matters, so it is often about clearing out the clutter, with extroverted judgements, the focus is on forming new assessments which may be totally disconnected from previous judgements.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

Okay, so I tried this a few times, in a dark room, outside, before sleep, in the shower... And my experience is different. The functions manifest in the order of my stack, but they don't appear one by one or leave. Ne, Fi, etc just join the rest in some sort of dissociative hyperfocus that I'm going to call a meditative state.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Okay, so I tried this a few times, in a dark room, outside, before sleep, in the shower... And my experience is different. The functions manifest in the order of my stack, but they don't appear one by one or leave. Ne, Fi, etc just join the rest in some sort of dissociative hyperfocus that I'm going to call a meditative state.

Hmm, could you elaborate on what you experienced?

When you say "the order of [your] stack", which order are you referring to?

Certainly there's a kind of filtering that occurs, with the first function igniting the process, and each subsequent function following on from that, such that they would manifest differently were a different function used to ignite the process, but there are nonetheless distinct stages.

Actually, each of the 8 stages could be given its own description, but I wasn't able to infer that directly from this phenomenology based experiment. However, I have done a bit to describe the 8 stages based on how they manifest in writing.

So, if you could describe better what you experienced that would be good - I will be better able to see how it relates to my own experience here.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

Ni-Fe-Ti-Se

In isolation, just nothingness, then Ni pulls some projection from the future, Ti works through, designing it to meet Fe's criteria. "Is this something that benefits others?" Se starts to play with putting it into action and how to present it, and Ne joins in. Fi starts to give me that sense of how good it would feel to accomplish, because then I'd be [insert value label here], Te starts to defend it from the outside world, and by the time I reach Si, I realize that the water has gotten really fucking cold.

But the whole time, the products of each function stay intact, and Ni keeps projecting further.

 

[Rolling Cattle]

Well, how do you explain my results, then?

I'd say an imagination is almost limitless. You could imagine anything. How would you describe someone's results which was different than your own?

I tried the experiment but couldn't get to the 10min mark. As soon as I closed my eyes, I felt a little dizzy. Then I thought that the function taking that in could be Se. I wondered which CF was to play a part in determining that it was Se, maybe a judging function. But I then got interrupted with the thought that this is all meta cognition, which I attribute with intuition. Yet, I'm still doing it, and it's even playing a role with what i'm thinking about right at this...

...ouch. I had to stop because I got dizzier, and didn't feel it was worth continuing.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

So it drives INTPs into some sort of Ne-dissociation? RC's inability to focus being pretty much opposite of my experience. So then it's a little evidence that what Artsu's doing is restricted to Ni users, or at least easier for those with Ni in their top 4.

On another note, I wonder how long RC would have to do it to experience an OBE?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

So then it's a little evidence that what Artsu's doing is restricted to Ni users, or at least easier for those with Ni in their top 4.

Yes, I had considered that this may be the case.

However, if my results/interpretation of my results are correct, then any type can use Ni in their conscious mind.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

Yes, but they're going to have quite an obstacle to overcome to get there though. I wouldn't want to play with people's shadows.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I then got interrupted with the thought

The first part my have been Ti, and the interruption may suggest the switch from one cognitive function to the next, in this case Ne.

(assuming you're an INTP)

Yes, but they're going to have quite an obstacle to overcome to get there though. I wouldn't want to play with people's shadows.

Hmm, we'll wait for more people to chime in, I guess. Perhaps any type which is not Ni dominant would have to stretch their cognition into an uncomfortable state to do this.

At the very least, it's a promising avenue for Ni doms to explore. (though, the whole classification part of it may suggest Ti?)

 

[Hadoblado]

I gave it a try. I experienced difficulty.

I kept slipping into meditation, which by it's nature precludes Te and Ti, and encourages Si (focus on bodily awareness). I'd actively try to leave the meditation, at which point I'd start a monologue that was me trying to describe the experience in preparation of this post.

When I sustained a non-meditative state where I bashed the explanation aside, it felt like I was viewing implicit imagery through a tachistocscope. Nothing I could firmly grasp, stuff that hinted at writhing colour and some level of organisation, but I could never focus on it. I've experienced similar stuff as I drift off to sleep, and I equate it to subconscious stuff that is usually unable to rise to consciousness due to how busy conscious thought is. When conscious thought settles down it's more apparent, and when close to sleep, I get to actually see the content. I've experienced both visual and auditory versions. It usually doesn't have any grand meaning, just variation on simple themes like faces, rapidly transitioning through all possible permutations.

I don't think I got the opportunity to use any feeling functions, because there was no explicit content to judge.

