# How to tell if you are S or N



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

This is a test my teacher gave our class a few semesters back. We split up based on N and S personality type results and worked in groups for about 20 min.


*Describe the ocean.*



Answer is below (and hidden) if I did this right.
How did you do? 
No cheating! 






The Ns in the class looked for adjectives that described the ocean as a whole. We wracked our brains out and came up with "dynamic and vast." We were divided on wet, because glaciers are technically solids AND part of the ocean.
(Side note: The INTJ wanted to take a photo of the ocean and submit that as his result.)
Edit: My group tested as INTJ, INFJ, ENFP (the teacher actually) and ENTP (me)

The Ss described various parts of the ocean. They had soooo much written down.
"Some parts are warm, some parts are cold, some parts are deep (like Marianas trench), some parts are more shallow, etc: etc:"

Also worth noting, out of a class of 25 people only 4 of us came up as Ns. I looked at a few websites. Ns are supposed to be far less part of the populations than Ss (about 30% vs 70%).


Highlight the above.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

My answer below in white as well. Truth is that I had problems with this, would be easier to just describe water.

The ocean is a vast and beautiful part of our planet, the largest part of our planet at that.
The ocean is the origin of life as life first began in water. The ocean is also the most important part of our planet and the existence of oceans is what turned earth from a dead planet into a living one.


----------



## JoanCrawford (Sep 27, 2012)

The ocean is a large gurgling mass of water. It sways in and off the shore, crashes on rocks, and creates an exuberant sound that is almost mystical in it's purity. It almost glides over the sand with a force that is both shocking and delicate.


I enclosed my answer in white above. This is very interesting.


----------



## jonkay1 (Aug 11, 2012)

My answer is also in white below.. and totally lacking in the poetry sector haha! I find the idea of this rather fascinating  I wish I looked at personality type when I was in school.

The ocean is a massive expanse of water. An ocean is heavy and deep, the biggest body of water you could find. It consumes and isolates islands of land. An ocean is powerful and potentially lethal. An ocean traps and segregates.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> My answer below in white as well. Truth is that I had problems with this, would be easier to just describe water.
> 
> The ocean is a vast and beautiful part of our planet, the largest part of our planet at that.
> The ocean is the origin of life as life first began in water. The ocean is also the most important part of our planet and the existence of oceans is what turned earth from a dead planet into a living one.





JoanCrawford said:


> The ocean is a large gurgling mass of water. It sways in and off the shore, crashes on rocks, and creates an exuberant sound that is almost mystical in it's purity. It almost glides over the sand with a force that is both shocking and delicate.
> 
> 
> I enclosed my answer in white above. This is very interesting.





jonkay1 said:


> My answer is also in white below.. and totally lacking in the poetry sector haha! I find the idea of this rather fascinating  I wish I looked at personality type when I was in school.
> 
> The ocean is a massive expanse of water. An ocean is heavy and deep, the biggest body of water you could find. It consumes and isolates islands of land. An ocean is powerful and potentially lethal. An ocean traps and segregates.


hah, look at the first sentence from each of us.


----------



## JoanCrawford (Sep 27, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> hah, look at the first sentence from each of us.


Great minds think alike? :3


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

Lol all you overachievers. 

Full sentences, grammar, nice vocabulary words. You're making me look bad


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

Hmm.

The ocean is the name given to the largest bodies of water (H2O) on planet Earth. The water contains high concentrations of dissolved salts due to repeated evaporation. Oceans cover approximately 2/3 of the Earth's surface and the deepest part of the ocean is approximately 11km deep.

(my answer in white above)


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

Alright, I'm gonna try to hide my text.

The ocean is vast and unpredictable. It's almost like the universe in that it's very difficult to fathom just how large it is. Even if you're speaking at the surface level, it stretches on seemingly forever, and yet there's a hidden depth to it that goes even further and is still unexplored. It can be calm or it can be rough and unmerciful. 

I guess that suggests more N than S.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Feels wet
Tastes salty
Has crabs


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

I wonder if this would be different in a group situation. Maybe a group of Ns working on a description would sound more "N" than individual Ns working on their own and likewise.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

dejavu said:


> Alright, I'm gonna try to hide my text.
> 
> The ocean is vast and unpredictable. It's almost like the universe in that it's very difficult to fathom just how large it is. Even if you're speaking at the surface level, it stretches on seemingly forever, and yet there's a hidden depth to it that goes even further and is still unexplored. It can be calm or it can be rough and unmerciful.
> 
> I guess that suggests more N than S.


I actually saw more S. 



Sounded like you were talking about all the various parts of the ocean. Dichotomies.
Ex: stretches forever, but lots of depth
rough or calm


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

I notice everyone seems to be being rather poetic or artistic about their descriptions. I'm not sure if my factual approach suggests S or N, or perhaps just T.


----------



## niffer (Dec 28, 2011)

* *




The blue stuff on the planet that is most connected to other large blobs of blue stuff. Huge amounts of water that fill up earth. Source of life as we know it. It moves in waves as is influenced by the moon. High tides and low tides fluctuate against the shore. It's like this really vast expanse that's full of all sorts of life that can live in salty water. It's extremely deep in some places and extremely shallow in others, typically near bodies of land. To humans it's basically the below ground counterpart of the sky; we can't explore it without all sorts of machinery. To most people it's quite mysterious and beautiful. It's kind of loud. The waves hitting the shore can make a roaring noise. Sometimes the wave motion creates really big, tall waves. Sometimes it does surprise things like tsunamis.


----------



## BlackMoonlight (Oct 16, 2012)

Strong and serene was the best way I could describe it. I'm not sure if that indicates N or S


----------



## Mammon (Jul 12, 2012)

Blue, wavy, calming, Sun light reflecting beauty, deep see, life, destruction if tsunami, uuuhhh holy shit my Sensing is overpowering! But I love it so fcking much :3 

I seriously need to work on my intuiting, been neglecting that stuff since the day I noticed things only gave pleasure if they could be manipulated and enjoyed in physical reality.

Done. Cool test, yo! :3


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Hi n__n

l like this thread a lot ^_^

l just said it was big and blue, herp dee derp.


----------



## Antipode (Jul 8, 2012)

I don't know how to make mine invisible :sad: but to me, the ocean isn't the ocean.

What the ocean is lies beneath the ocean. Lost under ages of shifting faces. Beneath that ocean lies something small and simple; a core that explains what the ocean really is. Simply put, the ocean is a collection of millions of drops of water; however, this only contributes as the face of the ocean. 

The ocean is everything, but it is also nothing.


----------



## asewland (Mar 5, 2012)

The ocean is blue and deep and dark. That's all i got :tongue:


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

This is easy to game for anyone who knows that N's use abstract language and S's use concrete language. If you ask the question spontaneously without telling people it relates to MBTI, then you'll get accurate answers.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

SuburbanLurker said:


> This is easy to game for anyone who knows that N's use abstract language and S's use concrete language. If you ask the question spontaneously without telling people it relates to MBTI, then you'll get accurate answers.


Very true. No pressure so true colors came out. It didn't seem like anyone expected MBTI to define them. It was just a fun class activity.

Edit: No pressure part was VERY big. Next part is in white: I have asked this question to other people outside of PerC (even those that don't know much about MBTI) and they got nervous and started over-thinking. Tried really hard to give an airtight response instead of going with their gut.


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

The ocean is unknowable yet fathomable.

Why are we all hiding our answers in white?


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Ellis Bell said:


> The ocean is unknowable yet fathomable.
> 
> Why are we all hiding our answers in white?


We're trying not to spoil the ocean for those who haven't seen it yet.


----------



## Herp (Nov 25, 2010)

I guess it was to the point:

The ocean is just a bunch of water with lots of things hidden underneath.


----------



## JoanCrawford (Sep 27, 2012)

Herp said:


> I guess it was to the point:
> 
> The ocean is just a bunch of water with lots of things hidden underneath.


Lol, I love how we N's almost over-complicate our descriptions and the S's are totally blunt about it...!


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

A vast body of water, which spans across the globe, crashing against the shores of every continent. It's powerful and uncontrollable, a whole new world teeming with life and mystery.


Hmmm.


----------



## Anubis (Nov 30, 2011)

blue stuff


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

So I gotta hide this, right? How do I do that? edit: Oh, I see. Text-colour. Gotcha.) 

"A surging mass of primal energy, at once calm, gentle, and life-giving; violent, turbulent and fatal. It nourishes, it destroys. It's older and deeper and holds more mystery than we can perceive. It is a dark, powerful, sleeping giant on whose whims and moods our entire being rests. 


