Seeking a one sentence description for each Cognitive Function - Page 3

Seeking a one sentence description for each Cognitive Function

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
Thank Tree35Thanks

This is a discussion on Seeking a one sentence description for each Cognitive Function within the Cognitive Functions forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; @ Turi but why are Se dominants so action oriented in comparison to other types then in general. if they're ...

  1. #21

    @Turi

    but why are Se dominants so action oriented in comparison to other types then in general. if they're Se dominant and they perceive more than do -- unlike dominant judgers according to what you're saying, wouldn't that render them more inactive than most [when this is clearly not the case]? INxx types are easily the most physically inactive types overall -- and they all strongly lack Se..

    and how does imagining something = doing something or judging?

    imagination can easily be void of reasoning [T] or values [F]

    Also, I don't think he's saying Se actually does anything. I think what he means is something about Se's perception inclines people to act and/or gives them the urge to act.
    Last edited by spaceynyc; 03-09-2018 at 01:15 PM.
    compulsiverambler thanked this post.

  2. #22
    Unknown

    Fi Personal Value
    Fe Custom Value
    Ti Consistent Logic
    Te Problem Solving
    Ni Interpretation
    Ne Extrapolation
    Si Impression
    Se Exploration

  3. #23
    INFP


    Quote Originally Posted by spaceynyc View Post
    <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
    @<b><a href="https://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=457522" target="_blank">Turi</a></b>
    <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->

    but why are Se dominants so action oriented in comparison to other types then in general.
    Stereotypes, internet typology.
    Don't get me wrong - it makes sense that somebody with a preference for gathering new, observable information might indeed be inclined to be more action oriented compared to non-Se (and Ne, imo) types, but that's just a possible byproduct of the function, and not the function itself.

    if they're Se dominant and they perceive more than do -- unlike dominant judgers according to what you're saying, wouldn't that render them more inactive than most [when this is clearly not the case]? INxx types are easily the most inactive types -- and they all strongly lack Se..
    What do you mean this is not clearly the case - what source do you have re: INxx types as being easily the most inactive?
    Who says Se types have to be physically active? It's a perceiving process - it's on the person to be physically active, or not - why can't Se types be just as mentally active as an Ne or Ni type?

    Nothing to stop an Se dominant from sitting at home, alone, nerding out on typology forums - it simply gathers observable information.

    Functions aren't related to levels of activeness.

    and how does imagining something = doing something or judging?
    Imagining something = intuition.
    I don't want anybody twisting this into 'omg ur saying sensors cant [email protected]@@' because that's not what I'm saying - we all can, and do, every function.
    S doesn't work without N. N doesn't work without S.
    Imagining = intuition - abstract perception.

    Decider/judging functions do things.

    imagination can easily be void of reasoning [T] or values [F]
    Well perceiving/observer functions and judging/decider functions all work together.

    Also, I don't think he's saying Se actually does anything. I think what he means is something about Se's perception inclines people to act
    He definitely saying Se does something.


    Also, I don't know if you caught it - I know you were waiting for it:
     
    secondpassing thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24

    @Turi

    by no means am I saying sensors can't imagine. we know everyone can do anything. it's just that a N-type is going to take their imaginations more seriously than an S type will. N types are skeptical of facts, S types are skeptical of theory and imagination.

    And yes, you can call Se users being stereotypes, but I believe stereotypes are usually stereotypes for a reason. There is always the outlier, but the majority outweighs the outliers. Se gathers physical facts. I'd say this is what makes them so active. To find out physical facts, you have to be physical. To figure out if you can clear that wall, you gotta jump up and clear the wall. So why can't we say Se types are the usually most physically active without it being written off as a stereotype?

    "Nothing to stop an Se dominant from sitting at home, alone, nerding out on typology forums - it simply gathers observable information." Sure, but how many Se dominants we see here? lol [Yes, I know there are Se dominants here but they are heavily outnumbered and underrepresented especially when you compare it the actual ratio of them out there in the world]
    Last edited by spaceynyc; 03-09-2018 at 01:46 PM.

  6. #25
    INFP


    Quote Originally Posted by spaceynyc View Post
    @Turi

    by no means am I saying sensors can't imagine. we know everyone can do anything. it's just that a N-type is going to take their imaginations more seriously than an S type will. N types are skeptical of facts, S types are skeptical of theory and imagination.
    I never said you said that, it was essentially a disclaimer on my behalf because every idiot on this forum wants to fight me whenever I post anything.

    And yes, you can call Se users being stereotypes, but I believe stereotypes are usually stereotypes for a reason. There is always the outlier, but the majority outweighs the outliers. Se gathers physical facts. I'd say this is what makes them so active. To find out physical facts, you have to be physical. To figure out if you can clear that wall, you gotta jump up and clear the wall. So why can't we say Se types are the usually most physically active without it being written off as a stereotype?
    You can believe stereotypes if you want, but I would strongly advise against them especially with regards to cognitive functions - why?
    Because cognitive functions aren't tested for in the MBTI nor any other dichotomy based test.
    People who test as an ESTP are not testing as Se dominants, etc.
    So stereotypes revolved around 'functions' have literally no basis in reality or tests or studies or anything.