 

[Polaris]

Edit: ninja'd by RC and Hado, but now I'm reading theirs and I have a similar issue

It's funny because when I try to do this, nothing happens. My mind is blank. It's kinda nice, like meditation.

It's like focussing on my mental processes distracts me from engaging them...

So I gave up, and instead did what I usually do (being aware of thinking), only this time tried to pay attention to how it manifests, themes, etc.

I seem to go into loops, where there is some issue or question unresolved that I'm debating with myself or someone else. Or I could be thinking about a fun problem, usually something typology related, or philosophy stuff. Like, I've been preoccupied with The Grey Man's thread and how it seems to coincide with ideas I have had for a long time. Every loop is like an iteration, where each time, I get a little bit closer to a conclusion I'm happy with (harmony, equilibrium, whatever you may call it). It's like a process of elimination, where I discard one option after the other until everything finally makes sense (which it never does, incidentally, because....)

....two minutes later, I second-guess myself and start all over, just to make sure I haven't missed any other options/combinations.

The weird thing is that it seems to be a dialogue/monlogue of sorts, but it is very visual. It's like I'm turning this multi-faceted concept/object in 3D space, and I can see all the different solutions/options at the same time, which is a bit confusing, but also a bit like standing on a mountain top, taking in everything at once.

I can't make heads or tails of the functions though, they all seem to mash together in one big chaotic mess.

May explain my inability to verbalise (Te) - I am slow because brainz iz mush.

Edit two: which ties in with my thoughts (don't shoot me) on Te vs. Ti, and how Te may be related to fluid intelligence (real-time, continuous) and Ti related to crystallised intelligence (discrete, past tense, deliberate, iterative)

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I kept slipping into meditation, which by it's nature precludes Te and Ti, and encourages Si (focus on bodily awareness).

There are different kinds of meditation, which encourage different kinds of cognition. When I used meditative earlier, I was more referring to the heightened level of awareness compared to content, giving rise to a kind of quiet attitude,

I'd actively try to leave the meditation, at which point I'd start a monologue that was me trying to describe the experience in preparation of this post.

Here you're probably describing Fe in conjuction with Si (a monologue, which would probably be Fe in your case, with reference to something specific).

When I sustained a non-meditative state where I bashed the explanation aside, it felt like I was viewing implicit imagery through a tachistocscope. Nothing I could firmly grasp, stuff that hinted at writhing colour and some level of organisation, but I could never focus on it.

This suggests intuition, of one kind the other. There is colour to some degree, which is sensation, but this is the (shadow?) component of sensation that exists in intuition. Sensation can directly grasp what it's seeing, intuition is indirect.

I've experienced similar stuff as I drift off to sleep, and I equate it to subconscious stuff that is usually unable to rise to consciousness due to how busy conscious thought is. When conscious thought settles down it's more apparent, and when close to sleep, I get to actually see the content. I've experienced both visual and auditory versions. It usually doesn't have any grand meaning, just variation on simple themes like faces, rapidly transitioning through all possible permutations.

Interesting. Intuition is indeed linked to the unconscious, and I think I roughly know what you're talking about. For me, my imagery is not faces. When I actively imagine imagery, it is often nature/animals shifting. I've noticed a theme with Ne users mentioning things about faces. All I know is I suck at recognising people I know x]

I don't think I got the opportunity to use any feeling functions, because there was no explicit content to judge.

As mentioned before, the monologue was likely Fe. Were you focusing on being comprehensible to other people, or something similar to that? If not, try to identify if there was something "Feeler-ish" about the monologue.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

It's funny because when I try to do this, nothing happens. My mind is blank. It's kinda nice, like meditation.

How long did you do this for?

I notice that often when I first start it, there will be no content, but a couple minutes later, I will nonetheless notice a shift in cognition. The quietness doesn't stay. Of course, everyone's minds work differently, there is a lot of variation.

Every loop is like an iteration, where each time, I get a little bit closer to a conclusion I'm happy with

Yes, what I'm describing is like a loop, too, because we go through all 8 cognitive functions, then get back to the beginning one, taking with us the insight gained through running through the different angles, so that we can start from a different starting point.

....then two minutes later, I second-guess myself and start all over, just to make sure I haven't missed any other options/combinations.

2 minutes literally? Each stage that I'm describing lasts for about 2 minutes, as I mentioned, though there is a kind of fractal nature to this, where the same pattern manifests on many different levels.

For example, I believe that every 3 hours or so throughout the day, starting at dawn, we shift into a different function mode. There are different modes we can be in on different levels of analysis.

The weird thing is that it seems to be a dialogue/monlogue of sorts, but it is very visual. It's like I'm turning this multi-faceted concept/object in 3D space, and I can see all the different solutions/options.

