# Is this an example of Ti?



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

I am hoping for some insight into what function is most likely used in this case...

A 6 year old girl begs for piano lessons because her sisters both play, but the local piano teacher won't take her for another year. So, she finds her sisters' old beginning piano books and ends up divising her own system of reading music. Usually, you name notes and name the keys and then put them together, but she skipped both steps and simply associated the note on the paper with the key on the piano. So, by the time she reaches college, she can play advanced music quite well and can translate the notes on the page with little effort, but has a very limited knowledge of the names of anything. She finally masters the names of the notes/keys while a music major in college simply because she has to learn them to pass the classes.

This same girl taught herself to read at age 4 by following along with the words as someone read and associating certain spoken words with the written symbol (in this case, the whole word not individual letters) on the page. She remembers her mom following along in the Bible at church and realizing that the pastor always said "the" when the word "the" was on the page. Her mom says she also liked to correct the pastor when he read a word wrong or changed the wording. Later she learns phonix and sees little use for it until her aunt mentions that she can use it to sound out any word she doesn't already know.

Would this be Ti or something different?


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

Sounds like it.
Functions are _perspectives_ moreso than the behaviors, and if this is coming from a perspective of internalizing logical principles to solve problems, then yes, it is definitely Ti.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Thanks, Eric. I just read the about functions being perspectives not behaviors just before I saw your post. IT does change how you think of the functions. The learning process here is Ti. The rest of the story would not relate to Ti. It just makes for a better story with the extra information. lol.


----------



## Omnipotent (Jun 22, 2010)

Sounds more like Ni to me.


----------



## ThinkerNinja (Mar 21, 2010)

Ni is nothing like this.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

True. Stuff like "divising her own systems" of things is_ judgment_; Ni is _perception_ (largely involving abstract data such as symbols).


----------



## Omnipotent (Jun 22, 2010)

Well, admittedly i'm no expert on the functions, but I thought Ni was primarily used for understanding patterns.


----------



## Omnipotent (Jun 22, 2010)

I found someone defining Ni as this on the INTP forum.

Ni: Drawing conclusions, all the pieces coming together subconsciously to form a whole, going from pieces to the final form without all the middle steps.

Sounds like what's goin on here, no?


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

No, because the "pieces" or patterns are *abstract* things such as symbols, archetypes, etc. This girl's "connections" are clearly *concrete*, and it's not so much about perceiving them, but using them for judgment.


----------



## ZC Carbon (Jun 11, 2010)

It sounds to me like this girl understands the art of seeing logic in patterns and developing a way to unify those patterns. This to my understanding is Ti.


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

I don't know about it being or not being Ti, but this is done with Ni too.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

I looked up the definition of symbols vs. signs since the word symbol keeps coming up when dealing Ni. Connecting a music note to a key or associating a written word to the spoken word would involve using signs. This would make sense to me as being Ti. Interpreting the meaning of music while listening to it (adding meaning to what is simply a series of sound tones and rhythms, or whatever) is an example of using Ni. (I read this idea on the Lenore pages http://http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/Introverted_Intuition_and_the_Meaning_of_Music.) Even if Ni had a part in the process that happened in my original post, I do not think the same result could have happened without an awful lot of Ti involved.


----------



## Omnipotent (Jun 22, 2010)

well, if you are an infj it could have been both.


----------



## thewindlistens (Mar 12, 2009)

It is Ti. It's exactly like any example of my own dominant Ti that I would give.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Omnipotent said:


> well, if you are an infj it could have been both.


Finding out it was Ti was the piece of the puzzle that helped me figure out that I was infj and not infp or isfp. It could have been both Ti and Ni, but with the (limited) understanding of Ni that I have, I have not figured out how it fits into this situation. Plus, from what I have read, when you are 4 and 6, you are still experimenting with which function you prefer. So, I am guessing that even though Ti seems pretty strong in this example, it is not guaranteed to be chosen as the dominant function. It also means that there is a chance that Ni was not even used.


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

anagrams said:


> I am hoping for some insight into what function is most likely used in this case...
> 
> A 6 year old girl begs for piano lessons because her sisters both play, but the local piano teacher won't take her for another year. So, she finds her sisters' old beginning piano books and ends up divising her own system of reading music. Usually, you name notes and name the keys and then put them together, *but she skipped both steps and simply associated the note on the paper with the key on the piano*. So, by the time she reaches college, she can play advanced music quite well and can translate the notes on the page with little effort, but has a very limited knowledge of the names of anything. She finally masters the names of the notes/keys while a music major in college simply because she has to learn them to pass the classes.
> 
> ...


