I dont actually know anything specific; the cons of N

[th!nkstyle]

Looking back, i dont really understand how i did a whole science degree.

I never really learned the actual matter at hand - rather because im so intuitive it gave me an advantage on the one hand, and a large disadvantage on the other hand.

What I mean is I learned how to look for patterns, how to optimize time on tests, how to generally know enough to get by, how to build connections to get copies of old tests...etc etc

In short I feel that I improvized my way through my degree (at least for a lot of courses), which is a feat in itself, but wasnt what most people get out of doing the same thing.

So overall I feel as though I can talk about deep matters in any science displine, but I could not sit down and take any half complicated derivate, balance a chemical equation etc. I do however know exactly what its about and im sure with an hour or two with text i could figure it out --- improvise.

I know that this is somewhat "normal", but there are people that would know how to do it off the bat, and I pretty much have to do this with any subject.

Maybe I should have put this in rants, as in a rant about myself, but i figured it fit here better.

I love my 100% N nature, but it gets to me sometimes.... bla.

[Lee]

Could you be more specific please?

[mr. treat]

what type of science did you get a degree in?

[Xenophon]

I don't think this is that wierd. Nobody remembers how to do everything they learn in school. People who learn everything in a linear manner just have to relearn an entire process when they want to use something from before, whereas if you have an intuitive grasp of the fundamentals, it is just a matter of filling in specifics. I personally think that having a general understanding of the fundamental system is much more valuable then having specific knowledge on how to copy some process.

How often does someone in the real world ask you to do something, and then proceed to say that you have to do it all from memory, and not look at any references? It just doesn't happen.

[C.J.Woolf]

I'm confused. Are you complaining? Being able to figure out the answer is as good as knowing it. Better, I think. I like intuition.

[th!nkstyle]

What i am saying is that intuition is not always used to "understand", so much as "improvise on understanding". This is definitly not the same thing. Much more is gained in the long term from intuitively understanding rather than intuitively improvising through tests, labs and courses in general.

My problem was that I liked to get super down to the fundamental roots of the problem, unfortunatly my math was never that good and I would end up philosophizing about it with "rough" "intuitive ( ? ) " math. The time I spent doing that, I did not spend on going deeper to what I was supposed to be actually learning (since I was not in pure, or applied math for that matter).

Perhaps I am not explaining myself to clearly, but my main point is that N has draw backs to learning styles, as in the sorts of methods of learning it sometimes is a catalyst for. I would assume there are some others who agree.

[Nemesis]

E+N+J= Easily grasp general concepts and then easily remember the details! :D

Edit: I ROCK at Chemistry!

[Watermark]

E+N+J= Easily grasp general concepts and then easily remember the details! :D

Edit: I ROCK at Chemistry!



Good for you, NarcissUs. I mean Nemesis.

Edit: Comment moderated for tone.

Edit 2: Spelling corrected. Saved by the Spelling Police.

[Ivy]

Could you be more specific please?
:rofl:

[Nemesis]

Good for you, Narcissis. I mean Nemesis.

Edit: Comment moderated for tone.:D

[Snowflake]

You spelled narcissus wrong.

[Watermark]

Oh, my, you are absolutely correct. Please forgive me. My whole self-esteem hinges on this mispelling. I'll go and correct it right now. Thanks Snowflake.

[C.J.Woolf]

What i am saying is that intuition is not always used to "understand", so much as "improvise on understanding". This is definitly not the same thing. Much more is gained in the long term from intuitively understanding rather than intuitively improvising through tests, labs and courses in general.

My problem was that I liked to get super down to the fundamental roots of the problem, unfortunatly my math was never that good and I would end up philosophizing about it with "rough" "intuitive ( ? ) " math. The time I spent doing that, I did not spend on going deeper to what I was supposed to be actually learning (since I was not in pure, or applied math for that matter).

Perhaps I am not explaining myself to clearly, but my main point is that N has draw backs to learning styles, as in the sorts of methods of learning it sometimes is a catalyst for. I would assume there are some others who agree.
Ah. I take it you exploit your intuition to skate by, to get to the right answer without really understanding why. Yeah, I've done that. I've also put in the work to understand the material. It all depends on what I'm interested in.

