latemailplatemail:

thealecdelgado:

asongofopposites:

nevver:

Calvin and Hobbes

The spirit indeed. Pascal anyone?

This is what I mean when I say that people with higher Ni don’t really do belief. It seems so foreign and nonsensical to them. Accept something as absolutely true? Right… I’ll just work with what works and leave acceptance and rejection to that. As far as I care, something can be simultaneously true and false, and it has no impact on me. Does it work? Okay then.

This is with regard to Pascal’s Wager:

I’m Catholic, though admittedly not a staunch one as far as the religious institution is concerned (i.e. I don’t agree with many of the Church’s views and have always been more inclined to an individualist Christianity rather than a collectivist/institutionalized one). That aside, I’m not quite convinced by the strength of Pascal’s Wager simply because if there is a God, given his omniscience, I’m pretty sure he’ll be able to tell a rationalized belief (which is what the Wager essentially is) from an authentic one, whereupon the gambit will fail utterly. Unless of course the God in question is Greek, in which case we can just offer sacrifices and appear pious, and the god(s) will be pleased and bestow good harvests and demigod children. Of course other gods will get jealous and turn you into nasty things like spiders, trees, marble etc. a la Ovid’s Metamorphoses. So perhaps the Wager remains inefficacious after all.

To address the point about Ni-dominants not doing belief, I think we do hold certain principles (moral or value-neutral) and subscribe to certain belief systems BUT we know that these systems are just models - they are not indispensable and are perhaps in fact constantly changing and being updated, as it were. This accounts for our hmm… belief that there is no absolute truth. Well, I think I just demonstrated why as knowing beings, we can never escape commitment to beliefs, from an epistemological point of view. At any point of time, there are certain things that we - consciously or unconsciously - take as truth. If we didn’t believe, it’d be hard to survive out there in a world of dangerous flux.

As an Ni-user, I was never always like that though - accommodating or integrating new possibilities. I remember that as a kid, I always wanted to be sure of the things I believed in; and when I finally found enough reason for myself to invest in a particular model, I’d genuinely take it as the Truth, capitalized. It perhaps explains why for the greater part of my academic life I was very ideologically involved with the sciences. Although I enjoyed and flourished in the languages, I always wanted/preferred water-tight answers that could withstand any sort of skeptical interrogation. I’m thinking it might due in part to my high Judging-orientedness, or else an unhealthy use of an underdeveloped, framework-obsessed tertiary Ti. Things changed when I started college though, in particular when I started taking Philosophy classes (which have been killing me due to its high demand for Te especially during discussions). It effectively deconstructed/decentered a lot of theoretical models that I’d been personally invested in, and Science was one of them. For awhile, I wasn’t sure if I believed in anything, haha. Later I realised that I could still continue subscribing to certain frameworks - I only had to be aware that there are many theoretical paradigms through which one may experience/understand the world, and our idiosyncratic worldview is essentially a constantly updating synthesis of many.

So yes, in short I generally agree with your formulation of the Ni philosophy of belief:

I’ll just work with what works and leave acceptance and rejection to that. As far as I care, something can be simultaneously true and false, and it has no impact on me.

although it sounds a tad utilitarian (that might just be my Fe alarm), and I might disagree a little with the part about the Schrodinger phenomenon not having any impact on myself, hehe.

[obligatory smiley face here: =) ]

“This accounts for our hmm… belief that there is no absolute truth. Well, I think I just demonstrated why as knowing beings, we can never escape commitment to beliefs, from an epistemological point of view.”

     I didn’t quite mean that there is or isn’t absolute truth, but that we aren’t preoccupied with validating it. Belief requires judgement, as do principles and psychological scripts, which Ni simply doesn’t do. It merely sees things for their quintessence, as their components, as their timeless, boundary-less, meaningless entities of perception. Since Ni looks at perception itself, rather than perceiving directly (as Se does), it can take something such as (to use your example of deities) and see it not as real or not real, but as things introduced by other humans who may or may not see it as real, themselves. There is no judgement, merely observation of judgement itself. To make a judgement, you’d have to use a judging function.