Bolded bits are quite Ni representative.


----------



## Holunder (May 11, 2010)

You can accomplish the same task with different functions, so it's hard to say which functions she used. It could have been done with Ni. There is one suggestive bit, however, because it shows her outlook an life: she didn't see a value in phonetics until someone gave her a practical reason for it. Ti would have been interested in knowing the underlying principle anyway; trying to learn only what's directly applicable indicates Te.


----------



## Abuwabu (Nov 25, 2009)

Holunder said:


> trying to learn only what's directly applicable indicates Te.


Not sure about that me old bean... you've just described 99% of ISTPs and there's not a dash of Te to be seen.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

I have noticed that INTJ's are very protective of their Ni. As an INTJ, do you relate to this way of learning, but with perhaps a Te slant to it?

I think of Te as focusing on things that are measurable. So naming notes, keys, intervals would be more important to the process. Te is linear, which would imply a very step by step learning process which is very thorough so that a complete understanding of the subject is acheived in the end. Is this correct? If you haven't guessed, already, I was writing about myself in the first post. I acheived the result of being able to play, but I definitely did not acheive a complete understanding of the material. Even with the reading, I can read well and fast, but my reading comprehension is something to be desired. I have to remind myself to actually focus on the meanings of the words. From my experience, most people will assume that you need a complete understanding of materials to get the end result, which is why I was able to get so far without someone teaching them to me.

ISTP's would have Ti and Ni just switched around from an INFJ. My dad leans heavily towards ISTP, but he focuses his energy towards lawn mowers and old sewing machines (my mom is a fanatical quilter) and I focus my energy more inward - signs and symbols and feelings. I am not sure where I am going with this. People keep talking to me IRL so I have to give up making any sense of it for now.

I do remember that I wanted to write about how I noticed that both Ni and Ti seem to have an "Aha" moment associated with them - where all of a sudden things just make sense. But, I would assume the difference lies in what is making sense. Ni would be abstract (symbols), Ti would be concrete (signs).


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

... Protective? *facepalm*

No no no... thing is, it does seem to have Ni all over it. I think we're just answering your question?

And yes, INTJs do learn similarly. We tend to self-teach ourselves everything because we're concerned with why and how things work and to make them work better for us (maxing out efficiency). So with Ni, we find patterns, how everything is linked together, so that then we know how to move each piece. Whether we're talking about assigning symbols or whatever to the keys doesn't validate or invalidate the use of Ni, because what Ni could be doing in your case is simply finding the patterns to give you understanding of what you're doing.

Again, what I bolded are examples of possible Ni at work:



> *but she skipped both steps and simply associated the note on the paper with the key on the piano*.


Oh, Ni loves skipping. It just loves to jump into things right away and get dirty.



> *following along with the words as someone read and associating certain spoken words with the written symbol *


There's a link there between what it's said and what it's written...



> *realizing that the pastor always said "the" when the word "the" was on the page*.


Pattern...



> *sees little use for it until her aunt mentions that she can use it to sound out any word she doesn't already know.*


Ni behaves like this too.It doesn't care for things if they're not connected to what it's currently interested in. As soon as your aunt showed you could implement it, you wanted to embrace it.

-----

I'm not trying to argue Ni vs Ti. 
I don't use Ti much so it's not like can say it is or it is not Ti. 

Like Holunder said, this can be done with different functions. I guess we're just giving our 2 cents here to not leave people thinking this is only possible through Ti?


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

anagrams said:


> She finds her sisters' old beginning piano books and ends up divising her own system of reading music.
> 
> Usually, you name notes and name the keys and then put them together, but she skipped both steps and simply associated the note on the paper with the key on the piano.
> 
> ...


I originally thought the examples showed an interaction with a source outside of the Self. I was thinking about Ne and/or Se. However after reading your examples again, I understand the wholistic process she is using and realize that it is most likely Ti. Introverting thinking types naturally take things apart to see how they operate. This is not necessarily taking something apart literally or physically but mentally seeing the basic principles of how systems and things work, from a cognitive standpoint. 

It seems that once she was comfortable with the basic principles of the two systems, she was able to mentally put the systems back together and see it forever in a different light. I remember my algebra teacher scolding me for working out equations in my head instead of writing them out. She was never satisfied with my wholistic approach, since there was a linear way of working out equations. Someone referenced to the examples being Ni. Ni and Si work in a linear fashion, a beginning-middle-end. 

