# Introversion=perceiving / extraversion=judging



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Inguz said:


> What this rant has to do with anything I have yet to understand. Anyway, empirical science > your theory based on arrows on some picture.


Then show me how evidence contradicts it? It doesn't, and you know this just as well as I do!

What no one seems to understand anymore is that theories come before experiments. If you have no theory there is nothing to experiment, to prove or disprove... Unless however the goal is to experiment for the sole reason to experiment, seems familiar, atleast, when I was still studying flawed science of bio-engineering. 

Nowadays, when someone even tries to come up with a new theory, it's automatic response is: "Not in-line with evidence." Um, *cough*, I think you meant, "Not in-line with old theory."

Empirical science, the biggest abomination of modern times...

Um, in case you haven't noticed, you can't prove something non-physical with physical instruments!!! It's called common sense!

Physical evidence is the new God:
Theists: "Is it in-line with God's commandments?"
Materialists: "Is it in-line with past empirical evidence?"

Get a life, seriously.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> Then show me how evidence contradicts it? It doesn't, and you know this just as well as I do!
> 
> What no one seems to understand anymore is that theories come before experiments. If you have no theory there is nothing to experiment, to prove or disprove...
> 
> ...


Stimulation seeking behaviour and extraversion

There are ways to measure brain activity.


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

To be frank I read all this,
And all it seemed to do was glorify introversion subtly,
So as an extravert I cannot absorb?
I'm just a condescending person who molds everything to my liking?

I think not


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

phoenixpinion said:


> Then show me how evidence contradicts it? It doesn't, and you know this just as well as I do!
> 
> What no one seems to understand anymore is that theories come before experiments. If you have no theory there is nothing to experiment, to prove or disprove... Unless however the goal is to experiment for the sole reason to experiment, seems familiar, atleast, when I was still studying flawed science of bio-engineering.
> 
> ...


So may I ask,
Are you an Extrovert?
Or an Introvert?
As you'd need to provide personal proof to this at the least,
Yet you'd lack the other sides perspective,
Your "Theory" needs to be backed by some form of proof,
As with any theory,
You're not a special snowflake,
You have yet to show anything to support what you think,
You only told us "I think",
Thats useless.

Any person who is even slightly adept at developing a theory knows there must be evidence,
Or supporting theories to link it,
Because a theory is a possibility of what may be true,
Not some wishy washy collection of poorly supported thoughts.

You brought forward a POINT,
Not any sort of evidence,
And certainly not anything substantial enough to make your line of thought plausible,
So before you go on please provide us with evidence!


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Inguz said:


> Stimulation seeking behaviour and extraversion
> 
> There are ways to measure brain activity.


"According to Eysenck, extraverts require more external stimulation than introverts in order to maintain optimal arousal levels. Manipulation of stimulation was attempted, by markedly reducing sensory input without the _S_'s prior expectancy, thereby minimizing the possible occurrence of differential demand characteristics. Seven measures of extraversion were used to select the final _S_ samples. A lever-pulling task was reinforced with light and music. Extraverts had significantly higher initial and overall response rates than introverts. Predicted performance decrements and reminiscence were not manifested. Findings concerning extraverts' higher need for stimulation were discussed in terms of Eysenck's theory, hedonic value of reinforcement, differential drives and ‘time-out’ from positive reinforcement."

All I read was that extraverts require more physical stimulation to get the same 'high'. EXACTLY, because they filter A BIG CHUNK OF THE INFORMATION. 

What people don't realise is that any conclusions can be pulled from empirical evidence. The trick is to pull the correct one. Materialist science always subtly pulls the materialist conclusion, because they can't conceive of any other.

Weird how people filter the world around them, but when it comes to almighty science, they filter nothing and just take everything at face value... "Because it's evidence right?" Haha, seriously...


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> "According to Eysenck, extraverts require more external stimulation than introverts in order to maintain optimal arousal levels. Manipulation of stimulation was attempted, by markedly reducing sensory input without the _S_'s prior expectancy, thereby minimizing the possible occurrence of differential demand characteristics. Seven measures of extraversion were used to select the final _S_ samples. A lever-pulling task was reinforced with light and music. Extraverts had significantly higher initial and overall response rates than introverts. Predicted performance decrements and reminiscence were not manifested. Findings concerning extraverts' higher need for stimulation were discussed in terms of Eysenck's theory, hedonic value of reinforcement, differential drives and ‘time-out’ from positive reinforcement."
> 
> All I read was that extraverts require more physical stimulation to get the same 'high'. EXACTLY, because they filter A BIG CHUNK OF THE INFORMATION.
> 
> ...


Yes, more, think of the five hamburgers example that I gave you.

How do you know that you pulled out the correct one?


