Patterns of observation

[Gaze]

Sometimes i notice patterns across people's habits, thinking, or situations, possibly related to the global learning perspective, and i realize that these global patterns that i notice are not always apparent although i assume everyone notices these patterns. I'm wondering if it's a Ne or P trait.

My question, do you notice patterns in unique ways not typically noticeable to others? What kinds of patterns and could you give examples?

I'll look up some articles on this as well.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Noticing patterns like that is generally associated as being an especially Ne thing.
(not that you can't do it via other means, but this is Ne's speciality)

I tend to look at ideas and patterns from a very abstract perspective - objective
reality is the starting point, and ultimate end point, but all the main conceptualising
is done internally, subjectively. Ne's can see these patterns manifest directly.

 

[Gaze]

Noticing patterns like that is generally associated as being an especially Ne thing.
(not that you can't do it via other means, but this is Ne's speciality)

I tend to look at ideas and patterns from a very abstract perspective - objective
reality is the starting point, and ultimate end point, but all the main conceptualising
is done internally, subjectively. Ne's can see these patterns manifest directly.

I agree with this description of how it works. Could you give an example of how this works in your own experience?

[MENTION=3846]Artsu Tharaz[/MENTION]

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I'm not good with specific examples.

Basically, when I see the meaning of a situation, it is based on how
it relates to my general model of how I see things - I would say that
it is akin to philosophy (Ni philosophers, anyway) and so what I am
doing is creating an over-arching perspective for interpreting things.

Ne's will see the phenomenon as-is, and will also see the connection
between different phenomenon - patterns between patterns - but
there is no real core perspective being formed; rather, Ne's form a
set of principles (based on logic or values) from their observations.

So, Ne = lots of smaller, more specific ideas
and Ni = one (or a few), holistic perspective(s)

(also, it's interesting to take not of what I've done with this post.
Rather than answering the topic by dealing with the pattern directly,
or coming up with an explanation for it alone, I've tried to reduce
it to my current, more generalised understanding of how this sort
of matter works - an interpretation more so than an explanation)

 

[Gaze]

I'm not good with specific examples.

Basically, when I see the meaning of a situation, it is based on how
it relates to my general model of how I see things - I would say that
it is akin to philosophy (Ni philosophers, anyway) and so what I am
doing is creating an over-arching perspective for interpreting things.

Ne's will see the phenomenon as-is, and will also see the connection
between different phenomenon - patterns between patterns - but
there is no real core perspective being formed; rather, Ne's form a
set of principles (based on logic or values) from their observations.

So, Ne = lots of smaller, more specific ideas
and Ni = one (or a few), holistic perspective(s)

(also, it's interesting to take not of what I've done with this post.
Rather than answering the topic by dealing with the pattern directly,
or coming up with an explanation for it alone, I've tried to reduce
it to my current, more generalised understanding of how this sort
of matter works - an interpretation more so than an explanation)

Do you think Ne is information dependent or is it simply a creative function capable of making sense of seemingly unrelated information it discovers? In other words, can Ne create connections or links out of nothing or must there be concrete information for there to be insights?

 

[Gaze]

(also, it's interesting to take not of what I've done with this post.
Rather than answering the topic by dealing with the pattern directly,
or coming up with an explanation for it alone, I've tried to reduce
it to my current, more generalised understanding of how this sort
of matter works - an interpretation more so than an explanation)

Because with interpretations, there are more possibilities, while explanations seek a single way to describe the truth of a situation.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Do you think Ne is information dependent or is it simply a creative function capable of making sense of seemingly unrelated information it discovers? In other words, can Ne create connections or links out of nothing or must there be concrete information for there to be insights?

So, does it make-up connections, or just see them?

I imagine it would do both.

Because with interpretations, there are more possibilities, while explanations seek a single way to describe the truth of a situation.

I don't think this is quite the reason. You can also explain something in multiple ways.

Explanations are more rigid though - they try to find a precise way of breaking up
the problem into logical steps, such as a scientific explanation of a phenomenon;
whereas the underlying scientific model being used to base the explanation on, is
an interpretation. The explanation depends on it in a sense.

 

[Gaze]

So, does it make-up connections, or just see them?

I imagine it would do both.


I don't think this is quite the reason. You can also explain something in multiple ways.

Explanations are more rigid though - they try to find a precise way of breaking up
the problem into logical steps, such as a scientific explanation of a phenomenon;
whereas the underlying scientific model being used to base the explanation on, is
an interpretation. The explanation depends on it in a sense.

But scientific explanation is not simply exploring possibilities for the sake of considering other options. Scientific explanation involves a desire to figure out the actual basis or foundation for the results. An explanation is a search for truth, whereas interpretation is more "play"; interest in seeing multiple ways to approach a problem or figure out a strategy rather than assuming or promoting the use or demonstration of one.

 

[Gaze]

Just found a classic Ne based activity: 99 unconventional ways to use an elastic band or paperclip.

 

[gps]

Sometimes i notice patterns across people's habits, thinking, or situations, possibly related to the global learning perspective, and i realize that these global patterns that i notice are not always apparent although i assume everyone notices these ...

These?
As if we all have the same set of operative `patterns' at the same time?
Irrespective of priming?

... patterns.
I'm wondering if it's a Ne or P trait.

It's a human trait ... part of the human condition, I'm quite sure.

My question, do you notice patterns in unique ways not typically noticeable to others?
What kinds of patterns and could you give examples?

I'll look up some articles on this as well.

I've noticed that human's can't NOT behold, apperceive, recognize, or spot patterns, themes, etc.
Moreover, they/we don't even need sensory input to experience patterns as accounts from sensory deprivation tanks have made clear.

