# Seeing Symbols and Symbolism



## The Alternate (Jan 14, 2013)

I've never been one to easily recognize or "deconstruct" the ulterior motives behind things and people. Actually, I like to believe that they aren't there in the first place and that everybody is good inside! But I happened to stumble upon some conspiracy shit (and you know Ne loves this), which got me thinking: what personality types or processes do you see being suited for this, seeing symbols and symbolism? Truth wise, I don't really care if somebody sees into something and is right or wrong (I don't really see how that is relevant - but if you do, tell me!). It is pretty weird though to follow some of this stuff and how they link it together and rationalize it into being something deeper. Yes, I know that one could be cherry picking data, and random things do happen with no conspiracy behind them, but just being in tune to find stuff like this... Ni+Te? Se+Fi? The closest I've got is coming up with excuses or explaining things away, like "...but, [semi plausible excuse]". That feels like a similar process, just introverted.

So, what are PersonalityCafe's thoughts on symbols and symbolism? Whatever you have on your mind.

Oh, and that reminds me. This video is everything I said above taken to the extreme. Hilarious


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Well in Jungian parlance symbolism is often related to the Intuition function. The ability to infer things that may not be able to be perceived by more conventional measures (sensation). Intuitives, especially introverted intuitives (really introverts in general in a broad sense) would probably be a little more predisposed to think of things in symbolic ways or to discount the actual physical evidence in favor of something ideational. This idea is clearly evident in Jung's description of the Introverted Intuitive as the 'seer' type or mystic. The person who is always able to read between the lines or see the greatest picture.

That being said, this paints a picture of a person who employs their intuition in a productive direction. People who do not have particularly robust ability to gauge their gut-feelings or hunches can be susceptible to the more nefarious side of intuition. Conspiracy theorizing, negative hyperbolizing and the like. This tends to be a general trait of dominant Sensation types as intuition is their inferior function. Because these types are so oriented to the world at hand, or the world as experienced they might have a very hard time with the idea of things existing that aren't physically evident. Perhaps even a tendency to be outright dismissive of someone who just claims to 'know' without knowing, for instance always demanding evidence or proof. Yet at the same time swearing by their own imagined sagacity or insight not realizing that they probably miss the mark as much as they hit it (in contrast dominant intuitives may have a better batting average with their intuitions because they have judging functions to help discern what is a hunch worth pursuing and what might just be indigestion). 

The general rule of thumb with Jungian types is that Sensation types are very grounded to the world of evidence, experience and the here and now and usually have somewhat wacky or slightly questionable intuitions (perhaps always expecting the worst situation to play out or reading unduly negative motivations into people or situations) and Intuitives, strong in the ability to read between the lines will struggle in the here and now. Intuitives may have sensation related issues (often revolving money and sex -- see Nietzsche), hypochondrias, phobias, and the like. Now a lot of the outward expressions of these things, like phobias might manifest across all types, but the motivations may be different (that's why we can't just say only Intuitives have body-image issues, because of their inferior sensation, because that could be a cause and most certainly would contribute, but the motivation for this might be from somewhere else. These things are more complex than they appear). 

Obviously Jung's work revolved heavily around symbols and Psychological Types and the types are no exception. The four functions and the types themselves are symbolic of the quaternary, the mandala, and other symbolic representations and fourfold models that have appeared throughout human experience. Jung was also heavily intuitive though, I suspect a Sensation type might have come to much of the same conclusions about people but probably from a more empirical standpoint, perhaps relying solely on statistics or brain research or what have you (but again I'm super generalizing here for the sake of simplification).


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

the video just seemed more like someone playing to pop-culture. all of the symbols just screamed "i'm cool; look, i also hate conventions, and i have a nihilistic view of the world" (as in living only for now, tomorrow doesn't matter). 

whatever i have my mind huh? i only read the first few lines in the link you provided, but i think it's safe to say those people are crazy. other than that, i think Liquid go to it pretty well. 

as far as intuition goes: i saw a post of an ESTP on this site a couple of years ago who was just going on and on about how mental disorders were due to physical means, and that looking in any other direction was pointless. this strikes me as a very "here in the moment" sort of outlook... and then went on a rant about how INFJs are "stupid" and how all INFJs try to approach mental problems through a lens of b.s. (i think he was having a bad day)

although, it can be difficult to type someone through those means alone. i have a dominant intuitive friend that when studying and stressed (and not taking time to re-settle back into her usual self) will try to get everything down a point of certainty, almost as if the information wouldn't exist otherwise, or at least that she has to make sure of something she already knows--as in physically seeing the information in text book. i think that if we were to view her only in this light, she could appear to be a Se-dom, but taking into consideration her level of stress and the general compulsiveness of her own actions... to me this shows that she's not operating in her normal mode. (although, one could even relate her actions to an inferior thinking type, so...)


