/sci/ - Science & Math

bump

>>>/psy/

>>4854656

I just tried searching for a psy and couldn't find it. If this isn't the right board to post this in then what is?

>>4854682
>>>/soc/

I'm 95% sure that nobody on /sci/ asked or will ever ask you for this.
There are so many interesting areas of mathematics, physics and chemistry to be explored.
There are so many interesting ways to use this information to create new devices that can change mankind forever. Which begs the question: why spend your precise time on such a pointless thing as this pseudomambojumbo.
>tripfag
Oh ok, I see..you have the intelligence of a squirrel.

>>4854682
I made my post expressing my opinion that we need a /psy/ board for this.

Alright.. I would never do this irl (for ppl i know irl reading this)... but I'm pretty sure this is definitely allowed on this site

>>4854690

Hey asshole, read this. this is u.
http://personalitypage.com/html/ENTP_rel.html
if im wrong then im wrong. if im right im right

People of the internet notice his speech form of extraverted intuition bouncing between new thought to new thought.
http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Extraverted-iNtuiting.cfm

>>4854716
Every single time you appear, I tell you the same thing: Please speak more professionally, so more people will take you seriously. It's an unfortunate thing to deal with, but deal with it we must.

>if im wrong then im wrong. if im right im right

Get out retard.

>>4854719

Sorry, Alright I shall.

>>4854757

What is >>4854719 's type?

>>4854761

My best bet is he is an ISTP.
http://personalitypage.com/html/ISTP.html

If not ISTP then for sure INTP.

He is definately talking in a perceptive way (describing reality). It is really hard to tell if he is talking in the immediate moment or like slightly connecting his thoughts with extraverted intuition but I'm putting it heavily extraverted sensing.

It is then very easy to see that he is using a lot of introverted thinking with words like "professionally", "seriously", and "unfortunate"
http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Introverted-Thinking.cfm

>>4854774
See, I told you I was a different IXTX than INTJ. I suspected my dominant cognitive function would be Ti, too.

>>4854789

How do I know you from before this thread?

What about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics

>>4854795

Socionics is flawed because it flips the (p) Perceiving and (j) Judgement code.

This is flawed because there is no reason for this flip.

A MBTI INTJ would be a Socionics INTP

The difference between talking in judgments and perceptions is very noticeable in the formation of people's thoughts/sentences.

Just look at the structure of how I am communicating. I will always be talking in judgements... I will always be laying down reality.

>>4854804
>>4854804
Piss off, you stupid unscientific tripqueer.

You are not wanted on this board, perhaps these may be more to your liking:
>>>/hm/
>>>/soc/

>>4854804
I am predominantly INTP, but as I expressed in a thread yesterday, I tend to express myself in what I believe to be objective truths. I don't think that equates to a judging function. Or does it?

Minor things like spelling out "you" and proper capitalization does help a great deal. If for example someone writes "lol" (or god forbid he says it out loud) (I don't know if you have) I will immediately dismiss him as a bleeding retard not worth my time.

It's helping your presentation a great deal.

>>4855158
I don't understand why people use 'lol' like a word or use emoticons like xD, if they are to be immediately dismissed as immature. It just doesn't make sense.

>>4855158

"predominantly INTP"? There is no middle ground to your personality type unless you are younger then like 14.

Linked is my powerpoint on the type/speech formula with examples
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91580124/How-to-Type-People-by-Speech

Judgments and Perceptions are linked to how your sentence is structured by you.

People that talk in judgments are claiming reality as this.
People that talk in perceptions are describing reality as this.

If you are making judgments externally then you are mainly gathering perceptions internally.
If you are making perceptions externally than you are mainly making judgments internally.

You are not making judgments (claiming reality) in your sentence structure like I am.

>>4855158

You are
Introverted Thinking Leading
Extraverted Intuition Supporting

Yes... you spend your time making a lot more introverted thinking judgments in your head.

1. You make most of your judgments internally using introverted thinking.
http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Introverted-Thinking.cfm

2. You express yourself extravertedly though through Extraverted Intuition. These are perceptions. Everyone of your sentences is being descriptive of reality than making claims about reality.


"It's helping your presentation a great deal."
" I don't think that equates to a judging function."
"Minor things like spelling out "you" and proper capitalization does help a great deal."

All descriptions (perceptions)

>>4856244
"predominantly INTP"? There is no middle ground to your personality type unless you are younger then like 14.

I don't see why. It's my experience from both myself and others that different response types (corresponding to Myers Briggs types) manifest themselves in different situations and that it's possible to train yourself to different response types.

It may be true for most people that they are stuck in one pattern, but it's not likely to be universally true.

>>4856292

You have to be careful of confusing personality types with cognitive brain functions.

You can access all 8 of your functions and I think that is what you are getting at. Yes, you can train your lower functions. They will still always take more energy to use than your normal 1st and 2nd functions.

The only thing I agree with you is that you can train to improve your lower function (and higher functions too of course, but that should happen normally.)

You will not be able to attract and have perfect chemistry "love" with a type that does not naturally have it with you though.

IE: If you are an INTJ like me, you cannot work super hard and pretend to be an ESFP and then all of a sudden ISFJ's are your best friend.

For the people that do not know, INTJ's and ISFJ's do not cognitively mesh well at all.

>>4856194
I don't understand why people use 'lol' like a word or use emoticons like xD, if they are to be immediately dismissed as immature. It just doesn't make sense.

Textspeak has few of the nuances of spoken language. It's easy to appear for example spiteful or demanding. The conventional measures of lolz and smileys constitute informal excuses to gloss over the aforementioned tendencies. It's more necessary if one is unaccustomed to express oneself in writing. But the need for excuses in general manifests itself as humbling yourself to the other party, always to make up for some real or perceived slight to the ends of maintaining the relation.

So you've already failed, or you think you have. So it appears that your MO is one of habitual compromise and promise. You're not in the moment, because your presence is always an afterthought. I'm with you but you're not with me. I could do better with my time.

More importantly, you are inconsistent and whimsical: You have no principles or you do not follow them and you are afraid of commitment. How can I plan my interactions with you? There will be more useful associates.

Even more importantly, you do not trust your abilities, so how can I be expected to do so? This does not speak to your favour.

>type me

>>4856194
>I don't understand why people use 'lol' like a word or use emoticons like xD, if they are to be immediately dismissed as immature. It just doesn't make sense.

Textspeak has few of the nuances of spoken language. It's easy to appear for example spiteful or demanding. The conventional measures of lolz and smileys constitute informal excuses to gloss over the aforementioned tendencies. It's more necessary if one is unaccustomed to express oneself in writing. But the need for excuses in general manifests itself as humbling yourself to the other party, always to make up for some real or perceived slight to the ends of maintaining the relation.

So you've already failed, or you think you have. So it appears that your MO is one of habitual compromise and promise. You're not in the moment, because your presence is always an afterthought. I'm with you but you're not with me. I could do better with my time.

More importantly, you are inconsistent and whimsical: You have no principles or you do not follow them and you are afraid of commitment. How can I plan my interactions with you? There will be more useful associates.

Even more importantly, you do not trust your abilities, so how can I be expected to do so? This does not speak in your favour.

>type me

>>4856423

INTP.
http://personalitypage.com/html/INTP.html

You do this ALOT
http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Introverted-Thinking.cfm