I sometimes illustrate the results of cognitively processing using Ti is like Cypher telling Neo that when he looked at the screens he no loner saw codes but people and things. We don’t see the system as most once we have mentally taken it apart and put it back together. We see it from a different point of view which naturally makes sense, and wonder why others don't see from the same perspective. I think it is why I personally sometimes have an arduous time explaining the type system to others, since it just seems to naturally make sense.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

eranashine said:


> ... Protective? *facepalm*
> 
> No no no... thing is, it does seem to have Ni all over it. I think we're just answering your question?
> 
> And yes, INTJs do learn similarly. We tend to self-teach ourselves everything because we're concerned with why and how things work and to make them work better for us (maxing out efficiency). So with Ni, we find patterns, how everything is linked together, so that then we know how to move each piece. Whether we're talking about assigning symbols or whatever to the keys doesn't validate or invalidate the use of Ni, because what Ni could be doing in your case is simply finding the patterns to give you understanding of what you're doing.


Thank you.  This is along the lines of what I was looking for. I have a feeling that Ni has a part in this too, but I have not yet figured it out for myself. I was hoping for more explanation than what was given because for me the Ti connection was obvious, but the Ni connection was not yet proven in my mind. The examples were there, but not the solid argument for them. But, it has finally sunk in that seeing patterns is the key to your argument. (I can be a bit slow. haha.) I still can't say that I agree with all of your points being Ni, but I am just a beginner at this and am still trying to figure it out for myself. But, what you said above certainly does give me something to work with, so thank you.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Functianalyst said:


> We see it from a different point of view which naturally makes sense, and wonder why others don't see from the same perspective.


That happens to me more than I would like.

(I wish I could do math in my head. lol.)


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

It's probably more of my inability to express it than you being slow.  (In fact, the sense of 'slowness' can also come from Ni. Because I'm failing to present all the connections you're not able to see them and you feel like you don't 'get it' yet that they're still there somewhere. That could pretty much be Ni whining about wanting to find out how it all connects) 

It might help you to know that you can't consciously 'see' Ni's work processes unless you develop a lot of self-awareness. So this might be another reason why it's hard to see the involvement of Ni.

Good luck finding out more about the functions. I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

eranashine said:


> ...And yes, INTJs do learn similarly. We tend to self-teach ourselves everything because we're concerned with why and how things work and to make them work better for us (maxing out efficiency). So with Ni, we find patterns, how everything is linked together, so that then we know how to move each piece. Whether we're talking about assigning symbols or whatever to the keys doesn't validate or invalidate the use of Ni, because what Ni could be doing in your case is simply finding the patterns to give you understanding of what you're doing.


This is taken from the Lenore Thomson wiki page:



> ....consider what happens when someone tells you how to do something moderately complicated with a certain computer program (say, MS-Word or Excel). They tell you how to work it, but that day you don't operate it yourself (maybe they were telling you over the phone when you weren't at a computer). When you finally try it yourself the next day, you can't get anything to work. All sorts of crucial details are missing from your memory. Or perhaps you remember everything perfectly, but they forgot to tell you something crucial. Now consider what happens when someone sits down in front of you and demonstrates how to operate the program. They run through the whole thing and explain as they go. The next day, you try it yourself for the first time. And barely anything works, again because crucial details are missing. And now consider what happens when they show you how to work the program by having you sit down at the computer. You type as they tell you what to do and point things out on the screen. Every time they forget a detail, you catch it immediately, and they supply the missing info. Every time you run into something you don't understand, you just ask them right away, or they tell you without your asking because it's obvious what you need to be shown. When you work the program again the next day, you're not a pro yet, but you can actually do stuff.
> 
> What's relevant here is not the sense of touch, but whether you are actively engaged with the tool. When you interact with the tool using your very own body, the reality of the tool becomes known to you in a different way than when someone tells you or shows you how to use the tool. You understand in a right-brain way rather than a left-brain way. The reality of the tool is guaranteed to have shown itself, because you had a concrete experience with the tool, not just a verbal or symbolic representation of it. The causal relationships of the tool get burned into your brain in a way that transcends words. You could try to translate your understanding into a linear stream of words, but you would indeed be translating: the actual knowledge that you have is not linear and not words. It's an "all at once" thing, and it seems that the knowledge resides in your hand. Or in other words, you have come to understand the tool in the Ti way.


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> This is taken from the Lenore Thomson wiki page:


Are we getting into an argument? Because if that's the case... there's no way to know for sure which function she used the most unless we jump into her mind and see her inner workings in detail. :crazy: And not just that, also take into consideration what her life was like and what kind of influences she had. So just so you know, I'm only bouncing ideas off, not taking any side.

