Oh, that's interesting! I typically go with exploring little micro-systems, then apply what I've learned from the micro-system to the larger system... it's all about constructing relationships between patterns. The J part largely comes in terms of the obsessive long-term planning and occasional attempts to alter systems, as well as a habit of keeping an "idealized system" in mind at all times (though I frequently update this mental model). I suppose I go in full P mode most of the time, taking J-side notes as to how I could apply the principles I've learned in a long-term xanatos gambit if I ever felt like it. It's kind of funny because when I'm observing I'll usually come off like a total airhead, and when I'm in application-mode I apparently seem shockingly cold and competent.
I'm big picture. All the time.
I was originally a computer science major, but dropped out as soon as I started taking programming classes. I understood everything just fine. I could construct the logical flowcharts demonstrating how everything would work and such. When it came to actually writing it, I was a mess. Too many crunchy details in syntax. I got so lost.
I took a few philosophy classes, and was so at home I didn't even take notes.
I don't get along with INTJs in general, though. Too cold (and, in my experience, arrogant), even though my lean is very heavy on the I, N, and T. I mean, I can figure out how to deal with them, but... I don't want to >_>
I can totally understand. My manager isn't cold or arrogant, but extremely stubborn and trolling. The thing is, he doesn't mean any harm by it. I don't think he realizes it most of the time. Intent is everything to me. If I know he means no harm, I can ignore it. Because I can ignore it, it never amounts to anything. Thus, we get along. Other people don't read behind his words, and can't talk to him ever without an argument.
Myers-Briggs typology =/ The Wikipedia article explains better than I can.
It's vaguely pseudo-scientific, but has just enough apparent validity to make discussion interesting.
It's the only psychological personality anything I put any stock in. It has plenty of history behind it, its descriptions aren't vague and arbitrary like others of its kind, and the results are incredibly consistent and reliable.
Author
Topic: Things that made you sad today thread. (Read 9794771 times)