“I remember that as a kid, I always wanted to be sure of the things I believed in…”

     This section is describing the nature of NiTi (and TiNi for that matter) and the matter of belief is being left to Ti, not Ni, as you’re describing it. Ni is simply responsible for the pull to investigate in the first place.
     When I was very young, I was introduced to all sorts of things, from magic to ghosts to religions to tips and tricks in video games (hold B to make the Pokeball more likely to catch ‘em all!), but I merely just heard the things, and recorded them in memory as thing’s I’d heard of, without regard to their validity. If somehow holding B did impact my ability to successfully capture a Pokemon, then I’d do it. If it didn’t, I wouldn’t, if I didn’t know, I’d leave it to Te and make a tally mark chart of successes and failures out of 50 Pokeballs to figure it out. Parallel to Pascal’s Wager, you’ll find, if it didn’t interest me enough to delve into, and cost me nothing to potentially increase the success rate of the Pokeballs with the “hold B” method, I’d merely do it when I could, without conviction or care. (Because really, it doesn’t matter unless I decide it does.)

Within science and psychology, there are often contradicting and alternative hypotheses and explanations I find, and merely remember as not true or false, but for what they offer and why they contend one another, in doing so, I see what can arise from understanding rather than believing in either. Are they both making the same implicit assumption? Are they differing on something that a perspective shift would instantly resolve? Is their attachment and belief in their Truth preventing them from achieving their goal? While this is merely my perspective on these things, I’m always interested in what my other Ni counterpart sees. Without Te, how does Ni still have its characteristic Agnostic Nihilism?

“although it sounds a tad utilitarian (that might just be my Fe alarm), and I might disagree a little with the part about the Schrodinger phenomenon not having any impact on myself, hehe.”

     Utilitarian due to Te, Fe is more Humanistic. So far, this makes sense, however even Fe is Utilitarian in a sense. All Je is housed by the structures responsible for cause and effect, induction, prediction, etc. It would reasonably follow that while you can have an “Fe operating system” or a “Te operating system,” it is essentially the same “hardware.”
     You’d have to explain yourself more about Schrodinger. In case it is a misunderstanding, I’ll add that I meant that the concept isn’t too foreign to the nature of Ni’s perception. Whether or not it makes an impact is another story.

I laughed when I saw the obligatory smiley face.

The Batman from the early 90s animated series was an INFJ. Originally, he was written to be an INTJ detective, but was re-written for the cartoon to be more of a humanist. Sherlock Holmes is an INTJ.

This is generally how the two types interact. They share Ni and inferior Se, only.

Johnny Depp
INFJ: Ni Fe Ti Se

Lily the INFJ?
Hmmm

Brock Pewter Gym Leader
INFJ: Ni Fe Ti Se

This one was particularly interesting, considering the amount of research I had to do, but in the end INFJ fits best, especially after watching the Brock-centric Season 1 episodes. He is characterized by his introverted perceiving, and extraverted feeling interactions with the other characters. Interestingly, he gravitates to Misty (ENFP), which would make sense considering Ne/Ni and Fi/Fe compliment very well.

Brock is considered the most mature, wise and level-headed of the main characters, and he is arguably the most intelligent character as well. He often acts as an older brother and caretaker to the other characters and a voice of reason in disputes. He will usually place others before him and will help and support his friends even against his better judgment or at his own expense. While he is not shown to battle often, he can understand the situations and strategies in any Pokémon battle, and often explains them to the other characters, probably due to the fact that he was once a Gym Leader. His wisdom is possibly derived from how observant he is; he can tell just by sight how a Pokémon is feeling and spot the differences between the various Officer Jenny and Nurse Joy.

[Source]

In the games, his Ni dominance is more apparent, however.

Brock’s title is “The Rock-Solid Pokémon Trainer.” Brock is quite proud of his rock-hard willpower, and uses Rock-type Pokémon to complement this.