And I don't like to speak about Ti (even though in theory I know about it) because it's not one of my main functions. I'll leave that to Ti-dominants. But let me add in some more about Ni in case that's welcomed:

One of the differences I see in the text you pasted was that with Ti things are taken step by step. With Ni things feel more like parameters. You get a sense of "Ok, this is simple. I can do this." and you jump into it, eventually finding there is more going on within the parameters, things that affect the product and things that don't and are marked as 'irrelevant'. 

Ti wants to know more about the finer details, it's not happy with just what is relevant to the desired outcome, is that right?


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

anagrams said:


> I am hoping for some insight into what function is most likely used in this case...
> 
> A 6 year old girl begs for piano lessons because her sisters both play, but the local piano teacher won't take her for another year. So, she finds her sisters' old beginning piano books and ends up divising her own system of reading music. Usually, you name notes and name the keys and then put them together, but she skipped both steps and simply associated the note on the paper with the key on the piano. So, by the time she reaches college, she can play advanced music quite well and can translate the notes on the page with little effort, but has a very limited knowledge of the names of anything. She finally masters the names of the notes/keys while a music major in college simply because she has to learn them to pass the classes.
> 
> ...


I would say that Ti is the dominate factor in this process with a touch of Ni. Ni would of said F the book let me hear the music. But with more in depth look it looks like Ti and Ne, my lousy guess would be INTP.

If you want details of how I came to this conclusion ask my Ni, then you should know my answer to that question.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Your lousy guess might not be so lousy after all.  The more that I learn about how the functions work, the more likely INTP is an option.


edit to add: Though if you give the childhood personality descriptions any merit, INFJ fits better. Of course, only I would know that...


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

eranashine said:


> Are we getting into an argument? Because if that's the case... there's no way to know for sure which function she used the most unless we jump into her mind and see her inner workings in detail. :crazy: And not just that, also take into consideration what her life was like and what kind of influences she had. So just so you know, I'm only bouncing ideas off, not taking any side.
> 
> And I don't like to speak about Ti (even though in theory I know about it) because it's not one of my main functions. I'll leave that to Ti-dominants. But let me add in some more about Ni in case that's welcomed:
> 
> ...


Nope, no argument just a point that based on what was said the little girl was using the tools to experience a different way of doing things. Ni and Si do things one step at a time, a beginning-middle-end to their process. Ti is holistic so may start anywhere in the process. But it has to get a feel for the overall principle of how a thing works. I pasted the information to illustrate how that occurs.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

anagrams said:


> Your lousy guess might not be so lousy after all.  The more that I learn about how the functions work, the more likely INTP is an option.
> 
> 
> edit to add: Though if you give the childhood personality descriptions any merit, INFJ fits better. Of course, only I would know that...


It can be tricky typing a child for they have not yet fully developed there personalities yet. But if Ti is already so soon then INTP is also a decent guess but you would know better by knowing her. So the next question is does she show Fe pretty well?


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

I didn't think we were attempting to type the little girl. I thought we were simply trying to determine whether the process used was Ti. Based on what was said, I would have to say yes. If it had been said that the little girl just took up music one day and started playing out of the blue, that could be Ni. However the OP was able to observe the process as it played out, which simply shows Ti was being used. Heck, it could just as well be Fi dependiing on how much intonation was used to decide, but it could only have been an introverted judging function to come to the conclusions, and only an extraverted perceiving function could have been used to take in the information. Whether the person used the Ti function as their dominant funciton (ITP), secondary function (ETP), tertiary function (IFJ) or fourth function (EFJ) is another story.


----------



## themuzicman (Jul 13, 2009)

I would think of this example as Ti and Ne. Clearly she is internalizing the individual pieces of data by thinking about them, but is also organizing a system of abstract concepts that she derives from Ti into an understanding of how this outside system works (Ne). I could see a case for Ti and Ni, as well, but I think Ti/Ne is probably the combo, here.


----------



## Turututu (Dec 22, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> I didn't think we were attempting to type the little girl. I thought we were simply trying to determine whether the process used was Ti. Based on what was said, I would have to say yes. If it had been said that the little girl just took up music one day and started playing out of the blue, that could be Ni. However the OP was able to observe the process as it played out, which simply shows Ti was being used. * Heck, it could just as well be Fi dependiing on how much intonation was used to decide,* but it could only have been an introverted judging function to come to the conclusions, and only an extraverted perceiving function could have been used to take in the information. Whether the person used the Ti function as their dominant funciton (ITP), secondary function (ETP), tertiary function (IFJ) or fourth function (EFJ) is another story.