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> That being said, this paints a picture of a person who employs their intuition in a productive direction. People who do not have particularly robust ability to gauge their gut-feelings or hunches can be susceptible to the more nefarious side of intuition. Conspiracy theorizing, *negative hyperbolizing *and the like. This tends to be a general trait of dominant Sensation types as intuition is their inferior function. Because these types are so oriented to the world at hand, or the world as experienced they might have a very hard time with the idea of things existing that aren't physically evident. Perhaps even a tendency to be outright dismissive of someone who just claims to 'know' without knowing, for instance* always demanding evidence or proof.* Yet at the same time swearing by their own imagined sagacity or insight not realizing that they probably miss the mark as much as they hit it (in contrast dominant intuitives may have a better batting average with their intuitions because they have judging functions to help discern what is a hunch worth pursuing and what might just be indigestion).
> 
> The general rule of thumb with Jungian types is that *Sensation types are very grounded to the world of evidence, experience and the here and now and usually have somewhat wacky or slightly questionable intuitions (perhaps always expecting the worst situation to play out or reading unduly negative motivations into people or situations*) and *Intuitives, strong in the ability to read between the lines will struggle in the here and now. Intuitives may have sensation related issues (often revolving money and sex -- see Nietzsche), hypochondrias, phobias*, and the like. Now a lot of the outward expressions of these things, like phobias might manifest across all types, but the motivations may be different (that's why we can't just say only Intuitives have body-image issues, because of their inferior sensation, because that could be a cause and most certainly would contribute, but the motivation for this might be from somewhere else. These things are more complex than they appear).


HELP! I do both of these! LOL, maybe I'm a mistyped ESFP, that would be the funniest thing ever.
On a more serious note, this post is very helpful. I know an ESFP who accuses everyone of RACISM where I just think it's a latent fear of the unknown or a projection of their own feeling of inadequacy in dealing with foreigners. But if I didn't have the ESFP as a model of "how not to do it", I could easily be as extreme as her.
Also, I know this other ESFP who wants to make friends with everyone. This one time, a random stranger came to our work place to do a work eperience there. He had the same pullover on as the ESFP. ESFP had never talked to him and didn't know anything about him, yet he exclaims: "He's got the same pullover on as me! It is meant to be!". LOL, for me that is clearly a random coincidence. YET, this one time a friend of mine had the same colour and style trouser AND pullover on on the same day as me and I thought "It is meant to be!". But that was after I'd known him for a few years. LOL LOL LOL.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

That video strikes me as somewhat meaningless in its use of symbols (rather than symbolism) to me, which to me seems to be more used as an aesthetic approach rather than to infer to a deeper meaning. It is possible to analyze that video symbolically, but what you'd look at wouldn't necessarily be the specific meaning of say, the use of the triangle then. Now compare to this video:






It's not very ridden with what may be thought of as obvious symbol use. Quite far from it. In contrast to that Kesha video, Machinae Supremacy's video is actually very simple and cheap (budget wise). Yet, I find that their video manages to touch on a deeper level of symbolism than Kesha's right away. It is obvious that the child seen in the video is linked to the lyrical content of the song for example, which by itself is quite symbolically ridden. 

It is for example obvious that when you link the appearance of the girl together with the lyrical content, the video and song is about a spiritual inner journey. Kesha on the other hand seems to use symbols for the sake of being cool which is not so cool in my opinion. 

LOL, for the sake of it, I had to look up the lyrics for Die Young. It's about sex? Oh, why am I not surprised lol. Seems written from an intuitive point of view though, or perhaps at least Si. Se lyrics tend to for some reason be very focused on the very concrete experience. Bruce Dickinson's lyrics for his solo project comes to mind here. He's most definitely an ESTP. Britney Spears' lyrics are also very focused on the sensate experience as another example.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

I see personal symbolism in a lot of things. My symbolism is very Fi/Ni, like my own dreams, or hearing songs and getting insights or like I just "know" things have happened or will happen.

I am mystified as to why someone posts a Keisha video every time they make one of these threads. I'm thinking she must be an ESFP and scaring you guys with some inferior Ni. I mean I don't know why you wouldn't post someone with more obvious literary or film symbolism like Bat for Lashes.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Note: Se doms use symbolism in a really obvious way that is almost comical or "preachy" or to be "cool" in the case of ESTPs with Se dom, Ni inferior, and Fe tertiary, it's a clusterfuck of symbolism-social cool-sensory impact.

I really think ISFPs use symbolism in a much more "personal" way that I identify with it, like it's more intentional and applied to their own life experience or something; like Bat for Lashes (again) making the video "Daniel" about her teen crush on Daniel from The Karate Kid, but it extending into this entire symbolic feeling of her adolescence and ex-bfs. 