Or something."


----------



## Murky Muse (Mar 19, 2010)

Look at my avatar. There you go. 

What? Not good enough. Fine. Highlight the below text. 

The ocean is an interesting place that covers roughly 70% of this planet we call home. Humanity knows less about it and its creatures than we do about outer-space. 
T


----------



## Emerson (Mar 13, 2011)

The ocean is the final frontier of understanding the Earth at least on a superficial level. It is by definition a giant expanse of water which has claimed many lives. To describe it one must describe many other things beforehand. We must create a binary system to understand what is liquid compared to solid. What its properties are and how they are perceived by our minds. It is a great task. Impossible even with such a short space of time.
Figure mine suggests N. Written a lot though, but mainly on a tangent regarding the concept of actually describing and its impossibility.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

This is cool, what class is this for? So, I spend about 10 minutes writing this poem; it's somewhat free form, didn't bother with metric feet, keeping a specific rhyme scheme, etc. Hmm, it would cool to get into sonneteering eventually. What do you think? Sensor or intuitive?

---

Ocean -- 

Blanket of the earth. 
An organism in itself
What stories does it tell? 

Tempestous and soothing
Reflection of human passions.

Water desert. 
Emptiness.

Layer upon layer
Of intricate complexity.

Blanket of hidden life.

Desert --

Blanket of the earth.
A corpse in itself.
What stories did it hear?

Scolding and preserving.
Reflection of the carnal state.

Sandy Ocean
Emptiness.

Waves of mystery
Cloaked in open simplicity.

Blanket of silent death.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

SputnikExperiment said:


> This is cool, what class is this for? So, I spend about 10 minutes writing this poem; it's somewhat free form, didn't bother with metric feet, keeping a specific rhyme scheme, etc. Hmm, it would cool to get into sonneteering eventually. What do you think? Sensor or intuitive?
> 
> ---
> 
> ...


You used words, so that makes you a sensate, as all the real intuitives responded psychically to the prompt


----------



## peabrane (Nov 1, 2009)

Part of Earth's hydrosphere and water cycle (assuming the 'the' in 'describe the ocean' refers specifically to Earth's ocean). The largest body of (circulating) saltwater on the planet, covering over two-thirds of its surface. Home to a variety of marine lifeforms. A major source of atmospheric oxygen and influence on the climate. Greenish blue in appearance.

I guess that does sound more S than N?


----------



## Rayos (Mar 28, 2012)

The ocean is a vast body of water, larger than a sea and in, most cases, high in saline content. It contains the highest biodiversity of any environment. While there is technically only one ocean, it is usually divide up into 5. In historical times, it was viewed as an insurmountable barrier but explorers such as Columbus demonstrated that this was not the case. Nowadays, vehicles such as ships and plans have made the ocean "smaller". It is also surprisingly easy to forget the immense power of the ocean, which has shown it to be a rather destructive force.

As with the other posts, my response is in white.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

I would describe the ocean as being a fun place to swim in. It's rather relaxing IMO.

I guess this makes me a sensor, because I don't wax lyrical about sands of time that are pulverized by the harsh suppression of the great big blue. The ocean and the sands that represent the natural nature of the human governments and such. The natural tides and the impending doom that the world will be subjected to. As we all fall into the depths of the ocean. A mass collection of human potential castrated by the rampaging goddess of the sea, with her knife twisting the collective reproductive system in it's weakest of place, and the womb to be fed to her nasty denizens. Erasing any traces of humanity ever existing in that particular spot in the first place. Dead, and alone. The surface world cannot see, because the surface world has been brought down to where the world originated. Most likely because the moon was destroyed by an evil villain and his satanic ray gun! Causing unpredictable tidal currents, that fuck with the world's plate tutonics or shit like that. It's kind of like unbirthing really! Which I don't recommend that you google it. Which you will though, and I will laugh at your expense! BOOOOSH!

Actually I should be doing this more. Shit is funsies.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Mysterious. Vast. Powerful. Essential. Feared. Respected. Admired. 

These were the first thoughts that came to mind. I can't be bothered constructing paragraphs at the moment.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

Big blue deepness, except for when it's not. Surrounds and holds the earth, but not in that way. Home to Nemo and any potential sequels. H20 in liquid form to suspend flora, fauna, and a few fluff fillers. Could use a better diet and some oil treatments. Oh yes and there's these things called continents that pseudo-seperate it into things that people call "oceans"...... how clever. Oceans of things to tell really, so it defies a moderate sized description like this but I'm keeping it anyway.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> This is easy to game for anyone who knows that N's use abstract language and S's use concrete language.


The other big problem being that they don't.

Well they do, but they do both. Depending on what you mean by abstract, you could be talking about something more relevant to "I or E?"


----------



## Iridescent (Dec 30, 2011)

My answer in white below. I was unsure whether I was ISTP or INTP before this. Now I'm pretty certain.

It's blue. And has waves. There are usually seagulls nearby. It's an amazing colour blue, almost cobalt, almost royal. Perfect place to be, as the wind hits your face and throws back the spray... Even though it's probably 60% fish piss.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

ElectricSparkle said:


> The other big problem being that they don't.
> 
> Well they do, but they do both. Depending on what you mean by abstract, you could be talking about something more relevant to "I or E?"


There's usually a preference for one type of language, though obviously we all use both types to an extent. Abstract language refers to intangible properties (e.g. vast, unfathomable, beautiful, volatile). Also, S's would be more inclined to write about details, while N's would generalize more.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

*My question is:* Do you guys cheat yourselves into being either S or N based on what you like more?...because obviously once you undestand what the answer in *sensor-ish* or* intuitive-ish* is, you can define the ocean in a way that fits your preference.

Interesting thread thou.










*My answer:*

I haven't been to the ocean so I don't know how to define it other then through what I know about it. According to my understanding the ocean is mother to us all, has sheltered life for who knows how long. If I think about it in this sense, a feeling of gratitude comes to me. I and the ocean are connected through time and space as it is part of and reason for my current state & existance as much as every event from beginning of time till the present moment. Without it I would not exist and neither would anyone else here.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> There's usually a preference for one type of language, though obviously we all use both types to an extent. Abstract language refers to intangible properties (e.g. vast, unfathomable, beautiful, volatile). Also, S's would be more inclined to write about details, while N's would generalize more.


I think "abstract language" isn't very much in the realm of intuition actually. Considering that intuition is simply bringing forth content from the unconscious to the conscious and such. It's actually just as primal of a way of perception as sensing is. It's just that intuition checks for the potential of something instead of the actual object actual qualities(se), or what the object invokes in the person (si).

JungYesMBTIno made a post somewhere about how such language would actually be a quality of feeling actually. Though it's probably just pretentiousness if nothing else. *Shrug*


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

@St Vual

o.o imo difference between S & N would be as follows:

*S:* define it as it is, details, what it is useful for etc.

*N* to define it as something that transends the obvious. To link it to a different deeper meaning, something only to be seen through the mind's eye. For intuitives this is a natural tendency especially Ne seems to use this cross contextual thinking, where the user by default bridges the gap between two seeingly unrelated things & brings them together.

o.o once you know this, you can speak both S & N, because anyone can speak S & N.

For example when someone looks at my running wolf signature they see the moon, snow and a beutifully fluid animation of a wold running through the winter moonlit landscape. ^^ when I look at it, I see my quest for meaning, I chose that gif because it is simbolic to me in a subjective way.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> *My question is:* Do you guys cheat yourselves into being either S or N based on what you like more?...because obviously once you undestand what the answer in *sensor-ish* or* intuitive-ish* is, you can define the ocean in a way that fits your preference.
> 
> Interesting thread thou.


Then the obvious fact is that you know your preference. You aren't deciding your type for anyone except yourself and you got nothing to prove to anyone.
Let's for example say that you answered it in an "N way" (even if you find that it's unnatural to you and that your way of explaining it is that of a sensor). Would you then be an intuitive or a sensor?

I think your question suffers the paradox of understanding that you are one or the other to be able trick yourself (in which case you wouldn't be tricked).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

* *




Water is the collection of particles primarily consisting of the atoms H and O forming clusters of two hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom, often referred to as H2O. An ocean is thus a collection of H2O particles at a very grand scale by separating continents apart.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Then the obvious fact is that you know your preference. You aren't deciding your type for anyone except yourself and you got nothing to prove to anyone.
> Let's for example say that you answered it in an "N way" (even if you find that it's unnatural to you and that your way of explaining it is that of a sensor). Would you then be an intuitive or a sensor?
> 
> I think your question suffers the paradox of understanding that you are one or the other to be able trick yourself (in which case you wouldn't be tricked).