Human individuals can't NOT experience patterns anymore than they/we can NOT think of a pink elephant.
And about any scheme imaginable can be misused for pattern recognition-cum-attribution.
Some read ink blots, some tea leaves, some clouds in the sky.
Some 20-something punks in a rival vBulletin group have even been using Jungian Cognitive functions as a means of projecting their `patterns' onto others using the vocabulary of Jung ... misusing Jungian distinctions for reading tea leaves, ink blots, and the psyches of those who can otherwise outwit, out-think and/or out-debate them.

We can't stop others from using patterns and categorical discrimination schemes.
I'd even go so far as to assert that whatever holds true about patterns conveyed via verbal languages as per the Sapir-Whorf-Korzybski hypothesis hold more strongly for patterns in general.

refs:
Pattern recognition

Apperception

Projective test

Sensory Deprivation Tank

Categorical perception

Attribution

 

[Gaze]

I always found it curious in my classes, there would be this single way to interpret something written in a novel. There were preset strategies or ways to interpret the theme, characters, behavior, etc. rather than being allowed the chance to think of unique applications of a theory or theoretical framework. How the theory worked internally made no difference; as long as i could make a plausible case that one thing has a link or connection to something else not seemingly related, without compromising the theory, I did fairly well.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I always found it curious in my classes, there would be this single way to interpret something written in a novel. There were preset strategies or ways to interpret the theme, characters, behavior, etc. rather than being allowed the chance to think of unique applications of a theory or theoretical framework. How the theory worked internally made no difference; as long as i could make a plausible case that one thing has a link or connection to something else not seemingly related, without compromising the theory, I did fairly well.

Honestly, I think they do this so they can get through it quicker, so they show objectively how much the kids are learning.

If you just let the students pick their own way to interpret things, it would take too long for them to form a view which as sophisticated as what they give you, so they just tell you what to write and judge you based on that so they can more easily report their results, "Look how complex novels we got this year! And you can see from our results that they understand the material". Creativity makes it harder to do an "objective" assessment.

Personally, I think school allows for more creativity in the sciences, because you can actually show that your working is correct, if it logically leads to the correct answer. Not having a single what, as per subjects like English, means they have to be more restricting in how you can get there. To me, mathematics is the subject which allows for most freedom of thought, because it is the subject with the most objective answers. If someone doesn't understand my philosophical ideas, they can't see whether or not what I'm saying is even coherent, but not understanding my mathematical ideas doesn't matter because they can see that I got to the right answer and so I can do it however I want.

School needs to get rid of objective assessment, and instead focus on helping students reach their full potential.

 

[Gaze]

You know, phrasing the question as a Ne thing is probably limiting. We all have different ways of seeing, and notice different patterns in things everyday. Some find it easier to pick out mathematical patterns, others social, or psychological patterns. And each may derive interesting insights about these patterns. In any case, it's all good.

 

[Trifoilum]

I agreed with the Ni/Ne comparison; I was confused about the Ne claims at first ("...huh? But I did that too *cue endless tirade about me being an INFJ..or not?*"), but when I thought about it; the pattern I noticed is processed and translated within my own mind; interpretation is a good word.

I don't know if other functions do it, although it won't be much of a trouble imagining it. Maybe the....areas, or the things patterned were different, or they use a different method...?

 

[Gaze]

I agreed with the Ni/Ne comparison; I was confused about the Ne claims at first ("...huh? But I did that too *cue endless tirade about me being an INFJ..or not?*"), but when I thought about it; the pattern I noticed is processed and translated within my own mind; interpretation is a good word.

I don't know if other functions do it, although it won't be much of a trouble imagining it. Maybe the....areas, or the things patterned were different, or they use a different method...?

Hey [MENTION=2172]Trifoilum[/MENTION] , could you elaborate on this part?

 

[Trifoilum]

Hey @Trifoilum , could you elaborate on this part?

Let's see, maybe Si/Se are making more patterns based on 'sensory' / generally more 'grounded' inputs, with Si having similar 'process' with Ni (comparing the inputs with already existing frameworks)?

For instance, the pattern that people scratching their nose and snorting might mean they are having a cold and thus are going to be sick / having some sort of sickness...would be Si..? But with a memory kind of relations around here somewhere; it might be that one has noticed someone / the same person under this pattern before.

For comparison, my form of Se pattern would be this; when I am thinking about something embarrassing and/or shameful, I tend to be highly nervous-- for about 3-4 seconds. Then it's alright. I realized on this after taking note of what I felt during those moments.

for comparison, Ni seems to be...I'll use one of mine (hopefully it -is- Ni); There's a phase of me when I turned up highly analytical, critical, and selfish, then I swayed / turned myself into a highly compassionate, warm, and selfless person under the belief that I'm being very selfish, then I swayed back under the belief that I'm being a doormat, each time lesser and lesser, until one moment when I stopped in somewhere in the middle, then another phase started in which I'm plagued by RL troubles (or to be exact, my achievement).

Currently I'm in one of those phases when it was doubt plaguing me. I don't know the pattern yet; but I'm -sure- it happened before.
I can't say about Ne though. :| And sorry that all those examples were something about me. :|

 

[Jana]

"I knew that she/he will do that...!"

Oh, I like to be right
I often guess...
And yes, I am showing off right now.
I like patterns, I like to observe human's behaviour. Funny thing is when I write a story and character is made by some model in real life. And that character does something that model does not untill I finish story. And than few weeks later my model does exactly the thing I described...I am good