• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • See https://www.intpforum.com/threads/upgrade-at-10-am-gmt.27631/

Looking to retreat from society

Kormak

True Neutral eNTP
Local time
Today, 13:57
Joined
Sep 18, 2019
Messages
320
Location
Your mother's basement
I'm not sure about them actively controlling their emotional side, it's rather an underdevelopment of that function. Control should not be equated to ineptitude, people who control their emotions have only done so through resillience and exposure, to that regard Ts have typically had little exposure because of their dominant functions. Lack of perception =/= Control.
Judgment functions are not perceiving functions, you don't perceive through emotions, you may judge and act on information based on something other than logos. Reason being in charge of passions is an inborn trait. Plato expressed this very NT way of being in the tripartite theory of the soul:
  1. logos is located in the head, is related to reason and regulates the other part.
  2. thymos is located near the chest region and is related to anger.
  3. eros is located in the stomach and is related to one's desires.
This is basically how I function. First reason, usually anger breaks through and is the primary emotion I seem to be aware of, after which the rest are acessible, but reason is always the rider, its an inborn habit.

I don't use reason because it's more practical or efficient, thinking isn't just utilitarian. That is a mistake of culture, of modernity. It is not my problem ppl nowadays throw metaphysics out the window... m-muh materialist utiliatrianism.


^^ funny that this way of thinking is reflected in christianity's trinity. It says something fundamental about us.

4613


In a thinker the higherarchy is Reason > Spirit > Desire.
In a feeler it's Spirit > Reason > Desire.

If you act out of passion & its a habit, you are a feeler. Now I have no way of knowing, can only rely on what you tell me. It all depends on how honest you can be with yourself.

^^ now its understandable that if you are in love or something, you aren't going to be reasonable at all. I mean, the first time I fell in love with a woman I did a lot of unreasonable crazy shit I don't regret... cus it got me dat pusi ^^.. and you know I'm all abut dat pusi.

In such a case Desire shoved spirit and reason out the window. Its a moment in time where a young man finally comprehends .. why Troy was sacked.

4614
 

Rebis

To see a world in a grain of sand
Local time
Today, 11:57
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
664
I'm not sure about them actively controlling their emotional side, it's rather an underdevelopment of that function. Control should not be equated to ineptitude, people who control their emotions have only done so through resillience and exposure, to that regard Ts have typically had little exposure because of their dominant functions. Lack of perception =/= Control.
Judgment functions are not perceiving functions, you don't perceive through emotions, you may judge and act on information based on something other than logos. Reason being in charge of passions is an inborn trait. Plato expressed this very NT way of being in the tripartite theory of the soul:
  1. logos is located in the head, is related to reason and regulates the other part.
  2. thymos is located near the chest region and is related to anger.
  3. eros is located in the stomach and is related to one's desires.
This is basically how I function. First reason, usually anger breaks through and is the primary emotion I seem to be aware of, after which the rest are acessible, but reason is always the rider, its an inborn habit.

I don't use reason because it's more practical or efficient, thinking isn't just utilitarian. That is a mistake of culture, of modernity. It is not my problem ppl nowadays throw metaphysics out the window... m-muh materialist utiliatrianism.


^^ funny that this way of thinking is reflected in christianity's trinity. It says something fundamental about us.

View attachment 4613

In a thinker the higherarchy is Reason > Spirit > Desire.
In a feeler it's Spirit > Reason > Desire.

If you act out of passion & its a habit, you are a feeler. Now I have no way of knowing, can only rely on what you tell me. It all depends on how honest you can be with yourself.
Look, I'm not going to completely reformat a personality test just to fit a temporal cognitive occupation. I don't feel the need to refactor a sociological model, endlessly prospectivity is not productive. The model itself just gave me an insight into qualities of my character independent of bias as you can see in 16personalities or any other personality test, it served its function and for the most part I'm able to develop ideas better on this forum.