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Mzansi said:


> To be frank I read all this,
> And all it seemed to do was glorify introversion subtly,
> So as an extravert I cannot absorb?
> I'm just a condescending person who molds everything to my liking?
> ...


I don't know you so how the heck do I know? Truth doesn't care about people's feelings...

How do you even know you're a real extravert? Because the 4 letter code says so? 

I doubt a true extravert would even bother with the unproductive pasttime of anonymous internet forums in the first place...


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Inguz said:


> Yes, more, think of the five hamburgers example that I gave you.
> 
> How do you know that you pulled out the correct one?


Common sense. 

I'm not saying this makes total sense, just more than the mainstream theories...


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> Common sense.
> 
> I'm not saying this makes total sense, just more than the mainstream theories...


Your common sense über alles!!!


----------



## Meadow (Sep 11, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> Conclusion? Introversion is Yin, extraversion is Yang. The reason why extraversion is still glorified (in the West atleast) is because the patriarchy is still in control. Aslong as we glorify extraversion, Yin will remain suppressed. Oh, and don't tell me that this is false because feminism has freed women. First of all, there's a difference between female/Yin energy and women. Second of all, feminism stands for women striving to the top alongside men, in other words, women turned into men. Feminism has not strengthened Yin, it has strengthened Yang.


I'm surprised no one has said this part of the argument has "issues." First, "feminism stands for women striving to the top alongside men." You've just rewritten the dictionary definition, since feminism stands for choices. Second, "women striving to the top alongside men, in other words, women turned into men." That's beneath what this site is about. Third, putting your "arguments" together, the population of men is equally as likely to be introverted/yin as women, women equally as likely to be extroverted/yang as men, so it might make for more happiness for yang women to strive to the top, while ying men stay home and take care of the house. I'm not putting down either role, just following through with what you said.


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

phoenixpinion said:


> I don't know you so how the heck do I know? Truth doesn't care about people's feelings...
> 
> How do you even know you're a real extravert? Because the 4 letter code says so?
> 
> I doubt a true extravert would even bother with the unproductive pasttime of anonymous internet forums in the first place...



Yes truth doesn't care about how you "feel" about this,
You need to actually have backing up of what you say,
And a extravert can be on here as much,
And there is nothing anonymous about this,
It's just you still not being able to back up what you say!

Way to go with you're silly attempt at diverting attention away from your shoddy theory,
Which I might add is a sham of a theory.

I expect proof when being preached to,
Not silly stereotypes,
And even sillier assumptions about my type,
I am an extrovert,
But hey,
Nothing wrong if I was an introvert,
I just know the only useless time being spent is you and your dream like theories,
That is a true waste of time!


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Mzansi said:


> Yes truth doesn't care about how you "feel" about this,
> You need to actually have backing up of what you say,
> And a extravert can be on here as much,
> And there is nothing anonymous about this,
> ...


Sociology doesn't work on evidence, because it's not a real science. It's not based on numbers, so it can't be proven empirically. If I'm wrong then how come the MBTI still has no supporting evidence? And if MBTI doesn't need evidence to appear credible, why do I then do have to suddenly provide evidence to disprove something that had no evidence in the first place? This line of reasoning is just BS. Seems to be personality cafe's default mindset.
However, if you actually use your mind you know the evidence is on my side, meaning introversion=perceiving=right brain=no "I"=timelessness and extraversion=judging=left brain="I"=past/future. The evidence is in the Bicameral Mind theory of Julian Jaynes. Another piece of evidence is left brain strokes as I've already listed as that video in one of my first posts.

You know that time during math exam when you already knew the answer to that question, but didn't know the logic you used to get to that answer and you had to "rewind"/"slow down" to search for these unimportant subconscious middle steps. I have that feeling now. I know 100% sure on my mother's grave that extraversion is based on judgement, therefore it makes no sense to split up E/I and J/P as Jung/Myers-Briggs did.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Mzansi said:


> But hey,
> Nothing wrong if I was an introvert,
> I just know the only useless time being spent is you and your dream like theories,
> That is a true waste of time!


Then get out of here if I'm wasting your time! You're not the center of the universe because I wasn't even preaching to you. You actually prove my point by saying this... It is also funny how you find dreaming pointless ("useless time spent is you and your dream like theories"), considering you are supposed to be the dreamer, the idealist, the NF. Must be nice having the "Giver" as your personal archetype, i.e. "I can't take because I'm labeled as a selfless giver" Right...

Edit: You honestly think in this world of 7 billion people that your productivity will even matter? You're nothing but an ant in an ant hive, and you may try as hard as you can, you will probably not even leave a trace of your existence. Time wasted is not wasted time, because time doesn't exist in the first place. This is incomprehensible to the left part of the brain, because lineair past->future thinking is the whole basis of its existence of "I".