I get these kinds of "feelings" about my personal surroundings (like picking up on murders that happened in the past or things that will happen or are happening today) or will intentionally use them as literary/film inspired symbols. I would not be like Keisha and use them to promote conspiracy theories or support the Illuminati, the Mayan calendar, or any of that shit. That kind of shit is unreal to me, and I know it's why I'm an ISFP and not an ESFP; it's not just asocial tendencies, it's the response I have to Ni inferior moves that almost make me want to laugh, while Ni tertiary to me is much more "mystical" and meaningful.

Comical: Rosemary's Baby
Creepy: Alice Sweet Alice


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> Well in Jungian parlance symbolism is often related to the Intuition function. The ability to infer things that may not be able to be perceived by more conventional measures (sensation). Intuitives, especially introverted intuitives (really introverts in general in a broad sense) would probably be a little more predisposed to think of things in symbolic ways or to discount the actual physical evidence in favor of something ideational. This idea is clearly evident in Jung's description of the Introverted Intuitive as the 'seer' type or mystic. The person who is always able to read between the lines or see the greatest picture.
> 
> That being said, this paints a picture of a person who employs their intuition in a productive direction. People who do not have particularly robust ability to gauge their gut-feelings or hunches can be susceptible to the more nefarious side of intuition. Conspiracy theorizing, negative hyperbolizing and the like. This tends to be a general trait of dominant Sensation types as intuition is their inferior function. Because these types are so oriented to the world at hand, or the world as experienced they might have a very hard time with the idea of things existing that aren't physically evident. Perhaps even a tendency to be outright dismissive of someone who just claims to 'know' without knowing, for instance always demanding evidence or proof. Yet at the same time swearing by their own imagined sagacity or insight not realizing that they probably miss the mark as much as they hit it (in contrast dominant intuitives may have a better batting average with their intuitions because they have judging functions to help discern what is a hunch worth pursuing and what might just be indigestion).
> 
> ...


Yeah Jung is a great example of an ISTP with tertiary Ni who gives the overall believable psychic or mystical impression. The most mystical and psychic people you know are ISFPs and ISTPs not INFJs. It's those of us with repressed, unconscious Ni that are so mystified by our Ni that we look at the apartment complex next door and know a murder is about to happen there, or that someone was killed in the house we're living in. It's the ISFP who knows you were going to call, it's the ISTP who wants to know what you dreamed about last night.

Apparently real Ni doms have much more conscious control over their intuition, something I can't even properly conceive of, but sounds insanely boring and informed about the order of the universe, something involving taking absolutely all of the mystery out of life and knowing why the solar eclipse is happening next month.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

fourtines said:


> Yeah Jung is a great example of an ISTP with tertiary Ni who gives the overall believable psychic or mystical impression. The most mystical and psychic people you know are ISFPs and ISTPs not INFJs. It's those of us with repressed, unconscious Ni that are so mystified by our Ni that we look at the apartment complex next door and know a murder is about to happen there, or that someone was killed in the house we're living in. It's the ISFP who knows you were going to call, it's the ISTP who wants to know what you dreamed about last night.
> 
> Apparently real Ni doms have much more conscious control over their intuition, something I can't even properly conceive of, but sounds insanely boring and informed about the order of the universe, something involving taking absolutely all of the mystery out of life and knowing why the solar eclipse is happening next month.


You know, ..... I often think I _ought_ to be more into symbolism seeing as I'm an Ni-dom, but then some symbolisms seem so obvious that I don't find them very interesting. I ususally read between the lines rather well and can come up with reasons for why people do the things they do. But when I read stuff about symbols I'm like.... "Well.... that's all very nice and I never thought about it that way myself, but now that they've said it, it seems obvious.... and also.. .what's the practical value of it?" At the same time symbols and deeper meanings seem very _real_ to me ... maybe that's why I don't understand the fuss some people make about them?


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

FlaviaGemina said:


> You know, ..... I often think I _ought_ to be more into symbolism seeing as I'm an Ni-dom, but then some symbolisms seem so obvious that I don't find them very interesting. I ususally read between the lines rather well and can come up with reasons for why people do the things they do. But when I read stuff about symbols I'm like.... "Well.... that's all very nice and I never thought about it that way myself, but now that they've said it, it seems obvious.... and also.. .what's the practical value of it?" At the same time symbols and deeper meanings seem very _real_ to me ... maybe that's why I don't understand the fuss some people make about them?


I don't know, but I LOVE mystery, I believe I might *intentionally* make things seem mysterious or symbolic or obscure because I don't want to deal with full-frontal Ni.

I posted the Fate's Companion quiz on an astrology forum, and a few people suggested they'd enthusiastically embrace knowing all the secrets of the universe, and I'm like "hey, whoa....fuck no." 

I really DON'T want to know the secrets of the universe. I want endless material wealth or health or ability to give healing; please don't take my sense of mystery from me.

Really don't. 

Fuck you.