Mainly what occurs for me is I'm interested in a subject, I read along the introduction to that topic. After a certain time has passed I consider it a value proposition: What purpose does this serve and can I apply it? I am time-oriented and curiousity has to have an auxilary function, either practicality or interest. I won't develop my curiousity if both conditions haven't been met. This is in congruence to which you can consider an emotional metanarrative, but in actuality it's just defining the practicality of the knowledge I'm acquiring for the career I'm going for. So prospection naturally dominates for exploration, Thinking dominates for application and logos is the narrative that brings everything together in a cohesive bubble. The only meaning I can extrapolate is one of primitivity: increase the survivability and propegation of our species. This isn't based on an emotional precedent otherwise I'd work in a nursing home or something.

Rather, improving/creating overarching systems that affect the population in general is not a passion but it's seen as a dutiful one. If I was to do a task, I'll do a task that provides relative utility to an international world. In this context utility could be defined as tasks that are not provided by others. This is not my passion, it is illusion that's supposed to mask a pointless world.

All I know is for most cases, the main function of my cognition is thinking in a logical manner. INFP, INFJ, INTJ blah blah blah... It gets exhausting. An endless echo chamber of reviewing information that's pretty much static. The order of cognition doesn't matter to me.
 

Rebis

To see a world in a grain of sand
Local time
Today, 11:57
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
664
I've stated on this forum numerous times, aligned with my name Rebis that I try to reklate to the word through my inferior functions. If I have strong intuition, I will try and flip the function to Sense. If I'm cold and distant in emotional conversations I will try to think logically what they mean, and attach it to an emotion. I have a prospective function, I will try to take more action and negate prospectivity.

Don't get too fussed on the classifications, INTP in the order of Reason > Spirit > Desire vs INFP that thinks in the orderSpirit > Reason > Desire .

I just can't be bothered evaluating your judgements of me. Called a narcissist yesterday, different personality over the last few weeks, INFP right now and having a massive ego a few days ago. If you have a perspective of me by all means, possess it. Anytime these ideas are proposed to me they don't seem systemic at all, so unless the personality quality is A) Atomic (not-abstract), B) Easily assessed and C) Not facets of other qualities, I just can't be bothered interpreting it. I'm tired even thinking about, it reminds me of people who're like "Wow I feeel happy today" "Wow I feel sad but also not super sad like sad scale of 3/7" "Thought I was taurus but based on the moon alignment at this particular social junction in our conversation, I must be a gemini with a O- Haploid group!"

Scientific subjects just seem a lot more concrete than the newest, and latest socionic model, big five model, MBTI model this or that. All the sociological stuff is just all over the place in my honest opinion, it's hard to really interpet because it's rare for 2 people understanding the concept to expain it in the same way.

Our reasoning here is becoming increasingly contextual, you can see why in standardized personality tests they ask simple, non-reductive questions rarely applying it to specific social dynamics:

4615


Unless I do a test in this form, where everything is standardized and I don't have to interpet everyone's nuanced understanding of the model then I'm not going to entertain the idea. Seriously exhausting stuff all this personality shit. On that premise if you think a certain psychological model would yield a different result and that INTP doesn't represent my personality, then throw me a test and I'll do that sure.

Basically personality types was an interest for me, but only to a degree in which I could classify people's behaviours, evaluate understanding I had of myself and understand compatabilities. After that like a finished book, it was put on the shelf and I moved on to something else. Currently not on anything at the moment, though it looks like it will be math related this weekend.
 

Kormak

True Neutral eNTP
Local time
Today, 13:57
Joined
Sep 18, 2019
Messages
320
Location
Your mother's basement
Self report testing is flawed and unreliable. It relies on your self knowlege. People often do not understand themselves shrug most likely because the conscious self you experience is just the surface lvl of the mind, which mind you is not readily acessibe.. e_e because your mind isn't your brain. These classifications are theories attempting to make sense of why ppl differ, why certain patterns persist in how they interpret and act on information.

:P so with that said, the abstract model may be flawed and the methods used to see if you fit the model are certainly flawed. regardless its fun to think about, at least for me. The tests however are in large useless. You can test INTP now and in a few years some other type. I wouldn't rely on it, they merely sell it to make a buck.