Indeed. :x


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

themuzicman said:


> I would think of this example as Ti and Ne. Clearly she is internalizing the individual pieces of data by thinking about them, but is also organizing a system of abstract concepts that she derives from Ti into an understanding of how this outside system works (Ne). I could see a case for Ti and Ni, as well, but I think Ti/Ne is probably the combo, here.


I would not go as far as to say whether the information coming in was Se or Ne, but it was one or the other and Ti in my opinion (or possibly Fi) created a system outside of the norm to teach the child how it worked.


eranashine said:


> Indeed. :x


This is where it would call for getting inside the child's head to determine what was being observed was the her considering the principles of how the systems work or the values in how the music works. She could have been just as easily making her conclusions based on the harmonizing of the music itself, in my opinion. I simply can't know.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Functianalyst said:


> I didn't think we were attempting to type the little girl. I thought we were simply trying to determine whether the process used was Ti. Based on what was said, I would have to say yes. If it had been said that the little girl just took up music one day and started playing out of the blue, that could be Ni. However the OP was able to observe the process as it played out, which simply shows Ti was being used. Heck, it could just as well be Fi dependiing on how much intonation was used to decide, but it could only have been an introverted judging function to come to the conclusions, and only an extraverted perceiving function could have been used to take in the information. Whether the person used the Ti function as their dominant funciton (ITP), secondary function (ETP), tertiary function (IFJ) or fourth function (EFJ) is another story.


I believe everybody agree's that Ti is at play here, but why stop now where is the fun in that


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

The original intent of the post was to determine if this was Ti or not. The underlying reason for posting it was to use it to figure out what type I am. So, if you are inspired, I really wouldn't mind guesses on type. Go ahead and have fun. Here's a deeper look into the girl's head, if you care to read. Forgive all irrelevant details.

My memory is pretty spotty when it comes to the exact way I figured out how to read musical notation. I know I was still using the system in high school to some extent. It involved a lot of trial and error. Does this note sound right here, if so does it also work when applied to a different area in the music where the note shows up again. If so, then I would associate that specific note to that key. I cannot play by ear, I am terrible at memorizing music, I had very, very little knowledge of chord structure or theory of why the notes were there - I still struggle with this. But, I can pick up a piece of music and play it quite well at sight. 

I can't say that I picked up on normal patterns that are usually used to learn music. It was a revelation to me that you could determine the name of the white keys on the piano by using the groups of black keys on the piano (D is always the key between the two black keys). For a long time I didn't even realized there was a pattern to the black keys. I found middle C based on it's relation to the letters of Kohler and Campbell written on the piano. Another helpful thing I learned in college was that there were patterns in music that repeated themselves - even whole sections. I had a really hard time measuring specific intervals between two notes on the page(2nds, 3rds, 4ths, etc) There is really not much I can brag about here on the traditional intellectual front. haha. When I tried to explain my way of reading music to my college professor, she was utterly confused. I confused a lot of music teachers. haha.

My early years were my intellectual peak. Really not much happened during my school years. I was not a risk taker, and I gladly followed rules. Went to school, got A's all the way through college in all subjects, but math is my weakest. Was often tested for the Gifted program, but never qualified. Excelled in art, music, dance, and grammar. lol. Scored high on ACT's. Then I went to college and discovered Theology and Philosophy and a whole new can of worms was opened, but stuck with music because it was my original plan. School was easy for me. Learning in a classroom setting seemed to fit my learning style. I was an efficient studier. I learned things long enough to ace the test and then usually forgot the information soon after (unless it was something I used on a regular basis or was very interested in).

When it comes to Fe, I always forget my own wedding anniversary and really hate Greeting Card holidays. I had to learn how to make small talk with strangers when I was an adult for my job.(This might come more from having two introverted parents. I'm pretty good at small talk now.) I am terrible at picking out presents for other people. But... I base the majority of my decisions on how it will effect others, feel responsible to take care of other people's feelings, and I am a chronic self-discloser (you probably noticed I like talking about myself. haha). I catch myself monitoring other peoples moods and mediating between people. In grade school, as noted by my parents, I had a way of making friends with a motley assortment of classmates and would attempt to bring them together in one group. I would always be attracted (like a moth to a flame) to the person who seems shunned or out of place, get to know them and bring them into my circle. ( I am an introvert - no doubt about that.) I am assuming that this is mostly Fe- perhaps not a pure example of it, though. Let me know if it is something altogether different. 