That's how I feel. And I do think this puts me at odds with people who have N dom/aux.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

fourtines said:


> Apparently real Ni doms have much more conscious control over their intuition, something I can't even properly conceive of, but sounds insanely boring and informed about the order of the universe, something involving taking absolutely all of the mystery out of life and knowing why the solar eclipse is happening next month.


Ni doms appear to be able to direct their Ni, just like other types can pick the direction to "aim" their dominant function. I suspect that it's the case with every type though that they can gain very good control of their dom, good/decent control of their aux, and control drops off the further in the stack you go.

Also, keep in mind that the usage of a function would be dependent on what it supports or is supported by.


----------



## The Alternate (Jan 14, 2013)

LiquidLight said:


> Obviously Jung's work revolved heavily around symbols and Psychological Types and the types are no exception.


Yes! I had thought of that too, just got distracted and forgot to post it.



celticstained said:


> the video just seemed more like someone playing to pop-culture. all of the symbols just screamed "i'm cool; look, i also hate conventions, and i have a nihilistic view of the world" (as in living only for now, tomorrow doesn't matter).





LeaT said:


> That video strikes me as somewhat meaningless in its use of symbols (rather than symbolism) to me, which to me seems to be more used as an aesthetic approach rather than to infer to a deeper meaning. It is possible to analyze that video symbolically, but what you'd look at wouldn't necessarily be the specific meaning of say, the use of the triangle then.





fourtines said:


> I am mystified as to why someone posts a Ke$ha video every time they make one of these threads. I'm thinking she must be an ESFP and scaring you guys with some inferior Ni.


I didn't expect any comments on that video lol. I posted it because I thought it was funny with all the over the top cliche Illuminati symbols in the viewer's face (the triangles, upside down crosses, pentagrams, etc). Nothing more than that! Tounge in cheek. Does anybody here really know about Ke$ha though? Probably not given the crowd, but I love the public persona she gives off. 



LeaT said:


> Now compare to this video: ...


Interesting.



LeaT said:


> LOL, for the sake of it, I had to look up the lyrics for Die Young. It's about sex? Oh, why am I not surprised lol. Seems written from an intuitive point of view though, or perhaps at least Si. Se lyrics tend to for some reason be very focused on the very concrete experience. Bruce Dickinson's lyrics for his solo project comes to mind here. He's most definitely an ESTP. Britney Spears' lyrics are also very focused on the sensate experience as another example.





fourtines said:


> I mean I don't know why you wouldn't post someone with more obvious literary or film symbolism like Bat for Lashes.


Well, maybe cause as my topic said, I suck at this kind of thing! No really, I came at this without much frame of reference in general. HELLO, what motivated me to start this was topic was a Beyonce conspiracy page after all! I used to listen to a lot of Britney Spears though. I'm not even sexual at all seriously in real life. But maybe I just channel it through music.



fourtines said:


> I see personal symbolism in a lot of things. My symbolism is very Fi/Ni, like my own dreams, or hearing songs and getting insights or like I just "know" things have happened or will happen.


Oh, that that viewpoint never occured to me (personal symbolism).
It's funny how you think of your dreams as symbolism though - I actually take the exact opposite stance and have thought this for years. I've had enough ridiculous and "non-mainstream/typical" dreams to the point where I don't see them as anything deep or symbolic. My dreams are just dumping grounds for anything I have experienced in the past. A lot of sensing. More than a couple of times I've had recent TV or movies influence my dreams in a big way, like I will be acting out a similar plot line or characters from TV are present, or the entire dream has a "you are the audience" feel as I'm watching it. I've also been able to trace back other things and come up with a somewhat plausible explanation. My dreams resemble glitching video games - bits and pieces all assembled together, things breaking and falling apart, and in the end it has no meaning because you weren't supposed to even be there!



fourtines said:


> Note: Se doms use symbolism in a really obvious way that is almost comical or "preachy" or to be "cool" in the case of ESTPs with Se dom, Ni inferior, and Fe tertiary, it's a clusterfuck of symbolism-social cool-sensory impact.


Because I have sucky social skills and no social life, I don't know any ESTPs, but that type and ESFP seem interesting to me becuase they are so different.



fourtines said:


> I get these kinds of "feelings" about my personal surroundings (like picking up on murders that happened in the past or things that will happen or are happening today)


My mother does this. She'll be affected by the past events at a place even if she was not there and it didn't directly impact her life - there was a place where a murder happened last year and now the place kind of creeps her out, even though the whole case was completely solved.


fourtines said:


> I would not be like Ke$ha and use them to promote conspiracy theories or support the Illuminati, the Mayan calendar, or any of that shit. That kind of shit is unreal to me, and I know it's why I'm an ISFP and not an ESFP; it's not just asocial tendencies, it's the response I have to Ni inferior moves that almost make me want to laugh, while Ni tertiary to me is much more "mystical" and meaningful. Comical: Rosemary's Baby. Creepy: Alice Sweet Alice


Yeah, it's unreal to me too, but that's kind of why I am fascinated with it and people who see "overt" symbols - I want to laugh but at the same time I'm sucked in. If my type is really correct, INTP, then I don't even have Ni in my top 4 unlike you.



fourtines said:


> Apparently real Ni doms have much more conscious control over their intuition, something I can't even properly conceive of, but sounds insanely boring and informed about the order of the universe, something involving taking absolutely all of the mystery out of life and knowing why the solar eclipse is happening next month.