There however is no solid ground to really hold onto, not even in the "hard" sciences... which is why probably the very idea exites me as someone who prefers the open ended & ever changing.

 

Rebis

To see a world in a grain of sand
Local time
Today, 11:57
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
664
Self report testing is flawed and unreliable. It relies on your self knowlege. People often do not understand themselves shrug most likely because the conscious self you experience is just the surface lvl of the mind, which mind you is not readily acessibe.. e_e because your mind isn't your brain. These classifications are theories attempting to make sense of why ppl differ, why certain patterns persist in how they interpret and act on information.

:P so with that said, the abstract model may be flawed and the methods used to see if you fit the model are certainly flawed. regardless its fun to think about, at least for me. The tests however are in large useless. You can test INTP now and in a few years some other type. I wouldn't rely on it, they merely sell it to make a buck.

There however is no solid ground to really hold onto, not even in the "hard" sciences... which is why probably the very idea exites me as someone who prefers the open ended & ever changing.

Yes, it's very straightforward but ultimately you aren't going to experience someone breaking down your character with all the information at their disposal. Self-testing is unreliable, but so is testing by a pyschologist, or by another person. My closest friends are INTP and INFP, I express a lot of disparate ideas and fields of interests. I'm introverted based on the fact I feel most comfortable infront of my computer screen, I don't seek socialising as 99% of the time it's people inviting me out. I keep distances from groupthink and its mob functionality so I rely on intuition in almost all cases, I question everything that's said to me, the intent of that information, the accuracy and if they understand the meaning of their words.Self-reporting?

I think a lot, I feel less: The only confusion here is I don't let my emotional side out, but when I take the plunge I can get emotional but that'a a product of a lack of exposure. If someone comes to me for advice, they're not going to get an emotional pat on the back that maintains the irrationality of their delusion to go back to their ex, or anything of that caliber. I think of practical situations in almost every situation, except with the proclivity to not be regimented to a cold individual who has never tried to interpret others because it's not natural to him, I develop in areas which I feel I lack. Emotions is certainly one of them, but these emotions are usually ephemeral and irrational, often based on complexes like wanting something because I can't have it (stop seeing a girl before the fantasy hasn't been satisfied, for example a romantic trip.)

Lastly, I'm prospective because I gauge a lot of topics that have little crossover, dipping my toes into here or there but not committing to one domain.

And who's to say I don't have self-knowledge of myself? I've questioned every facet of my behaviour, changing weaknesses into strengths, genuinely taking a look at myself, why I'm interested in x, why I behave like this in situation y. I used to have depression and implemented a multi-faceted system of supplementation (oxytocin, 5HTP), exercise, anti-inflammatory diet, sleep. I feel a certain emotion around others, I explore that, understand what's the association, why do I find them attractive and why I'm drawn to them. I constantly question why I do these things, more so than another psychologist would ever be able to because I'm honest with myself when it's needed.

Y'know I've always wondered why people omit self-reports as if they can't be valid. I'm not trying to get people's recognition for being a personality type, it was a task I done to assess my behaviour. With that in mind there was no benefit of deception, practically speaking so I was honest with myself. It was for myself so there was no guilt, shame or objective that would require deception.

Well how about exaggeration? Well, that's a possibility and can be situational based on memory of current affairs, but I took the test nice and slow it wasn't a race for time.
I've consistently scored INTP/INTJ, INTP a few times and INTJ once. Based on 4 Tests The first few domains have not changed, even across time frames. I get an INFJ when I was 17 or something, but I attribute that to the lack of knowledge of the self and an overestimation of ones characteristics.

I don't rely on it, I use it as a model framework. Infact, it seems you rely on the functions quite a lot. While I'm sure you have room for categorical overlaps, you think of these concepts empirically. I'm doing literally the exact same as you, I take the classifier and use that to assess typical expected behavioural patterns, note is type indicator (typicality). Again, it's a closed book, It's not a concrete subject they're just models to represent information.
 