Brock is one of the few truly serious professional Pokémon Trainers in the Pewter City area. He’s tough, people respect him, and most admire him. Supposedly, it’s hard to get him to laugh or drop his serious demeanor, but when he does, he can’t stop.

[Source]

Deconstructing Harry (1997)

Introverted Intuition
Reality is arbitrary, perception is your experience to bend to your will.

theideathief:

somnule:

I suppose you could call this a fact, in the same way “Abraham Lincoln’s favorite color may have been purple” is a fact, but I don’t remember the last time I was angry.

#INFJs may have the ability to see out their fingernails #INFJs may occasionally explode upon contact with potassium #INFJs may know the secret location of Carmen Sandiego
I just had to reblog this. These tags. Oh man.

I have no idea where these “facts” have been coming from, but lately they’ve been comedy gold. Thanks for the uplifting captions/tags/comments, it has been making my hospitalization a lot funnier.

introvertsdontbite:

thealecdelgado:

introvertsdontbite:

Snape was not an INTJ.
He had an extraverted feeling preference (Fe), which means he was an FJ, not a TJ. Though, you are right, he is an introvert. 

Really, there is no need to be rude. Though it is wonderful to know that people obviously have great interest in personality typing and are well versed in areas concerning psychology, I must respectfully disagree with this disagreement. I completely stand with the claim that Snape is an INTJ; his Feeling preference is absolutely prevalent but NOT extraverted. At least, if it would comfort you, his T or F score is perhaps in the lower numbers, therefore giving the perception that he is more Feeling than Thinking, or vice versa. Or perhaps he just has a developed Feeling side. Who knows, he’s a fictional character, after all. Though Snape holds the same depth of emotion as an INFJ, e.g. the love he carried for Lily and the revulsion for James and even Harry at points, he is systematic and logical. Not only that, but examine his career choice. Obviously, his motives for becoming a Death Eater when he was young is evidence of an impulsive Feeler, but potions? Science, a typical T pursuit. There is balance, organization, a clear cause and reaction; seeking and making logic with one’s bare hands? Absolutely the hunger of an INTJ. (Not that science cannot be the hunger of a Feeler, but that is a different story.) Perhaps Snape even went from a INFJ to anINTJ in developing as a man, as a character.

I obviously cannot claim to know what really is an INTJ, because I am not one. But really, please don’t squash other’s conclusions based on some need to correct random blog posts. Thank you.

If you perceived my response as rude, that was not my intention. According to Jung’s theory of personality, he does not fit the criteria of INTJ, but he does fit the criteria of INFJ. (Suggesting to me that you should find this upcoming analysis personally relevant since it deals with your own functions.) If I have offended by analysis and you would prefer to believe what you are comfortable with, read no further, because the differential analysis to come would not serve its purpose, instead it would simply make you uncomfortable.

If we are to use Jungian analytical psychology, Snape would need to meet the functional criteria of a specific type, and since you are clearly invested enough to write about it, it is in your interest to at least understand it. Scores do not make a type, functions, however, do. I will demonstrate what I mean, as well as clear any confusion.

For reference, I have numbered your points:
1. His Feeling preference is absolutely prevalent but NOT extraverted
2. Though Snape holds the same depth of emotion as an INFJ, e.g. the love he carried for Lily and the revulsion for James and even Harry at points…
3. …he is systematic and logical.
4. Obviously, his motives for becoming a Death Eater when he was young is evidence of an impulsive Feeler, but potions? Science, a typical T pursuit.
5. There is balance, organization, a clear cause and reaction; seeking and making logic with one’s bare hands? Absolutely the hunger of an INTJ.

Before I begin, I would like to make an aside to any 3rd party readers. What I am doing is called analytical psychology. It is a technique developed by Carl Jung to understand the psyche. There are many uses for it, though I subscribe to the notion that if used correctly, it can be used to predict the behaviors, thoughts, and by proxy, future actions of other people. (As well as understanding the nature of your own perception.)