Bahahahaha. But what the fuck? Conscious control over it. How?


Scelerat said:


> Ni doms appear to be able to direct their Ni, just like other types can pick the direction to "aim" their dominant function. I suspect that it's the case with every type though that they can gain very good control of their dom, good/decent control of their aux, and control drops off the further in the stack you go.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that the usage of a function would be dependent on what it supports or is supported by.


That seems plausible.



fourtines said:


> I don't know, but I LOVE mystery, I believe I might *intentionally* make things seem mysterious or symbolic or obscure because I don't want to deal with full-frontal Ni.


Yeah, I can see that. Plus it could be validation for those who want to feel smart or "insightful" if they believe their own bull.



fourtines said:


> I posted the Fate's Companion quiz on an astrology forum, and a few people suggested they'd enthusiastically embrace knowing all the secrets of the universe, and I'm like "hey, whoa....fuck no."
> I really DON'T want to know the secrets of the universe. I want endless material wealth or health or ability to give healing; please don't take my sense of mystery from me.
> That's how I feel. And I do think this puts me at odds with people who have N dom/aux.


[Coincidence] I actually addressed this very thing earlier yesterday.


----------



## Mammon (Jul 12, 2012)

fourtines said:


> I don't know, but I LOVE mystery, I believe I might *intentionally* make things seem mysterious or symbolic or obscure because I don't want to deal with full-frontal Ni.
> 
> I posted the Fate's Companion quiz on an astrology forum, and a few people suggested they'd enthusiastically embrace knowing all the secrets of the universe, and I'm like "hey, whoa....fuck no."
> 
> ...


I feel the same. I never want to know how magicians do their stuff. Ever. It's one of those few things left that still truly seems to be magical. 

As a kid seeing my brother and cousins leave the house at about 10pm I was fascinated. I thought they would meet aliens/angels in the forest and talk about all kinds of things 'out there.' I though they'd visit places high up in the sky in another beautiful slice of reality. Whenever I went to bed I theorized that perhaps I was visiting many of those 'slices.' So I equally figured those I encountered in those 'slices' might be visiting our 'slice.' Could all of this somehow be connected to the fact I wasn't allowed to stay up all night? OMG the mystery *.*

I then asked them and I got quite a disappointing answer 'We go to a club' -All night?... 'Yes'
I then thought that perhaps those visitors were only allowed in controlled areas and no just wander around. So a few weeks later I asked 'What do you do at those clubs?' and I got the most boring and bland answer out there 'We dance all night and meet girls' -_-

The life of a child. It was wonderous to say the LEAST.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

fourtines said:


> Apparently real Ni doms have much more conscious control over their intuition, something I can't even properly conceive of, but sounds insanely boring and informed about the order of the universe, something involving taking absolutely all of the mystery out of life and knowing why the solar eclipse is happening next month.





fourtines said:


> I posted the Fate's Companion quiz on an astrology forum, and a few people suggested they'd enthusiastically embrace knowing all the secrets of the universe, and I'm like "hey, whoa....fuck no."
> 
> I really DON'T want to know the secrets of the universe. I want endless material wealth or health or ability to give healing; please don't take my sense of mystery from me.




lmaooo.
 
so does typology take away the mystery of people? wouldn't you just rather interact with people's behaviors at face value instead of interpreting them in terms of type?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

I'd say that our own definition of symbolism is personal. Even tho the definitions aren't.



www.thefreedictionary.com/symbolism said:


> sym·bol·ism (smb-lzm)
> n.
> 1. The practice of representing things by means of symbols or of attributing symbolic meanings or significance to objects, events, or relationships.
> 2. A system of symbols or representations.
> 3. A symbolic meaning or representation.


Since we are sharing songs, I wonder why no one thought of this one.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

It is really interesting hearing how different people view symbolism.

I myself viewed the religion of Christianity pretty literally.
God was up in the sky and invisible angels and daemons walked among us.
It was a real a fact as the rock I could hold in my hand.

Then as I met with unending levels of hypocrisy and bullshit from other Christians
I started my own journey of exploration and quickly separated the hypocrites from the true believers.
Then I realized that every god damn person writing Church history back and including Paul was a hypocrite,
or the very least based their dogma on previous hypocrites.
Jesus/Christ quickly became a make believe figure who had a somewhat eastern style of preaching.
So I abandoned Christianity.
Now I guard my inner symbolic world carefully and don't let outside influences meddle in my spiritual affairs.
I know what is what, in my inner symbolic world and no hypocrite from any external system can reach it.

