I love building systems. I like to find the 'universal truths', so to speak. So I try to figure out what is the underlying core of things that happen. I'm not always right with these things, but they are usually quite close to the truth. I create these 'systems' separately from everything else, as they are purely based on my observations.
Building, breaking, or utilizing systems
Do certain types tend to have a preference for one of these more than others, and if so which ones? And do different types tend to have different ways of doing each of these?
For example, one person might have a tendency to build models of reality such as what things are like, how things work, systems and rules, or some other form. And another person might not find that valuable, preferring to question everything but not form or use complex systems or models. Another might prefer to utilize whatever models they come across whenever useful, but not form their own.
For example, one person might have a tendency to build models of reality such as what things are like, how things work, systems and rules, or some other form. And another person might not find that valuable, preferring to question everything but not form or use complex systems or models. Another might prefer to utilize whatever models they come across whenever useful, but not form their own.
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
It depends on the system. Ti-users may gravitate towards philosophical systems more and tend to emphasize truth and logical consistency. I am an INTJ and I care more about pragmatism and functionality, preferring systems that concern external mechanics.
I tend to either build or utilize those systems. I respect tried-and-true systems that work efficiently, and when they cease to work well, I either build on them or throw them out and start a new system. For me, there's no point in questioning and criticizing unless those activities go towards progress; otherwise it's only playing around, at least where it concerns these external mechanics systems.
I tend to either build or utilize those systems. I respect tried-and-true systems that work efficiently, and when they cease to work well, I either build on them or throw them out and start a new system. For me, there's no point in questioning and criticizing unless those activities go towards progress; otherwise it's only playing around, at least where it concerns these external mechanics systems.
I both utilize and build systems, and I enjoy these because they stimulate thinking, yet neither feels quite right overall. Utilizing systems or models can feel like buying a pair of gloves I could easily go without. And building them can feel like taking a line and splitting it in half repeatedly. You can approach the answer that way but you'll never reach it. I feel as if I could make myself physically ill with all the meticulous line splitting.
My strongest tendency overall is breaking systems. I see how everything is not necessarily true. I may speculate what things could be or how they might be interpreted while guarding against making assumptions or jumping to conclusions. Something might seem like an indicator but might not be meaningful, as it could have arisen from other factors.
My strongest tendency overall is breaking systems. I see how everything is not necessarily true. I may speculate what things could be or how they might be interpreted while guarding against making assumptions or jumping to conclusions. Something might seem like an indicator but might not be meaningful, as it could have arisen from other factors.
This sounds a lot like me. I'm an INFP, but my Feeling-over-Thinking preference is not strong. :happy:I both utilize and build systems, and I enjoy these because they stimulate thinking, yet neither feels quite right overall. Utilizing systems or models can feel like buying a pair of gloves I could easily go without. And building them can feel like taking a line and splitting it in half repeatedly. You can approach the answer that way but you'll never reach it. I feel as if I could make myself physically ill with all the meticulous line splitting.
My strongest tendency overall is breaking systems. I see how everything is not necessarily true. I may speculate what things could be or how they might be interpreted while guarding against making assumptions or jumping to conclusions. Something might seem like an indicator but might not be meaningful, as it could have arisen from other factors.
I think of it as "tweaking" rather than "breaking" systems. Although people who are extremely attached to those systems often accuse me of breaking them :/ I just want to keep what works while fixing what doesn't, though.
I hardly ever build systems from scratch; when I do, I tend to generate too many options. It starts to feel like I'm trying to make overly precise distinctions, and I wonder whether anyone else could possibly care about them.
I think my aux Ne can guard against assumptions for too long. But I'm still in the process of developing it and learning how to use it well.
Yeah, overly precise distinctions is what it's like. When I start thinking that way, I will actually stop myself because it can quickly start to feel annoying. And I also don't build systems from scratch, it's more that I build or refine my understanding of an existing one.This sounds a lot like me. I'm an INFP, but my Feeling-over-Thinking preference is not strong. :happy:
I think of it as "tweaking" rather than "breaking" systems. Although people who are extremely attached to those systems often accuse me of breaking them :/ I just want to keep what works while fixing what doesn't, though.
I hardly ever build systems from scratch; when I do, I tend to generate too many options. It starts to feel like I'm trying to make overly precise distinctions, and I wonder whether anyone else could possibly care about them.
I think my aux Ne can guard against assumptions for too long. But I'm still in the process of developing it and learning how to use it well.
I tend not to even tweak systems though. I'll tweak my interpretation of the system for accuracy, but I try to stay as close as possible to the actual, externally agreed upon concepts. I don't change the system itself, as I don't see much point in inventing my own system that no one else uses.
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Personality Cafe
A forum community dedicated to all ranges of personality types and people. Come join the discussion about health, behavior, care, testing, personality types, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
WickerDeer
753 Replies
ENTJudgement
671 Replies
Ms. Aligned
590 Replies