I've heard theories on how 90% of humanity has been effectively imprisoned into their limited anaesthetic left-brains. It seems to make more sense everyday... Especially when we now have psychiatry that treats any person who thinks outside the norm with anaesthetics that dull your mind and senses, that shut you off from the universe.

Edit 2: What am I even doing here on this forum? It's like we speak different languages...


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

phoenixpinion said:


> Then get out of here if I'm wasting your time! You're not the center of the universe because I wasn't even preaching to you. You actually prove my point by saying this... It is also funny how you find dreaming pointless ("useless time spent is you and your dream like theories"), considering you are supposed to be the dreamer, the idealist, the NF. Must be nice having the "Giver" as your personal archetype, i.e. "I can't take because I'm labeled as a selfless giver" Right...
> 
> Edit: You honestly think in this world of 7 billion people that your productivity will even matter? You're nothing but an ant in an ant hive, and you may try as hard as you can, you will probably not even leave a trace of your existence. Time wasted is not wasted time, because time doesn't exist in the first place. This is incomprehensible to the left part of the brain, because lineair past->future thinking is the whole basis of its existence of "I".
> 
> ...


All of what you said shows classic signs of either being a troll,
Or just being unable to accept YOUR place in this life,
I am an NF,
I don't need you to confirm that for me,
And you certainly don't know what being an NF means,
Since you lack any sort of perspective on the matter.

Second of all,
I am right brained,
Proven and tested,
It doesn't take a left brained person to realize what you've said lacks any evidence,
Or sensibility,
It's just a badly constructed idea that reeks of your own personal bias.

And it's better you either start talking like a grown up,
And not thrash like a child on here,
Otherwise please do leave,
We don't need someone who throws around useless theories,
And even more useless generalizations.

PS You obviously have never met an NF if you use that general,
Weak and shallow description of us


----------



## Devrim (Jan 26, 2013)

phoenixpinion said:


> Sociology doesn't work on evidence, because it's not a real science. It's not based on numbers, so it can't be proven empirically. If I'm wrong then how come the MBTI still has no supporting evidence? And if MBTI doesn't need evidence to appear credible, why do I then do have to suddenly provide evidence to disprove something that had no evidence in the first place? This line of reasoning is just BS. Seems to be personality cafe's default mindset.
> However, if you actually use your mind you know the evidence is on my side, meaning introversion=perceiving=right brain=no "I"=timelessness and extraversion=judging=left brain="I"=past/future. The evidence is in the Bicameral Mind theory of Julian Jaynes. Another piece of evidence is left brain strokes as I've already listed as that video in one of my first posts.
> 
> You know that time during math exam when you already knew the answer to that question, but didn't know the logic you used to get to that answer and you had to "rewind"/"slow down" to search for these unimportant subconscious middle steps. I have that feeling now. I know 100% sure on my mother's grave that extraversion is based on judgement, therefore it makes no sense to split up E/I and J/P as Jung/Myers-Briggs did.


There is no evidence on your side,
Thats the whole point,
It's just you twisting some little known facts and theories to yours,
You use half a fact to support what you say,
Not taking the whole rationale behind what you say.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)




----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Mzansi said:


> I am an NF,
> I don't need you to confirm that for me,
> And you certainly don't know what being an NF means,
> Since you lack any sort of perspective on the matter.
> ...


I'm not denying you're an NF.
And I never said you're a total extravert or left-brainer, since according to my spectrum, you ENFJ's are pretty close to the middle:

ESTJ-ENTJ-ESTP-ESFP-ESFJ-*ENFJ*-ENTP-ENFP------ISTP-INTP-ISTJ-ISFJ-ISFP-INFP-INTJ-INFJ

(That is because even though you're extravert (left-brain characteristic), you're still a feeler and intuitive (right-brain characteristics))

Also take note that if you swap the letter E with I, you become a total right-brainer. 

It's not as black and white...


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> Sociology doesn't work on evidence, because it's not a real science. It's not based on numbers, so it can't be proven empirically. If I'm wrong then how come the MBTI still has no supporting evidence?


It's summer, phoenixpinion! Time to crawl out from under that log.

Like the Big Five, the MBTI now has decades of data behind it. See this post and the posts it links to.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

reckful said:


> It's summer, phoenixpinion! Time to crawl out from under that log.
> 
> Like the Big Five, the MBTI now has decades of data behind it. See this post and the posts it links to.


It also has decades of data against it. If you're determined to proof something, you will. Just leave behind the anomalies in the studies, or subtly fit the evidence to match your pre-determined conclusion, leaving behind simpler hypotheses' that explain the evidence better.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

phoenixpinion said:


> Just leave behind the anomalies in the studies, or subtly fit the evidence to match your pre-determined conclusion, leaving behind simpler hypotheses' that explain the evidence better.


You seem to be an expert on this.


----------



## rawrmosher (Apr 22, 2013)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems like extrovert bashing to me =(


----------