Not if we consider that I am in denial or doubting, internally blind & unable to clearly chose a preference. I could be subconciously decieving myself or going with my subjective preference, completely blind to the bigger picture of who I am. Looking at things either way is very easy imo S or N, neither requires effort.

I guess the question would be : Do you trust that you won't decieve yourself for whatever reason? Its like I am me, but there is another me within me that may fool me :/ haha.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FreeBeer said:


> I chose that gif because it is simbolic to me in a subjective way.


Don't forget that Fi can be abstract too. What you described sounds more like Fi than intuition to me.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

JoanCrawford said:


> Lol, I love how we N's almost over-complicate our descriptions and the S's are totally blunt about it...!


For your information, I think your answer was actually very Si-focused.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

peabrane said:


> Part of Earth's hydrosphere and water cycle (assuming the 'the' in 'describe the ocean' refers specifically to Earth's ocean). The largest body of (circulating) saltwater on the planet, covering over two-thirds of its surface. Home to a variety of marine lifeforms. A major source of atmospheric oxygen and influence on the climate. Greenish blue in appearance.
> 
> I guess that does sound more S than N?


No, it's a T response.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> Not if we consider that I am in denial or doubting, internally blind & unable to clearly chose a preference. I could be subconciously decieving myself or going with my subjective preference, completely blind to the bigger picture of who I am. Looking at things either way is very easy imo S or N, neither requires effort.
> 
> I guess the question would be : Do you trust that you won't decieve yourself for whatever reason? Its like I am me, but there is another me within me that may fool me :/ haha.


Only works if you cheat 
How would you know how an intuitive answers the question if you haven't seen the answer made by one (or a sensor).
You'd likely answer in a way you think is intuitive, but would be a sensory way of describing it. (If you don't cheat and look at the answers made by people)


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

LeaT said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*Oxygen :tongue:



LeaT said:


> No, it's a T response.


Hmm, that's the problem. People are going to use their primary function, whether it is a perceiving function or a judging one. My response was similar to that one because of Ti, so someone would probably say I'm a sensor, but I'm much more certain that I'm an INTP. If you asked me to make connections or find meanings surrounding the topic of 'the ocean', then I would engage Ne, but it's not my most natural state.


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

The Ocean is a blue blanket that envelopes our earth,
Giving it's name of "The Blue Planet".
It is salty,
Due to the accumulation of billions of years of minerals,
It has divided our world for centuries,
Only being conquered on a surface level with the rise of the colonial powers.
It's murky depths are out unknown frontier,
We know more about the surface of our moon than the Ocean floor.
It's depths hide the process in which are continents move,
The heated Lava pouring out the trenches shifting the very world we live on.

The ocean is a source of life and death,
With one hand it's natural disaster have wiped out fictional and non-fictional civilizations,
Whilst shaping others,
It's wave hiding so many ancient cities,
Like Alexandria(half of it),
Or possibly Atlantis.

It supports a variety of life un-seen on the surface world,
Full of colors, shapes and sizes,
From the mightiest blue whale,
To the smallest Sardine.

So In the end the Earth is an integral part of our home world,
Making it special and different,
taking with one hand and giving with the other!

Well, there is my description ^
Not sure what I'd be counted as haha ​


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

A blue thing, with sea animals.

xD


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Only works if you cheat
> How would you know how an intuitive answers the question if you haven't seen the answer made by one (or a sensor).
> You'd likely answer in a way you think is intuitive, but would be a sensory way of describing it. (If you don't cheat and look at the answers made by people)


o.o hmm you have a point. I assumed I can just follow the logic as to what makes it intuitive & then apply it. I haven't seen someone diasssemble a laptop before either, no prior experience either, but that has never stopped me from disassembling one & fixing it. I haven't written before either, I don't read all that much, but I was surprisingly good at it when I tried writing. * you never know how unless you try, some people just know by instinct how to fly.*

Was my description that far off?  I made it up as I wrote it.

@firedell

:laughing: thx for the laugh


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

LeaT said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, that's a Ti description if I've ever seen one. Takes me back to Geometry...


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

It seems like anyone who has a sense of poetry in their souls, and a good dictionary inside of their head, will be typed as an intuitive.


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

St Vual said:


> It seems like anyone who has a sense of poetry in their souls, and a good dictionary inside of their head, will be typed as an intuitive.


And anyone with a preference for a factual explanation (or who simply assumes the question asked for facts rather than poetry) will be typed as a sensor. I think the vagueness of the question is the problem. People will end up using their judging functions to decide how to interpret the question (factually or artistically) and it ends up being a test to distinguish thinkers and feelers.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

FreeBeer said:


> @_firedell_
> 
> :laughing: thx for the laugh


Well, it's true. 

In my opinion, apart from the obvious look of the ocean, maybe the sound of it (I was going to mention it makes whoosing sounds) and it's function how else would you describe the ocean? It's something that is physical not metaphysical, so to me it's obviously going to get that kind of response. 

But thinking about it, is the ocean really blue, or is it a reflection of something? idk.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Well, that's a Ti description if I've ever seen one. Takes me back to Geometry...


Actually, it's Te. 


Watch Key Phone said:


> *Oxygen :tongue:


Yeah, I thought something was wrong somewhere...


> Hmm, that's the problem. People are going to use their primary function, whether it is a perceiving function or a judging one. My response was similar to that one because of Ti, so someone would probably say I'm a sensor, but I'm much more certain that I'm an INTP. If you asked me to make connections or find meanings surrounding the topic of 'the ocean', then I would engage Ne, but it's not my most natural state.


Agreed.


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

firedell said:


> Well, it's true.
> 
> In my opinion, apart from the obvious look of the ocean, maybe the sound of it (I was going to mention it makes whoosing sounds) and it's function how else would you describe the ocean? It's something that is physical not metaphysical, so to me it's obviously going to get that kind of response.
> 
> But thinking about it, is the ocean really blue, or is it a reflection of something? idk.


Water actually is slightly blue (you can tell when you have a bath full of water indoors) but part of the apparent colour of the sea is reflection from the sky.


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

Forget typing in white text. That's a bitch to read. I lost my train of thought in the middle of half of this anyway. I wanted to go somewhere with it but my mind wandered a bit.


* *




The ocean is not only filled with what is considered to be earth's biggest commodity, but symbolically it represents the very thing that it supports- life. Despite the irony that much of the world's ocean water cannot be consumed by humans due to the potential for disease and poisoning from certain chemicals, the ocean houses a plethora of life forms from the photic zone to the abysmal depths of the aphotic zone, nearing the earth's crust. The ocean is almost like the psyche as described by Freud in some way- where the top is all that others are able to see and imagine most readily, while the ocean floor is where the repressed id begins. Not only does the ocean have inspirational levels of depth that very few will ever achieve in their lifetimes, but it has a great deal of breadth. This breath could symbolize the potential for opportunities, or inspire a fervent curiosity in some to see what lies on the other end of various horizons.


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

LeaT said:


> Actually, it's Te.


Surely it's hard to tell the difference in a case like this? Ti will come across like Te when it's being expressed outwardly in an explanation, there's no avoiding that.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

LeaT said:


> Don't forget that Fi can be abstract too. What you described sounds more like Fi than intuition to me.


I applied value judgment & gave the ocean a human face to which I connected subjective feelings (my own). Yeah 100% pure Fi there. Nice textbook Te approach in yours btw.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

Everyone's little snippet about the ocean was always tied to death and life or whatever.

I feel disappointed that I didn't go on a diatribe about communism is evil in my own little thing. It makes me feel not very unique :C. I linked it up to government, but then I had to be cliche. At least you guys know what unbirthing is though.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Take two:


* *




But the ocean represents many things with its vastness and depth, especially the cycle of life with the way the tide flows, just like the heart itself is beating. Indeed, water is an essential aspect of all life. Just like the human body, the water is full with various creatures ranging from large to small, and their existences are crucial when determining the state of the planet itself. Indeed, water is often likened to a life force, the blood of the planet, and just like the human body everything needs to be in balance in order for us to function and thrive.

But there is also another aspect of the ocean where the surface merely reflects that which we can immediately see but underneath the surface lurks many secrets hidden from the very naked eye. Yet water itself does not hide as much as it murkens. Human emotion is often metaphorically represented with water phenomena. Rain represents sadness and loss, chaotic streams and tides that of uncontrollable emotions, dark or muddied waters that of troubled feelings but lack of insight and the depth of water bodies themselves representing the depths of our hearts. 