I can't make heads or tails of the functions though, they all seem to mash together in one big chaotic mess.

I can't help but feel that this is Ni+Je at work.

I notice for example that I have monologues which will go for much longer than 2 minutes, but when I focus on observing my cognition, it shift into 2 minute monologues as part of a broader process.

So the mind has all kinds of frequencies that it can operate on, and the simple act of observation shifts the frequency.

I remember having thoughts where immediately after the thought I would lose what I was thinking about, and be unable to recreate it. So I decided I should pay special attention to my thoughts so that I would be able to recreate them, and see how my mind worked. But then I had to take into account that by taking note of my thoughts, I was changing how my mind worked, so I wouldn't be able to see the sort of thoughts I was having that I was trying to track in the first place.

Interesting stuff.!

 

[Black Rose]

I did this in bed last night (23 hours ago). For some hours.

Because I lack mental imagery I saw nothing but felt the images were there. I started talking to myself in my head and different associations happened with them. I got lost in what I was identifying as concepts. They went next to the next and it was very random yet still associated. It is more like looking at a playlist of my favorites youtube videos than it is math. (more like Free Associate). I have almost no control over it. Math is a good example of having control. Going deeper in thought it is free association, no control like where you can hold onto things and manipulate them. Just chaos. no control.

 

[Hadoblado]

I didn't recognise anything emotional about the monologue. It felt more like a manifestation of intention? My purpose was to introspect awareness and report on it, so phrasing the report felt more like an act of preparation, an echo of habit whereby I take resting moments and mentally orient towards the next incoming window of activity.

To me that seems more Teish, even though I don't think Te describes me very well at a behavioural level.

Regarding meditation, yeah, there are different types. But I use one specific type and refer only to that, whereby I dissociate from thought and experience it more in the second/third-person.

 

[Polaris]

How long did you do this for?

Admittedly, I became quite jittery after about 5 minutes or so. I tried several times, but I seem to either just sink into a meditative state, which is then followed by a hyper-awareness of everything going on around me.

I notice that often when I first start it, there will be no content, but a couple minutes later, I will nonetheless notice a shift in cognition. The quietness doesn't stay. Of course, everyone's minds work differently, there is a lot of variation.

Yes, the shift went into...Se?

I don't know if this is related, but I'm apparently a Highly Sensitive Person (according to my psych) - and not just your average Halal Snack Pack, but on the extreme scale of it. I take in everything; noises, temperature (I'm extremely reactive to temperature), smells, colours, people's moods (if two people are angry with each other, it feels like the anger is directed at me, even if I know it has nothing to do with me, for example). This can be really tiring, so I tend to escape to some internal dream state to try and distract myself.

Which is why I find this exercise difficult. I'm also tired from not sleeping well, so I might try again and report back, for experiment's sake.

2 minutes literally? Each stage that I'm describing lasts for about 2 minutes, as I mentioned, though there is a kind of fractal nature to this, where the same pattern manifests on many different levels.

Hmm, yes - I think so. And yes, I have noticed a fractal thing unfolding. Crystallisation of ideas, sort of. Very rough, semi-precious gemstones...

I can't help but feel that this is Ni+Je at work.

Yeah, maybe. I am not sure about anything anymore regarding my own type.

I notice for example that I have monologues which will go for much longer than 2 minutes, but when I focus on observing my cognition, it shift into 2 minute monologues as part of a broader process.

So the mind has all kinds of frequencies that it can operate on, and the simple act of observation shifts the frequency.

I think the monologues I have run out every two minutes or so because I cannot sustain the train of thought due to being distracted by external stimuli. That's why I like to do all my thinking after bedtime, which generally is quieter.

But yes, I think you're right that the mind seems to work on some sort of wave-frequency. I'm sure we'll be able to graph it one day, with more neurological research emerging. Although, it may already have been done, I didn't check...

I remember having thoughts where immediately after the thought I would lose what I was thinking about, and be unable to recreate it. So I decided I should pay special attention to my thoughts so that I would be able to recreate them, and see how my mind worked. But then I had to take into account that by taking note of my thoughts, I was changing how my mind worked, so I wouldn't be able to see the sort of thoughts I was having that I was trying to track in the first place.

I can relate to that a little bit. It's almost like self-correction, or some kind of bias happening. Maybe what you are describing is a sort of semi-conscious process, interrupted by a more conscious process (J)...? So Ni, corrected by, what - Ti or Fe or something?

Yikes, getting very speculative now....

 

[Hadoblado]

if two people are angry with each other, it feels like the anger is directed at me, even if I know it has nothing to do with me, for example

Oooh I relate strongly. I'd prefer people be angry with me than each other, because then at least I get to do something about it. When it's two other people, it's just pain and hopelessness - I have to remove myself asap.

