Imagine traveling to a new and distant place using only your senses to guide you.
"A newΒ studyΒ published inΒ NatureΒ has found these little moths have a navigational trick up their wingβthey use the stars and Earth's magnetic field to find their way."
"In aΒ 2018 study, researchers discovered the bogong moth can sense Earth's magnetic field and use it as a guide. Now, the same team of scientists have revealed that magnetism is just part of the story."
""If you go to the Australian bush where these moths live and look around you at night, one of the most obvious visual landmarks is the Milky Way," (...).
"We know that daytime migratory insects use the sun, so testing the starry sky seemed an obvious thing to try."
To test their hypothesis, Eric and his colleagues built a special non-magnetic lab in a remote, rural location to avoid any interference from the outside world.
Inside the lab, they created simulations of the night sky and Earth's magnetic field. Their results were astonishing.
"I think the biggest surprise was discovering that bogong moths can migrate β¦ under a projected image of the natural local starry night sky and in the total absence of Earth's magnetic field," says Eric.
When the researchers turned the artificial night sky 180 degrees, the moths flew in the opposite direction. And when the stars were randomized, the poor moths were just confused."
"It turns out the magnetic field is a backup navigational aid the moths rely on during cloudy conditions when the stars aren't visible."
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
β Live Streamingβ Interactive Chatβ Private Showsβ HD Qualityβ Free Actions
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
"How to understand the experience of feeling? We know what sensing is, an inner touch. Feeling requires another quality. It has nothing to do with βlikeβ or βdislike,β and yet it is emotion. I feel sorrow or joy. Feeling is always rising up. Like fire it flares up, then dies away. And I feel βI am.β Pure feeling has no object. I can understand it only if I am capable of seeing without an idea, word or image, able to be in contact with what is."
THE BASICS OF MBTI
(from Carl Jung's personality theory - part 1)
THE FOUR LETTERS :
(E)XTROVERSION vs (I)NTROVERSION
(S)ENSING vs I(N)TUITION
(T)HINKING vs (F)EELING
(P)ERCEIVING vs (J)UDGING
-----
In the next post, weβre going to talk more in-depth about different categories of Intuition, Sensing, Feelings and Thinking called: Cognitive Functions.
I'm thinking about one of my favorite tropes to see in fanfic: Chakra sensors being negatively affected by having their sensing shut off.
(I'm talking about the idea of characters who are "Natural chakra sensors" i. e. Sensors who are constantly sensing and have been doing so since birth. Tobirama is the character I see portrayed with this ability most often)
And I don't mean "they get anxiety from not being able to sense" I mean their whole body goes haywire. They lack stimuli from a sense that has been as ever present as the ability to hear/see/smell/touch/taste, and when it suddenly vanishes... Well, have you heard of "the world's quietest room"? (Continued below the cut)
It's a room where sound is at -24.9 decibels. the baseline "silence" would be 0 decibels, so I can't even comprehend what being in a place of negative-noise is like.
Nobody has ever been able to handle being inside it for more than 45 minutes due to things like disorientation, hallucinations, feelings of sickness, and loss of balance. It's so quiet that people will begin to hear their own organs working as their ears strain to pick up on anything to orient them.
Eventually, it just gets too much, and they have to leave. Obviously the Orfield Laboratories (the place that owns the room) has no interest in torturing people with sensory deprivation, so no one knows what would happen if people are forced to spend longer in there, but my guess would be "nothing good".
...But I'm mean, and I like it when my favorite characters get hurt, so I like it when Tobirama gets a chakra seal slapped on him and is affected negatively by it. Only when he gets comfort though, pure angst is a bit much for me! ( Β΄ β Λ ; )γ
Usually I see fics where this happens have him fall into a coma, or otherwise fall ill, but I kinda want to see one where he starts hallucinating false chakra signatures or something instead. Or imagine if it somehow "broke" his sensing? *Slaps roof of Tobirama* This bad boy can fit so many self-worth issues in him!
Nah, but seriously, I see Tobirama as a character who considers himself a tool, and as such he probably puts a lot of his self-worth into his abilities, and if one were to stop working, or worse, start sending out false signals? Yikes. Tobirama would not handle that well...
Anyway, that's all for now. Oh! And if you're curious...