1. As a left brain function, Fe is rational and calculating, keep this in mind.
When we use Fe, we might locate leverage points in a situation to help everyone get what they need in the most affirming and fair way possible, or leverage our range of social contacts to get help or to interact with someone we wouldn’t normally have access to, or manipulate others into obedience. It can be used both affectionately and coldly. The key point to this, is that it is political. Fe allows the observation from multiple angles to arrive at a decision that furthers one’s campaign or position. It is because of this that he can have extraverted feeling and it wouldn’t result in a pleasant smile and a “how do you do?” The character is a great exploration of the darker side of Fe. What distinguishes this function from extraverted thinking is the fact that relatedness involves human beings, not impersonal abstractions.

2. “Depth of emotion” is not relevant to detecting type. It is relevant to detecting past experiences. Jung did not mean “feeling” in the same way as our common vernacular use of the term. It, along with judging, sensing, etc., is theory-specific jargon.

3. Again, Fe is political, the miniature social drama that plays out with him and Harry’s family is driven by this. He wanted Lily, James was a rival, and Harry, from an Fe perspective rather than a Te one, is connected by social category (family) and therefore perceived as a player in the aforementioned drama.

4. Let it be known that such a superficial observation as a person’s career is useless towards an accurate typing. It is the reasoning the person has for the career that would be useful. “Typically” T/F pursuit, is insufficient justification. For example, I can cite a brilliant and creative INFJ here on tumblr who is very active in a career in science, because his motivation isn’t derived from Fe, but Ni. It is introverted intuition that seeks to understand through science, because it finds the nature of reality captivating. Tertiary Ti finds the beauty in the universe’s salient order and Ni revels in uncovering it.

5. Lastly, you seem to misunderstand the INTJ’s “hunger.” Balance, organization, and clear cause and reaction are the result of an extraverted judging function. Seeking and making logic with one’s bare hands is the domain of Ti. The tertiary function of the INFJ. For this last point, it would be beneficial to thoroughly explain Te, after having explained Fe was political. Both functions are extraverted judging functions and as such, both are objective. (Objective means outwardly based, as opposed to the inwardly based, subjective.)

Te is a cognitive attunement to sequentially causal things. The relationship between act and result, such as a metal bar dropping and clanging, is so utterly predictable that it suggests a fixed sequence of events—the idea that the same thing will occur with other kinds of objects. The metal bar MUST fall and MUST create a clanging noise. Surely it may hit carpet instead, or fall on soft soil or perhaps be caught by someone else (introverted thinking). However, if the result of the impact of the metal rod with the floor followed by a clang did not occur, without serious imposition, from external forces, it would mean a cataclysmic shift in the extroverted logic of known reality. In other words, Te understands reality based on what works, what happens, and what can be repeated reliably. This abstract “falling things will clang” can then become a mental tool or rule; the metal rod can become any handled object and the floor can become any stationary field. Refined by introverted intuition: Unstoppable Force meets Immovable Object. While extroverted thinking is independent, dynamic, mobile and disconnected from any specific instance of reality, it still understands there to be a static, unchanging relationship between objects. Things happen because there is an immutable relationship between them.

The key here is that Te is focussed on things, and will see people as less reliable than things, due to their library of mental tools and rules being better suited to the natural world. Hence why Te is linked to science. The link is derived from Te’s desire to logically test and experiment. The deciding factor for Te is the external result. Ti, by contrast, desires to solve puzzling problems mentally, with logic. The deciding factor for Ti is not the external result, but the internal consistency.

To return to the point at hand, for Snape to have been an INTJ, he would have had to have had genuine indifference towards things that did not relate to his desire to understand the mechanisms of the universe and uncover reality. In other words, he would not fulfill his character’s role, and the story would not have been the same. Imagine switching Snape with Sherlock Holmes and you’ll see how that would have played out.

I am very knowledgeable in this discipline, feel free to send me an ask and I’ll try my best to answer any questions!