Losing all mystery would be a terrible thing, @fourtines fortunately that doesn't seem likely.
No matter how many mysteries we unfold another one stands ready at the gate.

I agree that the Kesha vid is over the top. Symbols taken to such an extreme strikes me as pretty meaningless.
It is like the Christian cross. Shove it in peoples faces enough and you don't want to deal with it any more.
Yeah it is the cross... Whatever... I've seen it before. 
No shock value of carrying an instrument of torture around your neck any more.
Only reason that the pentagram is so provoking is that it competes with the established cross.
Cross established Si vs Pentagram suppressed Se. That is how I interpret that vid anyhow.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

The most mystical my intuition gets is in this way that's very...I don't know, if they achieve my goals, they feel profound and sophisticated - sort of something that brings sensation into the picture, where reality, not the intuition, suddenly seems so extraordinary for it's potential - it's what it did for reality for me that impresses me, not necessarily the intuition for the sake of possibilities and for something known to reality - it does nothing for me if it isn't really being applied to something out of the mainstream lore, more to my own ideas (like, for example, anything that wreaks of stereotypical conspiracy theorizing makes me think of a really goofy cartoon - looking into anything that has a mystical feeling makes me not want to, because it already gives itself away to me that way - I just tackle it bluntly, etc.). @_fourtines_ really stated this well as differences between the types.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> The most mystical my intuition gets is in this way that's very...I don't know, if they achieve my goals, they feel profound and sophisticated - sort of something that brings sensation into the picture, where reality, not the intuition, suddenly seems so extraordinary for it's potential - it's what it did for reality for me that impresses me, not necessarily the intuition for the sake of possibilities and not something known to reality - it does nothing for me if it isn't really being applied to something out of the mainstream lore, more to my own ideas (like, for example, anything that wreaks of stereotypical conspiracy theorizing makes me think of a really goofy cartoon - looking into anything that has a mystical feeling makes me not want to, because it already gives itself away to me that way - I just tackle it bluntly, etc.). @_fourtines_ really stated this well as differences between the types.


I don't think that necessarily has much to do with type as I think it has to do with enneagram motivations. There is no way in hell I could choose to not research a topic extensively that interests me. I find that delving into it would cause me to feel even greater meaning eventually.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Literary symbolism is kind of just a blunt chore for me - like, okay, got it, next. If I'm not getting what I want to get out of it in terms of symbolism, then it just seems like any academic chore. Intuition in the realm of cliches is like nails-on-a-chalkboard for me - I'll get super blunt about it.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

LeaT said:


> I don't think that necessarily has much to do with type as I think it has to do with enneagram motivations. There is no way in hell I could choose to not research a topic extensively that interests me. I find that delving into it would cause me to feel even greater meaning eventually.


I'm talking about achieving goals through intuition, not achieving goals in general. The enneagram has 0 to do with this. I'm not really even talking about "meaning" either - I'm talking about reality colliding with metaphysical assumptions. I'm referring to intuition and sensation here, not anything else.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Inferior Ni is almost like the intuition that doesn't even quite reach the symbolic at times - the person might seem like they're trying to come up with a symbol, but never really get it off the ground - perhaps why it's easy for these types to read the wrong things into stuff.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> The most mystical my intuition gets is in this way that's very...I don't know, if they achieve my goals, they feel profound and sophisticated - sort of something that brings sensation into the picture, where reality, not the intuition, suddenly seems so extraordinary for it's potential - it's what it did for reality for me that impresses me, not necessarily the intuition for the sake of possibilities and for something known to reality - it does nothing for me if it isn't really being applied to something out of the mainstream lore, more to my own ideas (like, for example, anything that wreaks of stereotypical conspiracy theorizing makes me think of a really goofy cartoon - looking into anything that has a mystical feeling makes me not want to, because it already gives itself away to me that way - I just tackle it bluntly, etc.). @_fourtines_ really stated this well as differences between the types.


Obviously you're not a fan MBTI, but what you described reminded me of this. 

From Lenore Thomson:

“Like Introverted Sensates, INJs may collect objects or experiences that give form to their inner life. ISJs, however, give form to consistent self-experience, and they often preserve cherished objects against changing tastes and times. One might recall, from chapter 15, the ISJ who was fascinated by cylinder phonographs, learned to repair them, and found, almost despite himself, that his expression of self had turned into his social identity and life’s work” (231).

“I*NJs, by contrast, often collect things that represent their sense of emergent meaning, even if they can’t explain why the objects matter to them.* For example, an INTJ minister of my acquaintance collects carvings of the Green Man. The instinctual nature of this pagan image resonates with him but has no relationship to his present life structure. The INJ’s self-experience nearly always involves the unknown, a state of being that’s not yet embodied” (232).