This leads us back to the human body and how water is a crucial element of life and jhow we as human beings cannot function without it. We may claim lack of emotion but there is always something lurking underneath the surface hidden and veiled from the naked eye residing in the depths of of our psyche ultimately reflecting the content of our hearts.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Watch Key Phone said:


> Surely it's hard to tell the difference in a case like this? Ti will come across like Te when it's being expressed outwardly in an explanation, there's no avoiding that.


No, it is Te. It's Te because I refer to external data. I'm not making up my own system. 



FreeBeer said:


> I applied value judgment & gave the ocean a human face to which I connected subjective feelings (my own). Yeah 100% pure Fi there. Nice textbook Te approach in yours btw.


Yes. I know, unfortunately it was. My mind blanked out so I just defaulted back to Te. I gave a difference example above that I think reflects my actual cognition better.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

LeaT said:


> No, it is Te. It's Te because I refer to external data. I'm not making up my own system.


No, Ti is internalized thinking. (As explained by all/most major players in typology and Naomi Quenk)
Or what, are Ti doms forced to make up a system for whatever they do? What do you think of that @arkigos?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> No, Ti is internalized thinking. (As explained by all/most major players in typology and Naomi Quenk)
> Or what, are Ti doms forced to make up a system for whatever they do? What do you think of that @_arkigos_?


Internalized lmao? You mean introverted right? Ti makes up its own logical systems just like Fi makes up its own ethical systems. Fe can refer to external systems yes, but the way it does so is different to Te because Te refers to impersonal data, Fe refers personal data e.g. traits, behaviors and such the Fe user has observed in people. 

Am I saying that Ti cannot reference external data? No, I'm not. But is the external data reference the primary point of Ti? No, it's not. Ti works with logical principles in order to create subjective logical systems. That's the difference between Ti and Te. Te simply refers to what is and already exists, Ti creates something new and subjective to the Ti user.

I also think it's cute you need to mention arkigos as if he's some kind of authority on the subject when he's not. Why not mention someone as @_Abraxas_ or @_JungyesMBTIno_ instead? Or are you afraid that they will dissent with your point of view? Heck, while I'm at it, why not even mention @LiquidLight. I may not always agree with these people but if I have to mention anyone on this forum who I think are the most knowledgeable when it comes to Jungian psychology and who are the most well-read, it's these three.


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

LeaT said:


> No, it is Te. It's Te because I refer to external data. I'm not making up my own system.


How would you make up your own system when describing the ocean? A question like that pretty much demands an objective explanation, even from a Ti user. What would a Ti response look like in your opinion?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Watch Key Phone said:


> How would you make up your own system when describing the ocean? A question like that pretty much demands an objective explanation, even from a Ti user. What would a Ti response look like in your opinion?


Focus more on factual details that doesn't describe the ocean by already established systems. I can't think of any good example but I was discussing this with an ENTP yesterday about how one would describe the differences between two bird species. The ENTP would say something like, Bird A eats X and Bird B eats Y, but I'm more likely to say, taxanomically, they are different species because ABC. Do you understand the difference?


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Watch Key Phone said:


> How would you make up your own system when describing the ocean? A question like that pretty much demands an objective explanation, even from a Ti user. What would a Ti response look like in your opinion?


I made up a system for describing the ocean... It's a very simple one. I wanted to be funny with a sexual undertone. What I came up with was wet, salty, and has crabs.

Otherwise, I use external data to identify underlying principle/logic. I'm all about the framework. I can come to the same conclusions as Te users, but not until I understand it at an experiential level. Te and Ti are both empirical; one is evidence based, the other is experiential. Just my opinion though.


----------



## Watch Key Phone (Mar 29, 2013)

LeaT said:


> Focus more on factual details that doesn't describe the ocean by already established systems. I can't think of any good example but I was discussing this with an ENTP yesterday about how one would describe the differences between two bird species. The ENTP would say something like, Bird A eats X and Bird B eats Y, but I'm more likely to say, taxanomically, they are different species because ABC. Do you understand the difference?





PaladinX said:


> I made up a system for describing the ocean... It's a very simple one. I wanted to be funny with a sexual undertone. What I came up with was wet, salty, and has crabs.
> 
> Otherwise, I use external data to identify underlying principle/logic. I'm all about the framework. I can come to the same conclusions as Te users, but not until I understand it at an experiential level. Te and Ti are both empirical; one is evidence based, the other is experiential. Just my opinion though.


I see what you (both) mean now, thanks.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

LeaT said:


> I also think it's cute you need to mention arkigos as if he's some kind of authority on the subject when he's not. Why not mention someone as @_Abraxas_ or @_JungyesMBTIno_ instead? Or are you afraid that they will dissent with your point of view? Heck, while I'm at it, why not even mention @_LiquidLight_. I may not always agree with these people but if I have to mention anyone on this forum who I think are the most knowledgeable when it comes to Jungian psychology and who are the most well-read, it's these three.


 @arkigos is a friend and an INTP, I suppose you have to have one to understand. I could've mentioned @NighTi as well since he is also a friend, but he's not an INTP.
That part of my post wasn't to support what I said, but rather to just ask a friend.

FYI. I find @Doctorjuice to be more of an authority figure.

The people you mentioned are only human and their constant influx of encouragement does so they don't feel a need to improve their knowledge. Also, by what I have observed then those 3 don't know as much as they seem to, you definetly haven't learned anything in particular from them.


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

I'm liking the way the NT answers and the NF answers are as unlike each other as any of the potential S/N answers. To be perfectly honest, I'm seeing more Feeler/Thinker dichotomies here. The Ts go for facts and info, the Fs go for waxing lyrical. 

The point of any test/quiz/exercise like this (the MBTI itself included) is to discern the natural reaction (thus functional preference) of an individual. But the individual will sometimes act not on their natural preference but on their perceived one. Any of us can get any answer we want out of the MBTI because we all know now the basic premises behind each type (which is more or less what @_FreeBeer_ is saying, I believe.) Stuff like this is, and the MBTI itself is, only ever as accurate as the person answering is honest with themselves. 

Here was my honest (honest!) reaction to the OP's challenge:

"Describe the ocean", it said. I immediately thought of the ocean in the way one sees a painting or photograph. As a still shot, but one that can move if I let it. I can frame it in day or night, calm or turbulent, empty or filled with boats, swimmers, buoys, etc. In my mind it was dusk, the ocean was reflecting a deep, dark purpley-blue. It was not still but slightly unsettled in a "calm before the storm" sense. It was totally empty, no sea-traffic an' all that. The scenery resembles a coastline I often visited in my childhood summers, only I was never there at dusk. Still, the geography was much the same.

I took in that image and felt and urge to interpret the feelings I got from it into words. To recreate my impression of the ocean. It never once dawned on me to talk about the ocean in scientific or specific terms. Rather I sought to sum up the ocean's actual and symbolic significance to life and our world. I did consciously desire to be vaguely poetic too, if I'm honest. 

I'm not really sure if N plays much of a role here. To me it seems to be an imaginative Fi-Si loop, drawing on my Si to recreate a scene of the ocean on which I can based my inner, emotional reaction. 

Thing is, as an INFP, I use Ne and Si. As an exercise, this all occurs internally. We are asked to describe something that we cannot see at this present moment (unless you actually live by the sea and went to take a look before writing), so we call upon our memories or our imagination to form that description. Memory and imagination are introverted, and thus I'd say it tells us more about Ni or Si users rather than N and S generally. As noted by a few people, the impressions we then give seem divided more by our F/T divide than N/S.

Maybe. They be my thoughts, anyway...


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

Watch Key Phone said:


> How would you make up your own system when describing the ocean? A question like that pretty much demands an objective explanation, even from a Ti user. What would a Ti response look like in your opinion?


My answer followed the same line as @PaladinX. My answer looks abstract at first glance (talking about the ocean being unknowable yet fathomable), but my system hinged on the idea that the word fathomable has multiple meanings: both knowable and, literally, able to be measured in fathoms. As people post their answers, you can kind of tell what functions are coming out. It's not really about the difference between S and N.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> @_arkigos_ is a friend and an INTP, I suppose you have to have one to understand. I could've mentioned @_NighTi_ as well since he is also a friend, but he's not an INTP.
> That part of my post wasn't to support what I said, but rather to just ask a friend.


Then why not say that you cannot determine whether something is Te or Ti and you rather ask someone who knows better than you?