So have fun if you like, I don't mind.  I can relate to 90% of the description of INTP here An INTP Profile
I am incredibly nostalgic and love studying about the past, but it has to have a huge human element to it. I like learning about culture of the people, not dates or world wars. 

But the above mentioned about Fe, plus the fact that I have to monitor the kind of media (movies, music, literature) I expose myself to because I connect so deeply to the emotions of the characters (I cry a lot when I watch movies and read books and sometimes take months to recover after reading some emotionally charged fiction. That is why I prefer non-fiction), kind of separates me from the INTP... or does it? Also. I am not quick witted and I have trouble expressing intelligible thoughts in debates. I usually can't formulate the thought quick enough. And, anything attached to a number makes my mind go blank.

So, after that nice long book about myself... INFJ or INTP? Or, if you like to stick to the OP, is it still a good example of Ti?

edit: eeek. perhaps I just drained all of the fun out of this by giving too much information.


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Ok, forget a bunch of the long-winded book up there and return mostly to the OP. I have another question about it. I remember Functianalyst had commented that his first instinct on this was Se or Ne (so perhaps this is not far-fetched after all). I am curious about the Se part.

After writing out my last post, I started to realize the amount of hands-on trial and error involved - at least with learning music. Using the example of Ti from the Lenore wiki that was posted earlier about learning the computer program- You understand the program by being actively engaged with the computer. Se also involves hands on learning, right?


I see my way of playing as very Se in that (again from the Lenore pages):



> When you are oriented in the Se way, you live completely in the moment. You respond _now_ to what is happening _now._ What happens later, you'll deal with later. What's happened in the past is irrelevant.


Thinking of it this way would explain my lack of memory of what I played (or read) and explain my not noticing obvious patterns in the music. When I play, I am focused on the now and not the whole. See the note, play the key. Repeat. I do not think about the note, I just react. Playing music this way gives me something like an adrenaline rush. It is like instant gratification. Applying theory to music is a chore I would rather not do.

Can Se include learning to connect a sign to an action?


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

anagrams said:


> edit: eeek. perhaps I just drained all of the fun out of this by giving too much information.


Thats what I was thinking let my Ni/Ti have some fun and I am ready for some fun


----------



## anagrams (Jun 9, 2010)

Sorry.:blushed: I am thinking INFJ might not be right for me. I didn't see that coming until it was too late. haha.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

anagrams said:


> Sorry.:blushed: I am thinking INFJ might not be right for me. I didn't see that coming until it was too late. haha.


One of the reasons that I did not respond to your thread is because I don't get caught up in claiming to know another person's type. Hell it took me six years just to confirm my own. I adamantly believe only the person can discover their type. With that being said, I don't think you should be too quick to give up on being INJ (I think it was), before exploring how you may use Ti or Fi-Se. Remember those are respectively the third and fourth functions of INFJ and INTJ. 

As for your inquiry of Se and or Ne, you tell us which you believe that you may prefer:

*Ne - *p. 196: "Intuition draws our attention to context and we adapt to sensory events in terms of it."
p. 197: "Once we've grasped a whole pattern, we can envision options that don't yet exist. Indeed, one of the drawbacks of Intuition is that it conjures up a future before we know very much about the present. For example, given enough elements to suggest a star or a square, we have a hard time not filling in the blanks and seeing the complete image." 
p. 198: "...to leap from a few immediate cues to a quick impression of the whole..."
p. 223: "Extraverted Intuition would move us to unify our sense impressions with their larger context, thereby creating new options for meaning and response."

*Se - *
p. 145: "As a right-brain function, Sensation comes into play when events are changing so rapidly that linear analysis is impossible. We respond immediately, on the basis of visual and tactile information, guided by what we've done before."
p. 145: "Once we...know how to dance, we aren't thinking about rules or instructions. We're directly engaged by our surface perceptions--the rhythm of the music, the movements of a partner. We're changing as our situation does."
p. 146: "[Quoting Pirsig] 'The material at hand determines his thoughts and motions, which simultaneously change the nature of the material at hand. The material and his thoughts are changing together in a progression of changes.'"
p. 146: "The only way to cultivate Extraverted Sensation is by hands-on involvement--by strengthening the link between sensory perception and neural response. Our bodies have to get into the act. For types who use this function as their primary approach to life, true knowledge is always concrete, a product of firsthand experience."


----------