“Accordingly, where ISJs maintain and enjoy their hobbies all their lives, *INJs tend to lose interest when the fluid nature of unrealized meaning takes expressible shape and has meaning for others.* One of my cousins, an INFJ, spent years following the career of an unknown character actor, mesmerized by what she saw in him but unable to explain the interest to anyone else. When he ultimately a part in a popular TV show and won an Emmy, she felt vindicated but found that he no longer held the same fascination for her” (232).


Also, in ENPs:

“Of course, Extraverted Sensates also move on when their interest wanes, but their motives are mercilessly clear. The excitement is gone, and the experience is over. Extraverted Intuitives are more difficult to predict. *They may lose interest before anything of consequence has even happened. A small part of the vision, once realized, suggests the whole thing, and the Intuitive feels no need to consider the matter further*.” (p. 203)

“Perhaps one of the most interesting, and certainly one of the darkest, treatments of this aspect of Intuition occurs in _The Devils_, Dostoyevsky’s novel about the forces of change in nineteenth-century Russia. In his notes for tat book, Dostoyevsky describes his chief character, Nicholas Stavrogin, in terms that suggest an unmistakable ENP configuration. Stavrogin is a “man with an idea,” which does not absorb him intellectually but merges with his own nature, so that he embodies it, and “having fused with his nature, it demands to be instantly put into action.” (p. 203)

“Like a demon lover, Stavrogin courses through the lives of others, become the focus of their unmet dreams, raising their hopes, and unwittingly laying the groundwork for revolution. But as soon as his effect becomes apparent, his interest disappears and he abruptly moves on, casting about for something new.” (p. 204)

“’Don’t repeat my old ideas to me, he tells Shatov’, unable to contain his impatience’s with the man’s investment in him as a revolutionary messiah. And Shatov, having seen his highest aspirations reflected in Stavrogin, has no way to contend with his mentor’s abrupt change of mind:

‘Do you suppose I don’t see from your face that some new idea has taken
hold of you? Why am I condemned to believe in you forever? Could I have
spoken like this to anyone else?...I was not afraid of caricaturing a great
idea by my touch because Stavrogin was listening to me…Don’t you know
what that I shall kiss your footprints after you have gone? I can’t tear you
out of my heart, Nicholas Stavrogin!’”


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

hornet said:


> It is really interesting hearing how different people view symbolism.
> 
> I myself viewed the religion of Christianity pretty literally.
> God was up in the sky and invisible angels and daemons walked among us.
> It was a real a fact as the rock I could hold in my hand.


Yes I saw it this way to, until I was an adult, which is why I sometimes view Biblical literalists trapped in childhood or early adolescence.




> Then as I met with unending levels of hypocrisy and bullshit from other Christians
> I started my own journey of exploration and quickly separated the hypocrites from the true believers.
> Then I realized that every god damn person writing Church history back and including Paul was a hypocrite,
> or the very least based their dogma on previous hypocrites.
> ...


What I trust are "broader concept" spiritual systems, like I resonate stronger with interpretations of Christianity that more closely resemble interpretations of Buddhism and philosophical Taoism, because they are remarkably alike in an underlying conceptual manner, and I find that I can avoid hypocrisy and false religion by being aware of these "underlying" tenants, which I think is probably Ni analysis.

I also find my own inner symbolism to be personal to me. Once when I was 17 I wrote a monologue for my drama class, and my drama professor basically said "what the hell are you talking about" ...but in a polite way. Because I was expressing really pure, kind of immature Fi/Ni at that point I think, an inner world that had little to no connection with more "accepted" academic symbolism. 





> Losing all mystery would be a terrible thing, @_fourtines_ fortunately that doesn't seem likely.
> No matter how many mysteries we unfold another one stands ready at the gate.


:kitteh:


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

surgery said:


> lmaooo.
> 
> so does typology take away the mystery of people? wouldn't you just rather interact with people's behaviors at face value instead of interpreting them in terms of type?


I don't think you understand what I'm saying and I'm not going to bother explaining since you're being so disrespectful.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

The part of Lenore Thompson's description I don't really relate to that much would be the collecting objects thing. That never appealed to me, I mean, not for any kind of non-purpose (in that case, I'd probably tell myself to get a life). I dunno, a toy is just a toy to me, so what. You can make up anything about it, but that won't change what it is (I dunno, that sounds like a pointless quirk to me). I would agree with Lenore more if she generalized this as not really "collecting stuff" but just showing intrigue in something. I don't think collections are a type necessity at all. In fact, I don't really collect things much - not sure I would go so far as to attribute collecting stuff to type (that's not what Lenore said explicitly, but it's very easy to take it out-of-context that way), other than maybe a feeling thing (like, just because you want to for some reason). My Si doms parents are not very materialistic at all - my dad hates buying stuff and my mom is certainly in keeping with the times and gets rid of old stuff with ease. I'm cool enough with her descriptions though, as long as they're taken within context and not blindly attributed to people's actions without concern for consistency or relevance.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

fourtines said:


> I don't think you understand what I'm saying and I'm not going to bother explaining since you're being so disrespectful.