> FYI. I find @_Doctorjuice_ to be more of an authority figure.


Except he's not active and I wouldn't consider his type and function descriptions particularly deep although conceptually, he still understands things better than you or arkigos do. 


> The people you mentioned are only human and their constant influx of encouragement does so they don't feel a need to improve their knowledge. Also, by what I have observed then those 3 don't know as much as they seem to, you definetly haven't learned anything in particular from them.


They don't know as much they think they do...? That's one of the best things I've heard in a long time. Thank for giving the free laughter. I've learned plenty from reading LiquidLight's posts, and Abraxas' too. I don't always agree with JungyesMBTIno and LiquidLight in particular (I suspect it's because cognitively we don't favor the same functions, Abraxas is clearly Fi-Te and ego-consciously double-introverted) but I still respect them because they know their shit. Especially when compared to you.


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

@LeaT
@_Acerbusvenator_

I find describing the ocean too simple a thing to be indicative whether someone has a preference for Te or Ti. For instance, had I not read this thread, I could've very easily come up with a description very similar to LeaT's. 

Also, I think it's very difficult to find a single event or single statement uttered by a person to be enough to safely assume they are one type or another or prefer one function over another. I'm sure there are times in my life where I spewed out facts and referenced external data like a mofo. I _guess_ you could argue that I was _using_ Te at the time...

Anyway, multiple events need to be considered before safely coming to a conclusion about someone's type or preference. Once you have been around a person enough you can start to _feel_ their tendency or attraction towards one function over another.

That's my two cents.



> Am I saying that Ti cannot reference external data? No, I'm not. But is the external data reference the primary point of Ti? No, it's not. Ti works with logical principles in order to create subjective logical systems. That's the difference between Ti and Te. Te simply refers to what is and already exists, Ti creates something new and subjective to the Ti user.


Yeah, this is on target imo. 




> Focus more on factual details that doesn't describe the ocean by already established systems. I can't think of any good example but I was discussing this with an ENTP yesterday about how one would describe the differences between two bird species. The ENTP would say something like, Bird A eats X and Bird B eats Y, but I'm more likely to say, taxanomically, they are different species because ABC.




Hm, sounds good in theory. But I'm still reserved because explanations of well-known things might be too simple a thing to really exemplify such differences. Unless, you look at multiple descriptions they have said.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Doctorjuice said:


> I find describing the ocean too simple a thing to be indicative whether someone has a preference for Te or Ti. For instance, had I not read this thread, I could've very easily come up with a description very similar to LeaT's.
> 
> Also, I think it's very difficult to find a single event or single statement uttered by a person to be enough to safely assume they are one type or another or prefer one function over another. I'm sure there are times in my life where I spewed out facts and referenced external data like a mofo. I _guess_ you could argue that I was _using_ Te at the time...
> 
> ...




I completely agree, I was personally thinking about adding something like this to a questionnaire since it might add another form of question to add up information about the person from different aspects.




> > Am I saying that Ti cannot reference external data? No, I'm not. But is the external data reference the primary point of Ti? No, it's not. Ti works with logical principles in order to create subjective logical systems. That's the difference between Ti and Te. Te simply refers to what is and already exists, Ti creates something new and subjective to the Ti user.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is on target imo.


I find it to be a bit off.
Maybe I depend too much on Naomi Quenk's work, but I find her to be very correct.




> Introverted Thinking types may find their Extraverted Thinking colleagues to be lacking in depth and conceptual clarity, too quick to reveal their thinking process to others, and likely to not think things through well enough. Extraverted Thinking types may see their Introverted Thinking type counterparts as obtuse, obscure, esoteric in their interests, unnecessarily complex, and perhaps withholding and unwilling to share their thoughts with others.







> Introverted Feeling types may see their Extraverted Feeling associates as insincere and nondiscriminating in their expression of Feeling values, intrusive and overbearing in their focus on establishing and maintaining harmony for the people in their environment, and likely to choose breadth rather than depth of feeling. Extraverted Feeling types may feel unsureabout the values of their Introverted Feeling friends and colleagues. They may experience doubts about whether they are appreciated, may feel criticized, and may perceive (often accurately) the Introverted Feeling type’s judgment that the Extraverted Feeling type lacks depth.





> an ESTJ, whose typical type dynamics suggest habitual use of Extraverted Thinking and Introverted Sensing, is able to introvert Thinking *by silently considering the logical consequences of a decision* and to *extravert Sensing by seeking out sensory experiences in the outside world as fully as possible.*






> > Focus more on factual details that doesn't describe the ocean by already established systems. I can't think of any good example but I was discussing this with an ENTP yesterday about how one would describe the differences between two bird species. The ENTP would say something like, Bird A eats X and Bird B eats Y, but I'm more likely to say, taxanomically, they are different species because ABC.
> 
> 
> 
> Hm, sounds good in theory. But I'm still reserved because explanations of well-known things might be too simple a thing to really exemplify such differences. Unless, you look at multiple descriptions they have said.


Yea, I find this to be too general. According to this I would be a Ti user.


----------



## PyrLove (Jun 6, 2010)

only words...

Massive, ever moving, skin of the earth, amoeba-like, engulfing, swallowing, destructive, deceptive, necessary


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

I have to agree with @Moss Icon where he says that this would probably be a little more tell-tale of Ni vs Si especially.


----------



## littleblackdress (Feb 24, 2013)

Answer: 
* *




The ocean. Well, the ocean covers more than half our planet in water it is visible from space and is what gives our planet its characteristic "blue" colour. Metaphorically "the ocean" is described as profound - the vastness of being. Its surface can rage and beneath the storm, life goes on per usual. The ocean often also metaphorically signifies mystery - things hidden in the depths. It is likely the source of all life. The ocean is often used in context of frustration, as well, the vastness of uselessness - because sailors when lost at sea have water all around them and cannot drink it. The Ocean. It is used as a trademark, often signifying some level of purity or complexity - OceanSpray Cranberry Juice, for example. Or Ocean Sea food.


 EDITED *because my computer hates this site.*


----------



## littleblackdress (Feb 24, 2013)

firedell said:


> Well, it's true.
> 
> 
> But thinking about it, is the ocean really blue, or is it a reflection of something? idk.


 Water molecules are actually blue. That is why the sky is blue - reflecting water.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

littleblackdress said:


> Water molecules are actually blue. That is why the sky is blue - reflecting water.


My toilet water is clear unless I put 2000 Flushes in the tank or when I forget to flush.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Yea, I find this to be too general. According to this I would be a Ti user.


Maybe because the answer you provided before which is this: 


> The ocean is a vast and beautiful part of our planet, the largest part of our planet at that.
> The ocean is the origin of life as life first began in water. The ocean is also the most important part of our planet and the existence of oceans is what turned earth from a dead planet into a living one.


Is actually very Fe-tinted...?


----------



## littleblackdress (Feb 24, 2013)

PaladinX said:


> My toilet water is clear unless I put 2000 Flushes in the tank or when I forget to flush.


Blue pee... That IS interesting... you might want to have that checked


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

littleblackdress said:


> Blue pee... That IS interesting... you might want to have that checked


It's not pee, but good point! :O


----------



## ebullientcorner (Oct 5, 2012)

I haven't read any of the thread, and here ya go:



the big blue wet thing. Kidding! (Homage to the Muppets ya?) 

The unassuming side of God that is past feeling. There is nothing to appeal, just pure natural mystery in it's infinite depths. A trickery in safety and complacency. A salty reminder of mortality and smallness.


And Scene.


----------



## JoanCrawford (Sep 27, 2012)

LeaT said:


> For your information, I think your answer was actually very Si-focused.


Really!? That's kind of cool, I mean I suppose it is one of my functions. ;-)


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

Here goes:

Harboring life, wide, dynamic, moving, colorful, cyclical, wet


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

LeaT said:


> Is actually very Fe-tinted...?


I doubt your ability to type people. Actually scratch that, I KNOW you can't type, I have observed you completely missing the mark and not listening to the person you are typing because that would mean that it's actually possible for you to be wrong.

Also, my answer was mainly about the functionality of the ocean and its part in the development of life. What is Fe about that? Or is something HEAVY Fe as soon as the word "beautiful" is used when describing?

And here I thought you just annoyed me because you can't hold a logical discussion with me without trying to offend me. After all, this escalated right after my first post which simply pointed out that Ti doesn't reinvent the wheel.



> No, Ti is internalized thinking. (As explained by all/most major players in typology and Naomi Quenk)
> Or what, are Ti doms forced to make up a system for whatever they do? What do you think of that @_arkigos_?