Rebis

To see a world in a grain of sand
Local time
Today, 11:57
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
664
Do I really have to watch this.... You can refute anything with words, it doesn't mean they're insubstantial. It's beliefs for passive followers, but under the surface there is rigorous testing that have produced repeatable, consistent observations that set the groundwork for these theories to exist.

Dogma 1: Nature is mechanical & Dogma 2: matter is unconscious

Testing natural systems, millions of times over and getting the same result means it's reliable, provable and verifiable. "Buttt, what if one time it didn't happen?" Well firstly we'd try and discover why a process didn't happen, it would be an outlier probabilistically speaking. As far as we know, the material world hasn't exhibited consciousness so we can only judge it as having no intention, therefore its interaction is based on processes: Velocity, Friction, Gravitation, Nuclear force.

Dogma 3: Laws of nature are fixed

It's not so much laws are fixed, but the laws defined have provided functionality to complex machinery without any problems. Simulating gravitational orbitals when the Moon is the closest to the earth, these theories have been tested millions of times. We can't operate on a maybe condition, if the laws change then so will the constants.


I'm not gonna write a big summary because you could be trolling, but the guy's no aristotle that's for sure. He probably revels in the idea of adding what ifs to virtually anything that anyone says,
 

Polaris

Radioactive vision
Local time
Today, 00:57
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,200
You don't strike me as a narcissist (as per the NPD definition - NPD here being the disorder that affects them in such a way that the quality of their lives are severely reduced). This is because you seem to have a genuine benign interest in other forum members and what appears to be some concern/empathy for lonely people. Also, you made the effort to wish someone best of luck in a dating thread, which not many people here would bother with. Additionally, the fact that you are willing to consider critique is typically not something a narcissist would do. A narcissist would reject the suggestion that they could have NPD or try to turn the accusation around by gaslighting the other part. You don't seem like you are putting on a 'nice' facade either, which usually becomes more transparent the more posts one reads. I have grown up with and dated a couple of real narcissists, so I tend to recognise them.

Yes, a lot of people are self absorbed, but there's a borderline where self absorbtion becomes so serious that other people are relevant only in terms of how they can elevate the narcissist, usually to their detriment. Narcissists need to push other people down to elevate themselves. This is where 'normal' people will care, but the narcissist won't have any empathy.

I could of course be wrong - this is just my impression.
 

Rebis

To see a world in a grain of sand
Local time
Today, 11:57
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
664
You don't strike me as a narcissist (as per the NPD definition - NPD here being the disorder that affects them in such a way that the quality of their lives are severely reduced). This is because you seem to have a genuine benign interest in other forum members and what appears to be some concern/empathy for lonely people. Also, you made the effort to wish someone best of luck in a dating thread, which not many people here would bother with. Additionally, the fact that you are willing to consider critique is typically not something a narcissist would do. A narcissist would reject the suggestion that they could have NPD or try to turn the accusation around by gaslighting the other part. You don't seem like you are putting on a 'nice' facade either, which usually becomes more transparent the more posts one reads. I have grown up with and dated a couple of real narcissists, so I tend to recognise them.

Yes, a lot of people are self absorbed, but there's a borderline where self absorbtion becomes so serious that other people are relevant only in terms of how they can elevate the narcissist, usually to their detriment. Narcissists need to push other people down to elevate themselves. This is where 'normal' people will care, but the narcissist won't have any empathy.

I could of course be wrong - this is just my impression.
I think the closest association is with INTP and ASPD disorders like Narcissism, Psychopathy, sociopathy and Machiavellianism. Generally I just avoid these words, they're way more common than their use solicits. Someone that wants you to do something against your nature isn't manipulative in the sense that it's a battle of desire: You want A, I want B, we can only have one or the other, I want A more than you want B and you eventually comply. Over time I basically become the aggregate, right? It seems I'm controlling you because I make more decisions but it could just mean I'm more assertive, granted, at the neglect of your interests.
 
Top Bottom