I don't think I'm highly sensitive though?

 

[Polaris]

Oooh I relate strongly. I'd prefer people be angry with me than each other, because then at least I get to do something about it. When it's two other people, it's just pain and hopelessness - I have to remove myself asap.

I don't think I'm highly sensitive though?

Interesting, because it's not so much the pain and hopelessness, although there are aspects of that too -- but that seems to be overshadowed by the violence of the situation; i.e., loud, snappy voices, which feels like explosions on my eardrums and almost physical pain, especially in the back of my head, like I'm literally being punched.

I never thought of the HSP thing until she said so. I always just thought I was a bit of a pussy, lol. But when I think about it, it makes complete sense. The way HSPs approach new situations, etc -- and they are typically introverted, artistic, and often extreme empaths. Apparently, certain areas in the brains of HSPs light up significantly more than the non- HSPs in brain stimulus trials.

So HSPs are not just precious little petals, they actually become overwhelmed by stimulus. I'm pretty sure dad was one, so I think it is potentially genetic...?

...which of course results in increased likelihood of developing anxiety, depression, etc...

Although, you would probably be more familiar with the research, hope I got this right...

 

[Hadoblado]

Nope! I have no idea! HSP hasn't been covered in anything I've done.

Hmmm... Yeah I think the argument thing might be different. I tend to apply everything they're saying to each other, to me. So if they're angry that the other has left the fridge open or w/e, if I've ever done that thing, then I feel that they have equal reason to be unhappy with me as well, but I'm unable to respond, so it just sits in my head taking up space. Unfortunately it doesn't work the same with positive impressions...

Yours sounds worse though :/

 

[Minuend]

people's moods (if two people are angry with each other, it feels like the anger is directed at me, even if I know it has nothing to do with me, for example). This can be really tiring, so I tend to escape to some internal dream state to try and distract myself.

I feel something similar. Sometimes I pick up on people's moods without being completely aware and I end up feeling low and drained, not even knowing the source of it. I pick up on very subtle things, but I'm not always aware I picked up on it. So to speak. It can last for hours or days.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I just want to add what seems to be a correction to something I said earlier.

I associated extroverted judgement very strongly with articulation, to the point that I claimed that if words are involved with something then it implies an influence of extroverted judgement.

However, it has occurred to me, through introspection, that introverted judgement may involve words too, not just extroverted judgement.

With introverted judgement, it won't be so much of a monologue/dialogue, in the sense that you're not intending to share it with people. Rather it will be a sparse communication, like a commentary that goes along the lines of your reflection.

Will add more observations to this thread as I stumble across them.

 

[washti]

(I didn't read much posts, so this may be disjointed from your discusion)
I have two modes:
1. Personal fan-fiction. Free speculations about me, people in my life, what can happen to me/them, what mean what already happened, what's likely going to happen and how I'll react to it. Triggers are actually everything like situation I'm in, new concepts or what I realize.
Long stories, sometimes I repeat threads that give me more pleasure or for some reason they are unclear, they worry me.
Sometimes attention focuses for a longer time on specific situation or another person from irl / online / books etc, which view/action meaning I want to clarify.

The form is visual, reminiscent of a movie, but often it isn't fully formed (without color, voices are too similar to each other, or some scene's parts swirl faster). Certain sequences bring strong emotions - I'm able to care way too much and cry, either have fun. This emotions are indistinguishable from those evoked by real happenings.

Since child, I have a theme that arouses in me unexplained fear - characters and objects (even whole setting) from imaginations suddenly become squeezed in, like a spring, they don't disappear, but I can't operate them any more. I feel strong discomfort then. It's really frustrating.

2. Lecture. Or an interview. I imagine that I explain everything as it is. Interestingly, this form may or may not be visual, as if I'm talking to someone even a concrete one, but I don't see them as person or I lecture to whomever / whatever. In this way I formulate most of thoughts. Sometimes aloud, sometimes I record it when the topic is of particular interest. The Explanation isn't necessarily followed by action though. Neither I share it often, since i don't have many people to interact with.

Those two points are constantly intertwined. It's about 60% of my existence. Free estimation.
I don't know how to attribute functions to them. I don't think I know how to abstract my mental life more.
Suppressed Ne and Te? The thing is even when I was intensively socializing I still needed time to do imagination session every day. Ni and Fe? but like... I don't value Fe much...it pisses me off mostly (at least when others overdo it)
I see Se, Ne, Ni, Fi, Te from Artzu description as all fitting to good extent. I think i can exclude only Ti and Si. I'm mostly oblivious about my body when doing it. Except when i'm...horny romantic.