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

First, @_St Vual_ - Your posts are delightful. 

Okay, now for some ocean describing-ing. I was very strongly compelled to recall my sensory impressions of the ocean to do this... so, I am going to do two descriptions, one following the 'just describe it' convention and one as I would more naturally ... er, do - spoiled AND white!:


* *




I did not understand in any way what the ocean was until I was in it. I was on a cruise ship, in the middle of the night, in a swirling wind and light rain. I was absorbing this moment and taking great feeling and joy from the cold and the myriad sensations of the wind and rain. I looked out to the black sea. It terrified me and I imagined myself in it, alone. The ship was gone, the lights were gone, and I was wading. I put the terror from my mind (I am very very very afraid of many aspects of this vision) and simply existed in that moment. I wanted to BE THERE and comprehend it as it might be in an hour, when the invasive lights, sounds, wake, life and presence of the ship faded into the distance. 

I suppose that the ocean is solitude and endless alone. I see the ocean as countless souls must surely have seen it throughout the wide histories of our world.... as the realm of terrifying unknown, but also of a longing... of possibilities, of safety in the unknown, of escape from the very real and known dangers of the connected land. The ocean is the realm of the intrepid, the connector of the world as much as the benevolent wall of civilizations. I imagined all the times that unknown ships appeared on the horizon, irrevocably changing the whole narrative of the world... I think of all the unfathomable times that sailors, travelers, slaves looked up at the stars or charted them to find their way. I think of starvation and death, of the wasting of the sea and how it is not our realm, not our place, and has killed, horrible, or driven mad, so many who have foolishly entered it not comprehending or appreciating it's alien heart or the power it possesses to crush us or dry us up, or infect us. We even lack means of effectively describing it in a comprehensive yet meaningful way. I see the ocean as cruel and dead, like the creatures that are in it. Unfeeling and unknowing.





St Vual said:


> It seems like anyone who has a sense of poetry in their souls, and a good dictionary inside of their head, will be typed as an intuitive.


I agree. We all have N. Literally all of us... and can all invoke it with varying degrees of maturity, consciousness, and ease. The N / S dichotomy is false inasmuch as it presents them as being either present or absent... rather, they are either consciously/directly utilized or subconsciously/indirectly utilized. However, this has real observable consequences that can be codified to a good extent. It's not a lost cause.



Watch Key Phone said:


> Surely it's hard to tell the difference in a case like this? Ti will come across like Te when it's being expressed outwardly in an explanation, there's no avoiding that.


It can be perceived as Te, but I believe there are often, though certainly not always, notable differences. I, for example, upon reading the post that spawned this particular debate, immediately thought "that's Te". For what it's worth. However, one statement that is 'Te' could potentially come from an Ti user, perhaps because they ate too many pancakes that morning. It's always wise to base judgments on an aggregate, I'd imagine. 


Acerbusvenator said:


> No, Ti is internalized thinking. (As explained by all/most major players in typology and Naomi Quenk)
> Or what, are Ti doms forced to make up a system for whatever they do? What do you think of that @_arkigos_?





LeaT said:


> Internalized lmao? You mean introverted right? Ti makes up its own logical systems just like Fi makes up its own ethical systems. Fe can refer to external systems yes, but the way it does so is different to Te because Te refers to impersonal data, Fe refers personal data e.g. traits, behaviors and such the Fe user has observed in people.
> 
> Am I saying that Ti cannot reference external data? No, I'm not. But is the external data reference the primary point of Ti? No, it's not. Ti works with logical principles in order to create subjective logical systems. That's the difference between Ti and Te. Te simply refers to what is and already exists, Ti creates something new and subjective to the Ti user.
> 
> I also think it's cute you need to mention arkigos as if he's some kind of authority on the subject when he's not. Why not mention someone as @_Abraxas_ or @_JungyesMBTIno_ instead? Or are you afraid that they will dissent with your point of view? Heck, while I'm at it, why not even mention @_LiquidLight_. I may not always agree with these people but if I have to mention anyone on this forum who I think are the most knowledgeable when it comes to Jungian psychology and who are the most well-read, it's these three.


'Cute'? How peculiarly glib! I suspect that if you reread this all in context you will observe that your implicit accusation is misplaced. I believe that Acerbus, who only rarely and incidentally ever agrees with me and also who has repeatedly implied and I think even directly stated that he does not see me as an authority, did not pull me here to get a free backing from a known authority. I can only assume that you have not followed much of our interactions, or you would not have made such an odd error in judgment. 

Your judgment of me as not being an authority is accurate. I am not and do not desire to be an authority on what is already understood about Jung. I am an explorer, who mostly uses this forum as an arena to contemplate knew(?! NEW!) perspectives on Jung. The whole process of innovation and discovery is wrought with error and I hope that people do, as I often ask them to do, take my perspective with a grain of salt. I feel, despite my nature as an explorer, I can often provide some useful perspective... especially when speaking of myself. I can only imagine you will be the judge of that. All this talk of authority is absurd to me. An authority can and is often wrong, because situations are fluid and nuanced. 

One might think it wise to pull in someone who might have an interesting perspective on Ti into the conversation. Hell, why not an INTP? Better yet, why not one you know and who you know is interested in this sort of thing? Brilliant!

Also, 'internalized' vs 'introverted'. They literally mean the exact same thing. Internal and intro both mean 'within'. -ize is to act or to change the state of (most action verbs would work to describe this) ... -vert is to 'turn or to flip'. You want to argue the interpretable semantics of 'to turn inside' and 'to <insert action verb, such as 'turn'> inside'?


Watch Key Phone said:


> How would you make up your own system when describing the ocean? A question like that pretty much demands an objective explanation, even from a Ti user. What would a Ti response look like in your opinion?


I tried explain this like 10 times, but erased every one. A good trick to determine what you internalize (sorry, introvert!) is what sort of things you accept input on and what sorts of things you don't. As a Ti/Ne, I eagerly seek for new perspectives and *want to hear everyone's perspective first and foremost *at least until I feel I grasp it. What I am not interested in is their conclusion, which is often useless to me because it tells me little of their process or perspective (comprehension, interpretation). Once I have all possible perspectives in mind, I analyze them for inconsistencies.... deeply, internally. If someone points out an inconsistency, I stop and introvert... determining in myself, for myself, with myself, if I see the same. I will decide in myself what is inconsistent. This is probably an ego thing. If they frame it as a new perspective, I'll want to hear it and will essentially take it at face value. It's just a perspective, after all. 

This may be much more true of INTP than ISTP, mostly because of the influence of Ne/Si, but, yes, I DO make up my own system for describing the ocean, and am uninterested in the systems of others. I don't think that this is a universal Ti thing since I am not certain that I have observed ISTPs doing this. 


LeaT said:


> Focus more on factual details that doesn't describe the ocean by already established systems. I can't think of any good example but I was discussing this with an ENTP yesterday about how one would describe the differences between two bird species. The ENTP would say something like, Bird A eats X and Bird B eats Y, but I'm more likely to say, taxanomically, they are different species because ABC. Do you understand the difference?


The only problem that I have with this is that it is showing Ti under the influence of Ne and Te under the presumable influence of Ni. This suffers from the fact that examples like this cannot isolate Te and Ti into a void and thus leaves the scenario open to interpretation. 



PaladinX said:


> I use external data to identify underlying principle/logic. I'm all about the framework. I can come to the same conclusions as Te users, but not until I understand it at an experiential level. Te and Ti are both empirical; one is evidence based, the other is experiential. Just my opinion though.


Rather, you use external data, distilled and cherrypicked from, to determine your own logical framework. Te types great a group framework and check for consistency to it. Ti would presumably gather as many frameworks as possible to determine their own subjective one.... which the Te folk may or may not find worth of replacing the group framework they currently have. That's my perspective, at least. That isn't to say that Ti can't humor the group framework, but cognitively they would only accept it in subjective terms.



Moss Icon said:


> I'm liking the way the NT answers and the NF answers are as unlike each other as any of the potential S/N answers. To be perfectly honest, I'm seeing more Feeler/Thinker dichotomies here. The Ts go for facts and info, the Fs go for waxing lyrical.
> 
> I'm not really sure if N plays much of a role here. To me it seems to be an imaginative Fi-Si loop, drawing on my Si to recreate a scene of the ocean on which I can based my inner, emotional reaction.
> 
> Thing is, as an INFP, I use Ne and Si. As an exercise, this all occurs internally. We are asked to describe something that we cannot see at this present moment (unless you actually live by the sea and went to take a look before writing), so we call upon our memories or our imagination to form that description. Memory and imagination are introverted, and thus I'd say it tells us more about Ni or Si users rather than N and S generally. As noted by a few people, the impressions we then give seem divided more by our F/T divide than N/S.