    Se gathering 'facts' or observable information =/= activeness.
    To 'find out' physical facts you do not have to be 'physical', unless you mean literally opening your eyes or having ears that function, etc.

    "Nothing to stop an Se dominant from sitting at home, alone, nerding out on typology forums - it simply gathers observable information." Sure, but how many Se dominants we see here? lol [Yes, I know there are Se dominants here but they are heavily outnumbered and underrepresented especially when you compare it the actual ratio of them out there in the world]
    Mate, there are wayyyyy more Se types here than you think, they just pretend they're not.
    Not that this is relevant, lol.

  7. #26

    Quote Originally Posted by Turi View Post
    Really? I think they're concise af, so much so I don't even know what you mean by 'complicated' here - what do you need help with?
    I'm not being a toss - I know people saying 'help' on an internet forum are usually condescending twits - totally genuine.
    I don't need help on anything. All I said was that applying those descriptions of the functions to the real world is complicated because as I previously posted, functions work completely differently depending on the positioning of your personal stack, what other functions they are being used with (we never truly use 1 function at a time), environment, how you were raised, etc. I suppose you've never taken a psychology course?

  8. #27
    INFP


    Quote Originally Posted by MusiCago View Post
    I don't need help on anything. All I said was that applying those descriptions of the functions to the real world is complicated because as I previously posted, functions work completely differently depending on the positioning of your personal stack, what other functions they are being used with (we never truly use 1 function at a time), environment, how you were raised, etc. I suppose you've never taken a psychology course?
    Those descriptions work wherever, though - saviours will be good things, i.e Se seeing the spectrum of reality and facts - positive, where the person goes when they're in trouble, observation, perception, gathering observable information.
    If it's a demon, then this will be something the person is averse to - so Se demon will be somebody who prefers to go to their Ni - narrow in on particular abstract connections, rather than seek out new information, when in trouble.

    You can easily envision this in yourself (assuming you're accurately typed) in all of those times when you need to figure something out, you don't know what to do, so you just fucking disappear into your bedroom and basically intuit/think your way through things - obviously, this is with pre-existing information - retreating to a saviour introverted function - not thinking off the bat that you need to go and get more observable information (which would be running to a saviour Se) in the form of Googling solutions or obtaining the information elsewhere externally.

    Those descriptions fit regardless of position because none of them imply strength or quality of function.

  9. #28

    Quote Originally Posted by Turi View Post
    Those descriptions work wherever, though - saviours will be good things, i.e Se seeing the spectrum of reality and facts - positive, where the person goes when they're in trouble, observation, perception, gathering observable information.
    If it's a demon, then this will be something the person is averse to - so Se demon will be somebody who prefers to go to their Ni - narrow in on particular abstract connections, rather than seek out new information, when in trouble.

    You can easily envision this in yourself (assuming you're accurately typed) in all of those times when you need to figure something out, you don't know what to do, so you just fucking disappear into your bedroom and basically intuit/think your way through things - obviously, this is with pre-existing information - retreating to a saviour introverted function - not thinking off the bat that you need to go and get more observable information (which would be running to a saviour Se) in the form of Googling solutions or obtaining the information elsewhere externally.

    Those descriptions fit regardless of position because none of them imply strength or quality of function.
    I never disagreed that the functions' descriptions were accurate, I just said they were vague because they are. Because functions work in a more "sophisticated" way when you actually apply them to reality, trying to give a short description for the functions is complicated; therefore a vague one is needed in order for it to be accurate in all scenarios. If I disagreed with you, I would have never referenced your post to OP to begin with - apologies if it seemed sarcastic.

  10. #29

    Quote Originally Posted by Turi View Post
    Se doesn't look to do anything, doing is deciding/judging functions. Same deal with intuition. They don't 'do' things. They just perceive. A lot of what you think is 'intuition' imagining what you can do, is decider/judging functions i.e Ti/Fi.
    I disagree. I called them "so-called" judging functions because I see no evidence that the functions labelled "Perceiving" and the functions labelled "Judging" should be ever have been called those things by the original authors, as they don't seem to correspond with the ordinary dictionary definitions of those words and it's quite misleading about the nature of what you actually see in practice from people.
    Last edited by compulsiverambler; 03-11-2018 at 11:14 AM.

  11. #30

    Quote Originally Posted by spaceynyc View Post
    completely agree with how you explained Se here, there's definitely a reason Se users have a action oriented vibe about them... when you say Ni compares the past with the past, can you elaborate on that?
    I will try, though I don't have time to right now I'm afraid, I've been pretty busy. Hopefully tomorrow I'll get a chance.

    Not that it needs an essay; I intend to explain in a single medium-sized paragraph, but my non-shitposts typically start out at least four times larger than they are by the time I've edited them down them down to only what's strictly relevant, coherent and concise - hence the username - so they take more time and a more focused mood than you'd probably guess from the resulting quality.


     
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Adjectives For Each Cognitive Type
    By SweetPickles in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-27-2014, 11:20 PM
  2. How much of each cognitive function do YOU think you have?
    By thehigher in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 01:18 PM
  3. One word criticism for each type
    By Raichan in forum Myers Briggs Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-24-2012, 05:24 AM
  4. A brief description of each cognitive process...
    By nathdep in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-23-2012, 09:03 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:27 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0