I'm sorry. I didn't mean to be disrespectful. I probably did misunderstand you, but since you said you'd rather not have the mystery taken out of certain things, I just wondered to what extent that is so. I wrote "lmaoooo" because I thought the way you said "whoa, fuck no...." was funny, not because I'm laughing at your self-experience.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> The part of Lenore Thompson's description I don't really relate to that much would be the collecting objects thing. That never appealed to me, I mean, not for any kind of non-purpose (in that case, I'd probably tell myself to get a life). I dunno, a toy is just a toy to me, so what. You can make up anything about it, but that won't change what it is (I dunno, that sounds like a pointless quirk to me). I would agree with Lenore more if she generalized this as not really "collecting stuff" but just showing intrigue in something. I don't think collections are a type necessity at all. In fact, I don't really collect things much - not sure I would go so far as to attribute collecting stuff to type (that's not what Lenore said explicitly, but it's very easy to take it out-of-context that way), other than maybe a feeling thing (like, just because you want to for some reason). My Si doms parents are not very materialistic at all - my dad hates buying stuff and my mom is certainly in keeping with the times and gets rid of old stuff with ease. I'm cool enough with her descriptions though, as long as they're taken within context and not blindly attributed to people's actions without concern for consistency or relevance.


 
Right. I probably just didn't make it clear enough that my intention about Intuition doms losing interest in things quickly after they have seen their potential manifest in reality, not the stuff about collecting. She uses the example from Dostoevsky's writing to illustrate how what she thinks is an ENP quickly becoming disenchanted with an a idea once they understand it. The example of her INFJ cousin is slightly different. She suggests that INJs Intuition leads them to be fascinated with something, which they often can't fully explain. Once their ideas become manifested in the "mainstream" though, they loose interest (in this case, at least). That made me think of what you said about symbolism--being extremely bored by symbols already held in "mainstream lore". 

I think what Thomson is probably trying to express is how the dominant function can lead to behaviors and skills that are directly opposed to ones that the inferior, when dominant, tends to lead to. Essentially, Ne doms don't feel the need to remain in touch with certain idea for too long the way an Si dom might want to use the same specific concrete information in order to stabilize changing situations over and over again. Similarly, where Se doms are often interested in staying "on trend" with the excitement of new sensate information as it comes, Ni doms tend to lose interest in information, especially ideas/symbols that are so widely understood that they become obvious. I don't know, I just thought that might be relevant, but maybe it's notttt..


----------



## emerald sea (Jun 4, 2011)

Ni innately views the world as a metaphor to be decoded, and that which is visible on the surface as a symbol representing the hidden, underlying reality. Ne reads the environment either as symptomatic of, or potentially capable of, something as yet unseen. 

however, any set of cognitive functions can be used to translate the hidden messages conveyed by the world around us...as evidenced by the general rule that people try to decode the meaning of that which confuses or intensely fascinates them. if you need proof of this, just look at two people who are deeply interested in one another, yet very unsure how the other feels about them - and all the "reading," analysis, and interpretation of underlying feelings behind actions, that goes on in such a circumstance! 

there are other motivators which can lead towards reading the world as a symbol. consider how people in general often read into things either that which they _want_ to see, that which they _expect_ to see, or that which they are _afraid_ to see (projecting their own behaviorial tendencies, their strongest desires, their inner fears or insecurities onto their "reading" of the behavior of others). 

a drive towards security, and a tendency towards imagining worst-case future scenarios, both can propel an individual towards hypervigilant "reading" of the environment ~ scanning the environment in search for potential threats, alert to secrets as yet undisclosed...as in the case of enneagram 6, or as in the case of anyone who values something so deeply that they profoundly fear to lose it. take into account, for instance, how a wife who is not typically suspicious might behave if there is any evidence her beloved husband might secretly be seeing another woman...or how a civil servant watching unfolding dangerous world events might seek to uncover the concealed driving forces behind the behavior of world leaders, in order to predict their next steps and make the choices that would ensure national safety. 

and also worthy of mention are the following ~ love for mystery novels, or watching/reading many (too many?) detective stories, can develop in their reader a desire to decipher what is REALLY going on secretly, under apparently innocent conditions, whether one's cognitive functions naturally veer that direction or not. and neither paranoia nor hallucinations about conspiracies are necessarily indicative of usage of any one specific cognitive function ~ they can occur in many mental health disorders or with usage of certain drugs. 

but if you are looking for which cognitive function _naturally_ tends towards a belief that "there is always _more_ to the story than what is immediately apparent," and which operates in "symbol interpretation mode" _by default -_ not just when prompted by a profound level of interest or curiosity in a subject - that would be Ni.


----------