 I think both are discernible, case by case, though I am sure you agree. Fi/Si loop is intrinsically informed and influenced by Ne, I'd think. I think that the strong pull of Si that I felt in writing my description is really consistent with your observation. What is the ocean? It's my sensory memories and the wild imaginative journey they took me on. Yes, the more I think about this I think your thoughts are very good on this. Cool.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I doubt your ability to type people. Actually scratch that, I KNOW you can't type, I have observed you completely missing the mark and not listening to the person you are typing because that would mean that it's actually possible for you to be wrong.


That is so ironic coming from you.


> Also, my answer was mainly about the functionality of the ocean and its part in the development of life. What is Fe about that? Or is something HEAVY Fe as soon as the word "beautiful" is used when describing?


Because you didn't dscribe its impersonal properties. Check my response for an example of Te:



> Water is the collection of particles primarily consisting of the atoms H and O forming clusters of two hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom, often referred to as H2O. An ocean is thus a collection of H2O particles at a very grand scale by separating continents apart.


Nor was your response Fi since you didn't try to personally relate. Nor was it Ni because you didn't describe it from a meta perspective. If you want to see an example of Ni and Te you should read @Pavane's response:



> The ocean is not only filled with what is considered to be earth's biggest commodity, but symbolically it represents the very thing that it supports- life. Despite the irony that much of the world's ocean water cannot be consumed by humans due to the potential for disease and poisoning from certain chemicals, the ocean houses a plethora of life forms from the photic zone to the abysmal depths of the aphotic zone, nearing the earth's crust. The ocean is almost like the psyche as described by Freud in some way- where the top is all that others are able to see and imagine most readily, while the ocean floor is where the repressed id begins. Not only does the ocean have inspirational levels of depth that very few will ever achieve in their lifetimes, but it has a great deal of breadth. This breath could symbolize the potential for opportunities, or inspire a fervent curiosity in some to see what lies on the other end of various horizons.


Nor was it Ne because the later post I wrote exemplifies more of an Ne response:



> But the ocean represents many things with its vastness and depth, especially the cycle of life with the way the tide flows, just like the heart itself is beating. Indeed, water is an essential aspect of all life. Just like the human body, the water is full with various creatures ranging from large to small, and their existences are crucial when determining the state of the planet itself. Indeed, water is often likened to a life force, the blood of the planet, and just like the human body everything needs to be in balance in order for us to function and thrive.
> 
> But there is also another aspect of the ocean where the surface merely reflects that which we can immediately see but underneath the surface lurks many secrets hidden from the very naked eye. Yet water itself does not hide as much as it murkens. Human emotion is often metaphorically represented with water phenomena. Rain represents sadness and loss, chaotic streams and tides that of uncontrollable emotions, dark or muddied waters that of troubled feelings but lack of insight and the depth of water bodies themselves representing the depths of our hearts.
> 
> This leads us back to the human body and how water is a crucial element of life and jhow we as human beings cannot function without it. We may claim lack of emotion but there is always something lurking underneath the surface hidden and veiled from the naked eye residing in the depths of of our psyche ultimately reflecting the content of our hearts.


You describe some external qualities of the ocean, how it relates to people in a general sense, but it's done so personally. Therefore, Fe. 


> And here I thought you just annoyed me because you can't hold a logical discussion with me without trying to offend me. After all, this escalated right after my first post which simply pointed out that Ti doesn't reinvent the wheel.


Hah, again ironic coming from you since you were the one who picked a fight with me but you can't even get the basic terminology right. And of course I take any stab at offending you because it's not like you really warrant anything less. Maybe if you were an actual INTJ you could use that magical Ni of yours to figure out why that is so. 

Oh wait I forgot, intuition seems to be one of your unconscious functions.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Thanks for the compliment - that really made my day!


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Maybe because the answer you provided before which is this:
> 
> 
> > _The ocean is a vast and beautiful part of our planet, the largest part of our planet at that._
> ...


Ni abstract reductions based on generalized face-value logical observations.... maybe you are seeing the generalized conceptual certainties here as objective valuations? Ni aggrandizement being mistaken for Fe expressive valuation somehow? I don't see much (if any) valuation at all here... of either Attitude. 

Now I am suddenly wondering if there was any Fe in my description(s). Hrm... .. .... . .


EDIT: @LeaT



> _But the ocean represents many things with its vastness and depth, especially the cycle of life with the way the tide flows, just like the heart itself is beating. Indeed, water is an essential aspect of all life. Just like the human body, the water is full with various creatures ranging from large to small, and their existences are crucial when determining the state of the planet itself. Indeed, water is often likened to a life force, the blood of the planet, and just like the human body everything needs to be in balance in order for us to function and thrive._
> 
> _But there is also another aspect of the ocean where the surface merely reflects that which we can immediately see but underneath the surface lurks many secrets hidden from the very naked eye. Yet water itself does not hide as much as it murkens. Human emotion is often metaphorically represented with water phenomena. Rain represents sadness and loss, chaotic streams and tides that of uncontrollable emotions, dark or muddied waters that of troubled feelings but lack of insight and the depth of water bodies themselves representing the depths of our hearts. _
> 
> _This leads us back to the human body and how water is a crucial element of life and jhow we as human beings cannot function without it. We may claim lack of emotion but there is always something lurking underneath the surface hidden and veiled from the naked eye residing in the depths of of our psyche ultimately reflecting the content of our hearts_


For the same reasons cited in Acerbus' post, I say Ni. First, no Si... which seems to be evoked in this question for Ne users(? at least for me). You did just what Acerbus did... fact is abstracted to a singular interpretation.... fact is abstracted to a singular interpretation. 

Maybe I'll convince some INFP friend to do this and compare. Just to see if I am seeing this wrong?


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

@arkigos
Your post #91 was a wonderful perspective.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

St Vual said:


> I think "abstract language" isn't very much in the realm of intuition actually. Considering that intuition is simply bringing forth content from the unconscious to the conscious and such. It's actually just as primal of a way of perception as sensing is. It's just that intuition checks for the potential of something instead of the actual object actual qualities(se), or what the object invokes in the person (si).


I'd recommend reading David Keirsey's "Please Understand Me II", which goes into language usage and how it relates to personality type:


> _As for cognition, Myers in The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator had some of us oriented by intuition or introspection, the rest by sensory perception or observation. Similarly David Riesman, in individualism Reconsidered, spoke of "inner-directed" and "outer-directed" orientations. And Eric Adickes, in his Character and Worldview, saw some as "heteronomous" or other-directed in orientation, and others as "autonomous" or self-directed in orientation. Thus our thoughts and the words that reflect them keep us oriented to reality by telling us who we and our companions are, and what we and they are to do. Thoughts of course are not observable, but words are, so some inspection of the kinds of words we choose may be useful. Abstract words can be used in slightly different but related ways - analogical, categorical, fictional, figurative, general, schematic, symbolic, and theoretical. Likewise, concrete words can be used in slightly different but related ways - detailed, factual, elemental, empirical, indicative, literal, signal, and specific._


----------



## PyrLove (Jun 6, 2010)

I wish threads like this didn't turn into a pissing contest. I suspect there could be some genuine value in the discussion but I don't have the patience or tolerance to filter out the crap.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Meanwhile, in a thread about descriptions of the ocean...


----------



## Kalimar (Mar 21, 2013)

Answer below:

The ocean is a mixture of water, salt and some minerals. Bound by the laws of physics, it swells and flows where nature dictates it should go. It directly supports life for a myriad of creatures as the earth and air we live on directly supports life for us. 

The ocean is both warm and cold simultaneously. Seemingly teeming with life and direction, it is energetic and constantly moving. Underwater volcanoes spew their contents, some fish survive even within its darkest depths, and coral reefs hold certain colour, charm and energy. However, as it is bound by natural laws, such direction and movement seems to be aimless. For all its variety and colour, the ocean leaves no graves. The ocean is no place to make friends.

Indeed, the same could be said of Earth on the whole and of humanity itself. The lives granted to us are brief and ephemeral like the twinkling of a star; and within them our activities are energetic and seemingly purposeful. However, they only hold long-term meaning to other such humans. Even then, only the stories of a select few are kept in circulation throughout the ages - although with the advent of the internet that amount may increase in time. One day, though, we will all be gone and none will remember us. Were one to take a magnifying glass and peer on our planet, would they see us as bound in the same way as the water molecules within the ocean are bound to their fate? Would they be right or wrong?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Teybo said:


> Meanwhile, in a thread about descriptions of the ocean...


haha, yea. I don't know why this escalated so quickly...