Fics I know of where chakra sensory deprivation occurs:
there is not enough hate in my heart - vylat - Happens to Tobirama
Bound and Broken - Kalira - Happens to Indra (Indra as Madara & Izuna's brother AU)
(If I remember more I'll add them, if any of y'all know of any fics like that, do let me know! ^w^)
Oh, last thing! Link to an article on the world's quietest room if you wanna learn more: Inside the Worldβs Quietest Room, Where No One Lasts More Than 45 Minutes
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
β Live Streamingβ Interactive Chatβ Private Showsβ HD Qualityβ Free Actions
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
How can I tell if I'm a sensor vs an intuitive? I know there is a bias against sensors, so I'm not sure if the descriptions I found online are accurate or not. I've seen someone who is a "professional" typer say that if you're into aesthetics you must be a sensor, is that true?
Not at all. I've known INTJs who have incredible fashion sense and are super picky about their environment, by adhering to a particular aesthetic. Now, a sensing type may have BETTER fashion sense... a lot of people into interior design, fashion, makeup, etc., are sensors.
If you are an intuitive, all it means is you "know" things without having evidence from a sensing point of view. You catch on to things quickly (what's really going on here, how to do this or how to grasp this concept, or the big implications of something) rather than needing guidance through it. You treat your "assumptions" about people, situations, patterns, motives, etc., as the truth in a way that sensing types don't. If someone asked you, wait, how do you know that / what proof do you have, you might not have any, but it just seems right / like what's really going on.
Someone asks you a question about something you know a little bit about, and the answer you come up with, when you do research later, is pretty close to the truth -- you just sort of "figured it out" on an unconscious level, despite not having researched it yet. The more you know about a topic, the more accurate your "guesses." But because you trust what you don't need to explain to yourself or others, you act as if it's true when making decisions.
I have one intuitive parent and one sensing parent, and the intuitive parent is always "leaping to conclusions" about everything and stating it as a fact, to which the sensing parent goes "you can't know that for sure," or "how did you reach that conclusion? where's your evidence?" For a sensing type -- you need proof. This leads to that, and that leads to this, and this is the foundation of my hypothesis; it seems accurate, because it's proven itself to be reliable/accurate.
Intuitive types may not know the degree to which they are operating off of unseen assumptions and treating them as facts, or that those facts have no evidence behind them. So an intuitive sees their future how they want it to be, and acts as if it is already real today. They may fantasize about that future and dream about it, or work toward it, feeling that it's going to fall into place, whereas a sensor would come up with a more intentional method to get there, based on one thing leading to another.
Another thing intuition does well is big picture thinking. How this connects to that and affects this other thing and how it will play out; an INTJ I know predicted the shortages 6 months before Covid hit, and had stocked up on food/toiletries in advance. Intuition can often weave a pattern without needing to think about it much; it's like with Buffy the Vampire Slayer, a lot of ENTP Joss Wheden's plot lines were not decided upon until later seasons, but he unconsciously laid most of the groundwork without even having a plan yet, because it all makes sense. (Willow seeing an alternate reality vampire gay version of herself, years before they decided to make her bi/gay.)
Ni is specific futuristic insights, and Ne weaves a giant net that catches useful things and resolves its own proverbial plot lines.
Short answer? Ask yourself how many of your "assumptions" are intuitive leaps, and how many of them have a solid basis in reality? Are you picking up on patterns with your mind, or is your knowledge more substantial because it's built on a foundation of details?
Anon wrote: Hope you had a good trip. Im trying to find a simple example to explain to my sister how sensors and intuitive might think differently. Please help me refine this? Also, if im completely wrong, you can help me correct it.
Example: my husband just finished his workout and is about to take a shower. Asked me to do him a favor and fill up his sparkling water bottle and put it in the freezer.
A sensor might focus on the task asked of them and a job well done is that there is cold and refreshing sparkling water in the freezer for my husband when hes out of his shower.
An intuitive might focus on why of this task. My husband asked me because he finished his workout, hes sweating, and he likes hot showers. He loves sparkling water and really wants something cold and refreshing when hes done because its a good cool down. A job well done is when my husband gets out of the shower and the sparkling water can help him cool down. There's a distinction between the physical task at hand and the meaning to the task.
Of course there's extroverted and introverted functions, but this is as far as ive gotten so far in my example.
