Joined
·
12,625 Posts
Okay so I came across this video and I just want to get your opinion on what he says....
As you've asked for our opinions: I'll take Nardi's word over whomever this guy is.You can realize your potential for self-leadership by understanding and practising the cognitive processes. But which cognitive processes are most practical or appropriate to explore and develop first?
First use the table (not included in this post)to locate which processes you prefer most. As you explore, consider this: noticing our own preferences is like noticing the air we breathe. Our preferences are ever present, perhaps taken for granted or unnoticed. Moreover, "preference" does not mean "can't use". Preference promotes use, and we need full mature use for peak performance.
Second, for each personality type pattern, the table (not included in post) suggests three processes to develop as good ways to unlock your potential. These three help balance and expand upon your existing gifts without competing with or undermining them. depending on your age and life experience, you may or may not have already developed these.
Finally, consider exploring and developing all eight to include them in your life in some way.
Not easily.I was wondering if it is possible for you to strengthen your inferior function. I personally believe that I have pretty strong T in me even though I am sure that I am a Fi type.
What makes the ego-centricism not a violation of your core functions?It's not just "oh I'm a Ni-dom so I'm gonna try to paint or ride a roller-coaster and develop my Se." That's still ego-centric.
Well your conception of this I think is a bit narrow. When I say ego-centric, we have to understand that the ego and the functions only represent one small part of a person's psyche. It isn't as MBTI proposes that the entirety of the psyche revolves around the functions. Let me explain.What makes the ego-centricism not a violation of your core functions?
I don't think it is particularly hard for me to rationalize an argument and look at it from an objective view point, even though I think the argument would lose color very quickly because how can this argument be applied if we aren't thinking about the effects it would have for other beings? We can't just have logic in a vacuum.
I also do enjoy thinking in depth about conceptualized problems and dealing with important overreaching issues like politics, immigration, health care and other current event topics. I wonder if it is really that hard to look at things objectively just to see the other side of the issue. I don't feel like I am sacrificing myself by doing that. I just think that I am trying to learn more about the other side and why other feel the way they do. I am educating myself.
I personally don't think it is that difficult to do that, as long as my opinions are respected. I can certainly deal with opposite view points and in general have a thoughtful discussion with someone else, debate can be good and fun. I am attracted to NT's usually anyway just because I love the fact that they seem to have opinions about things and because they seem to have a very different thought process then I do and I find that to be endlessly stimulating. Is it impossible for an F type to enjoy discussing and having in depth logical conversations with others?
Ultimately I think we have all functions, they are just ordered differently. I don't think being a Feeling type means that people can't be logical objectively or find other ways to view things. Nor do I think being a Thinking type means that they can't feel. :/
First Reaction:Any more than it is for the Sensation type, who is used to seeing things in the moment, as they are, to only pay attention to possibilities or notions, etc. It's not just uncomfortable it makes you uneasy, makes you feel naked, blind, like a fool sometimes.
And then you have those more "conservative" type preachers who put down all psychology, (encouraging the exaltation of the ego or self", which they misinterpret as synonymous with ego; and also encouraging the indulgence of "sin"; i.e removing "responsibility" for it), and take a "Bible alone" approach, which says "just repent, pray, read the Bible, try harder, think less about 'self', and God will change you". But much of this (read into select scriptures) is actually just suppressing/repressing the sin further into the unconscious, thinking that alone will make it go away, or "God will then take it away"! :frustrating: But usually, it doesn't go away!![]()
It's not just "Yea I'm a preacher and I have a sex problem" but rather really understanding that the sex problem, probably reveals something about your inner personality (or maybe an unconscious process) that might need to be dealt with. Because, as the diagram points out, the ego is not big enough to hold back the entire unconscious on its own, anything that gets repressed has the potential to roar up and overwhelm you. And depending on how ego-centric you were, you might not even know what was going on.
Google search.And then you have those more "conservative" type preachers who put down all psychology, (encouraging the exaltation of the ego or self", which they misinterpret as synonymous with ego; and also encouraging the indulgence of "sin"; i.e removing "responsibility" for it), and take a "Bible alone" approach, which says "just repent, pray, read the Bible, try harder, think less about 'self', and God will change you". But much of this (read into select scriptures) is actually just suppressing/repressing the sin further into the unconscious, thinking that alone will make it go away, or "God will then take it away"! :frustrating: But usually, it doesn't go away!
A perfect example of this (Even down to the condemnation of psychology; he used to call it "sorcery"), is Jimmy Swaggart. As far as I know, he never did get over his sexual addiction. Yet he kept on getting back up and preaching as if nothing happened (deflecting blame back at "attackers", of course); even disobeying the Church organization when it told him to step down.
So a lot of good information! Where did you find that Johari Window illustration?
I wouldn't let anything get in your way..... but basically the message** here is that you don't develop by throwing away one skillset and developing another, that's not what functions are about. The functions are in order of consciousness, not ability, and when a function is more conscious, it will feel more like "you," so type development is pretty much the acceptance of your inferior and tertiary (and particularly your inferior) as you, but since the inferior is and is the gateway of the stuff you repress, development is not a quick walk in the park.SMH what did I start...... I don't think I'm going to be able to read all of this without feeling drained... Ugh.... My Ne+Fi.... SMH
I think you nailed it.I wouldn't let anything get in your way..... but basically the message** here is that you don't develop by throwing away one skillset and developing another, that's not what functions are about. The functions are in order of consciousness, not ability, and when a function is more conscious, it will feel more like "you," so type development is pretty much the acceptance of your inferior and tertiary (and particularly your inferior) as you, but since the inferior is and is the gateway of the stuff you repress, development is not a quick walk in the park.
**Or something like that. Experts clarify if I'm already off...
Oh okay..... So am I correct to assume that there's a major consensus among all parties involved within this thread in regards to the audiovisual presentation that was displayed in the original post? (I love NT language!)I wouldn't let anything get in your way..... but basically the message** here is that you don't develop by throwing away one skillset and developing another, that's not what functions are about. The functions are in order of consciousness, not ability, and when a function is more conscious, it will feel more like "you," so type development is pretty much the acceptance of your inferior and tertiary (and particularly your inferior) as you, but since the inferior is and is the gateway of the stuff you repress, development is not a quick walk in the park.
**Or something like that. Experts clarify if I'm already off...