----------



## unINFalliPle (Jul 8, 2012)

The ocean is filled with waves and sand and it makes me feel really peaceful. It brings good memories and I miss being in the ocean. Its colorful and alive. Its also scary because its so vast and there are so many creatures living in it. The ocean is filled with sounds and movement. 

I'm not sure what being an s is, but I have a feeling I'm not it.


----------



## daringcherry (Apr 23, 2013)

Vast, blue, big, huge, amazing, rich with life, deep.

The ocean takes up two thirds of the Earth's surface. It is filled with interesting creatures like fish, jellyfish and whales. The ocean is made up of salty water.

Ok, now I'm gonna see the answer. I'm an N although I got a feeling that I got 'S' in this task.

...Ah, I got 'N', after all.


----------



## CaféZeitgeist (May 29, 2012)

The ocean is an enormous expanse of raging waters. It makes up 70% of the planet. It's dark and deep and we know more about the moon, thousands of miles away, than we do about the bottom of the ocean. The ocean has multiple personality disorder. So calm and tranquil in some parts, and quite cantankerous in other parts. The ocean was our main means of transportation before trains and planes came along. It's dangerous and exhilarating all at the same time. The ocean is the unknown monster itself, never mind the monsters that hide in its depths.

I seem to have elements of S and N...


----------



## jjr667 (Jul 4, 2012)

The ocean is a huge blue expanse of water that goes as far as the eye can see

what does this mean lol


----------



## EasterInTheBatcave (Aug 18, 2012)

Blue


----------



## LadyD (Mar 13, 2013)

To be honest, my first response to describe the ocean is, "well . . . it's the ocean." Then came the inevitable blank where my brain hits the wall because it doesn't seem to know what's being asked of it and the big silent hole of that. Then I started thinking about the word describe to try to understand what was being asked. I asked myself what _is _the ocean, and I honestly . . . just didn't know. I'm not even sure I know now. I mean, it's water, it's large, it's saline, but so are a lot of things. What gives the ocean its ocean-ness?

The thing is, to break it down, it just becomes parts of the ocean, but then it's not the ocean any more. If I say it's salt-water, well, that's true, but the sea is also salt water. It's a habitat for life, but so are a lot of other things.

The parts of the ocean are a system that collectively makes the ocean. The ocean itself is a part of a system that makes the earth. The earth is a part of a system that makes the solar system . . . and on, and on, and on. The parts of the ocean are themselves systems that become infinitely smaller.

So, the ocean is a system made up of infinitely smaller systems which itself contributes to infinitely expanding systems.

Then I wrote this:

_Deep and dark and full of secrets.__Whispers and roars against the earth. _
_Nurturing and violent._
_Ebbs and flows with maternal lunar touch,_
_Collecting ever flowing life force from all directions_
_Churning in a briney mass full of secrets,_
_mystery, life. Filled to the deepest abyss and rising_
_Slowly rising to the sky, shifting in the wind -- waves_
_and weather. The world over. Connected to all._
_Connecting all._


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

The ocean is so many things. It's the birthplace of most of life on earth. It's a symbol of emotion. To me, it's a symbol of rejuvenation, reincarnation, and death. It's associated with the lunar cycles--which is partially why it's associated with fertility and death and also femininity. 

It's really so big it's hard to talk about. It's full of conflicting images. Poseidon was a very lonely god and very structured as well, but I tend to see the ocean as more nurturing and wild. IDK. The foam reminds me of laces and pearls--pearls remind me of Aphrodite. So it's a place of feeling and isolation--of depth and reflection--of nurture and terror.

I don't really want to write anymore. There's a mockingbird singing outside tonight, and I just want to find the answer and move on. I do love the ocean though.

Results: It seems like I might be an S type according to this because I am not able to describe the ocean as a whole, but rather as the parts. The parts conflict with each other and though they form a whole (IMO), that whole isn't as easily articulated.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@_CapedCrusaderess_, I think that is because you probably lead with Thinking, so for you the S/N line will not appear quite as clear. Also S/N will not play as large of a role as Thinking does. Notice how you focused on it. It was very focused on defining. Pointing out... well, facts, I think. It gave me a Te-feel. I would also say I think I saw some Intuition there. So your top two functions are probably Thinking+Intuition. ^_^ 

@_meltedsorbet_, lol! Well it was very clear you are Introverted. Very subjective. And I almost saw Ni, there (which might actually be because the auxiliary might just take the attitude of the dominant function). o.o I definitely saw Intuition. I mean, I could be having a hard time differentiating Introverted Feeling from Intuition, though. So. Take that with a grain of salt.


----------



## moeron. (Apr 7, 2013)

My spontaneous, unreflective description: The ocean is a mysterious, pulsating, live-giving expanse to which the ebb and flow of all earthly realities abide.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

Describe the ocean:
huge, stretches with no end in sight. its color reflects the sky. blue on a sunny day with the sun dancing on its waves. on a bad weather day, the ocean is turbulent and gray and dark and forboding. It is filled with creatures and maybe a monster or two. Who knows? No one goes to the depths of the ocean long enough to know. It is filled with bottom feeders and fish and sharks and all of the creatures that make up a watery world. There are sunken ships and treasures that are preserved in the waters. It is the stuff of imagination, the contents of these sunken ships. Unfortunately, it is also full of the refuse that humans create, especially plastic, that gets inside the sea creatures and makes them sick. The coral is not looking as beautiful and the pristine nature of the water is compromised because humans insist on sucking the oil out of the earth, even from under the oceans... i could go on and on but i will stop here.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Which ocean? 

It's, uhmm... big and wet and filled with stuff like fish and Chtulhu.


----------



## Aquamarine (Jul 24, 2011)

Here it is:

Strong, roaring waves rocking the boat. No limits on every direction I look at. The wind is blowing at my face and I feel the freedom of the large space around me, which is both intimidating and liberating at the same time. I look below and I see plenty of fishes and other marine life in the clear blue water. I touch the salty sea with my hands as the boat moves along.

Mine sounds pretty balanced between S and N. I have a mental image of me on a sailing boat and being in the ocean myself, looking at and experiencing everything that is around me.


----------



## themonocle (Feb 18, 2013)

It was easier when I personified the ocean as a woman. It happened on accident.

Far and wide the rhythm and pulse of life. A constant paradox in motion. She is always changing yet eternally the same. Both living and supporting life in her body and breath.



What functions do you see here... I'm just learning them.


----------



## Moya (May 22, 2012)

I said "it's big and wet." Not sure what that indicates, besides laziness.


----------



## pushit (Dec 20, 2012)

Warm was the first thing that came to mind....Si at work, perhaps? I'd also say its quite exhilarating. It is the source of some of our weather and atmospheric conditions in general, from what I understand.


----------



## pushit (Dec 20, 2012)

themonocle said:


> It was easier when I personified the ocean as a woman. It happened on accident.
> 
> Far and wide the rhythm and pulse of life. A constant paradox in motion. She is always changing yet eternally the same. Both living and supporting life in her body and breath.
> 
> ...


When you describe the ocean as a "woman" it sounds like an abstract impression spawned by Ni, but it could also be Si abstracted by Ne. I'm Ne-Si and I've had weird, random interconnections between unrelated objects as well. However, the fact that this occurred to you randomly probably suggests Ni at work...especially if it just linearly came to you without any interruption from other impressions getting in the way, and thus you found the core of the impression, that is also ultimately telling of the big picture. Ne usually spawns a web of interconnected units or impressions, and Si is used as a 'bouncing plank' by Ne to generate more abstractions, all heading in different directions. That is usually when Ne is ahead of Si in archetypical order, I'm not sure what the process would be like the other way around.

hope that helps!


----------



## Velasquez (Jul 3, 2012)

The ocean is this big blue ass motherfucker, and it's all over the world and you can swim in it.


----------



## necrodeathmortem (Jan 14, 2013)

The ocean is the man, he gets millions of chicks in bikinis and he doesn't even have to do anything for it.

Hmm, your method doesn't seem to work on me.


----------



## O_o (Oct 22, 2011)

big blue n beautiful
with a surplus of animals willing to inflict an immense amount of pain upon your body.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

asewland said:


> The ocean is blue and deep and dark. That's all i got :tongue:


I smell secret ENFP


----------