-------------------
I suggest you review the S/N parts of the study guides because you haven't grasped what these cognitive processes are really about. I can't help you refine an idea when it's off the mark. If you're trying to illustrate the difference between S and N, this is a poor way to do it, because this very simple situation doesn't require any significant cogitation. It's kind of like saying, "This is how Ss breathe and this is how Ns breathe". It's off the mark because everyone breathes and S/N doesn't impact breathing.
Furthermore, there isn't as big of a difference as you might think between the two examples. Everything you said for the N is pretty much implied for the S, assuming the person is a human with normal brain function and basic logic. If you asked the S why they did it, they'd give you the same explanation as the N, because you seem to be invoking cause and effect thinking - neither S nor N but T. You've just made the N seem like they suffer verbal diarrhea, unable to perform a simple task without having to mentally narrate every painful detail.
The first fundamental point that's missing from your example is the notion of "purpose": What are S and N used for? S and N are perceptual processes; they only apply in situations of perception and it's not clear your example fits. In psychology, perception is defined as the active process of interpreting sensory information for making sense of one's environment. To quote my Type Spotting Guide:
The heart of the [S/N distinction] is this: When the person looks out into the world, do they mainly see things as they actually exist in their concrete form (and the notion of potential comes later), or do they mainly see things in terms of images/ideals of what those things can/might eventually become (and the notion of factual reality comes later)?
If you're trying to illustrate this distinction, it hasn't come through.
A typical example of the distinction would be to compare what each cognitive process "sees" when it's looking at an object and trying to make sense of its situation. For example, let's have them looking at a house that has fallen into disrepair:
The Sensing process would see the object exactly for what it is, just the plain facts: a house in disrepair.
The Intuitive process would imagine things such as what the house used to be at its peak or how it could be restored to greatness, etc.
The second fundamental point that's missing from your example is the notion of time orientation. Because S perceives objects as they are, it is primarily oriented in present concrete reality. Because N perceives objects in terms of what they could develop into, it is primarily oriented toward future possible realities. Taking the above example:
- A Sensor would primarily see the house as being in disrepair. If you asked them whether they'd buy it, they'd think about whether it would be feasible to fix it up, in terms of material and logistical constraints. Their vision of the future is firmly grounded in the current concrete reality of the situation. "Feasible" differs from "possible" because it's centered on "doable" rather than "conceivable". Of course, questions of whether they like the house (F) or whether it is strategically advantageous (T) would also enter into consideration.
- An Intuitive also sees that the house is in disrepair and that there would be material and logistical constraints to consider. The difference is, if you asked whether they'd buy it, it would depend on their ability to conjure up an abstract image of what the house could be. Without an ideal to aim for or a promising vision to motivate commitment, they wouldn't move forward with it, even if material and logistical constraints were taken care of. The crucial point is, if their ideal/vision is clear and strong enough, they could move forward purely based on hope and faith (that things would work out), despite material and logistical constraints (that would hold a Sensor back).
The third fundamental point is whether the cognitive process has an extraverted or introverted orientation (Se vs Si vs Ne vs Ni), which could significantly impact a person's appetite for risk. The fourth fundamental point is the exact stack position of the cognitive function, which could significantly alter its overall degree of influence. The fifth fundamental point is how the cognitive function is interacting with the other functions (type dynamics), especially any functions above it in the stack, which could significantly alter or even distort perception.
Every functional stack has both a Sensing and an Intuitive function, which means every person has the capability to see the plain facts as well as envision what could potentially be done with the plain facts. What personality type is getting at is the individual's dominant or preferred mode of operation, generally, the mode that is automatic or tends to come first when a person is faced with the challenge of understanding any given situation.
And finally, the most complicated factor to take into consideration is human psychology's many other processes, especially individual will. There is always a possibility that an individual chooses to go against or override their dominant/automatic personality settings because of being influenced or pressured by unpredictable factors, such as extreme circumstances or mental/emotional dysfunction. As such, type is more easily identified by longer term patterns of behavior rather than one-off situations of the kind you're invoking.
In other words, since you haven't even captured the first fundamental point listed above, your example is missing too many layers of complexity to be useful. (Side note: A lot of people dismiss the idea of personality type because they have no idea about the complexity and think it's just about sorting people into arbitrary boxes.)