[xHTx]

INTP weakness: have trouble seeing the reality at a lot of times.
absent-minded

[sasapurdue]

You don't need to explain anything further to me. I can relate. I got through my biology degree without really learning the details carefully. I always think about how I am technically a biologist, but saying it is almost laughable because the actual knowledge I retained DEFINITELY does not qualify me to call myself a biologist. Whatever. It's all just a crock of shit anyway. (in the words of my father)

[Serotonin]

You don't need to explain anything further to me. I can relate. I got through my biology degree without really learning the details carefully. I always think about how I am technically a biologist, but saying it is almost laughable because the actual knowledge I retained DEFINITELY does not qualify me to call myself a biologist. Whatever. It's all just a crock of shit anyway. (in the words of my father)

Add me to the list of befuddled science graduates. I mean, I know stuff, but put my 2nd year exams in front of me now and I'd fail them all. Studying is best the night before because our Si is short-lived.

[dunee]

I think I am guilty of this sometimes as well- and I'm an anthro major.

I definitely have to learn historical/scientific specifics well with archaeological work though because making errors with the TPQ would be Very Bad. But I like that sort of stuff so its not too hard- just needs a bit of reinforcement to stick (and classifying hundreds of miniscule china crockery shards gives plenty).

Though I have to say that intuiting skill def. came in handy when I took that "crock of sh*t" that was philosophy of language last fall. I had no clear idea about the details of what I was talking about at any point during that semester, but wrote the BS well enough that I passed.

[euterpenc]

E+N+J= Easily grasp general concepts and then easily remember the details! :D

Edit: I ROCK at Chemistry!

Chemistry is easy...

[Nemesis]

Chemistry is easy...
Said the NTJ

[justmyimagination]

Looking back, i dont really understand how i did a whole science degree.

I never really learned the actual matter at hand - rather because im so intuitive it gave me an advantage on the one hand, and a large disadvantage on the other hand.

What I mean is I learned how to look for patterns, how to optimize time on tests, how to generally know enough to get by, how to build connections to get copies of old tests...etc etc

In short I feel that I improvized my way through my degree (at least for a lot of courses), which is a feat in itself, but wasnt what most people get out of doing the same thing.

So overall I feel as though I can talk about deep matters in any science displine, but I could not sit down and take any half complicated derivate, balance a chemical equation etc. I do however know exactly what its about and im sure with an hour or two with text i could figure it out --- improvise.

I know that this is somewhat "normal", but there are people that would know how to do it off the bat, and I pretty much have to do this with any subject.

Maybe I should have put this in rants, as in a rant about myself, but i figured it fit here better.

I love my 100% N nature, but it gets to me sometimes.... bla.

Ooh, I definitely know what you mean! In school as soon as I understood something, I had no need whatsoever to remember it, because I could always look it up again or follow the same process I had in understanding it in the first place. This always worries me because I wonder if I will ever be able to become an expert in something if I can never remember the details or specifics. I can't have political debates with S-types because they end up thinking I don't know anything-and I don't, or nothing specific, at least, and in a career I don't think knowing how to look things up really counts as expertise, either. I collect ideas from everywhere, but I can never remember where I got them…it’s frustrating! I wonder…is this hopeless? What gets us to actually learn, not just improvise? What is it that makes something “stick”? I love my ‘N’ too, but I’m terrified of ending up in life with nothing but extremely good bs-ing skills.

[Snowflake]

Oh, my, you are absolutely correct. Please forgive me. My whole self-esteem hinges on this mispelling. I'll go and correct it right now. Thanks Snowflake.

:rofl:

[th!nkstyle]

Ooh, I definitely know what you mean! In school as soon as I understood something, I had no need whatsoever to remember it, because I could always look it up again or follow the same process I had in understanding it in the first place. This always worries me because I wonder if I will ever be able to become an expert in something if I can never remember the details or specifics. I can't have political debates with S-types because they end up thinking I don't know anything-and I don't, or nothing specific, at least, and in a career I don't think knowing how to look things up really counts as expertise, either. I collect ideas from everywhere, but I can never remember where I got them…it’s frustrating! I wonder…is this hopeless? What gets us to actually learn, not just improvise? What is it that makes something “stick”? I love my ‘N’ too, but I’m terrified of ending up in life with nothing but extremely good bs-ing skills.

Interesting that you bring up BSing. Although I have great improv skills I wouldnt say that BSing is really all that correlated to N.. at first thought anyway.

BSing verses general improv....

True N types are not actually BSing i think. true BSing requires no real understanding while still managing to sound like you know what is going on.

Personally my debates and all my major arguments are by talking about the most fundamental points, which are general and intuitive.

[justmyimagination]

Interesting that you bring up BSing. Although I have great improv skills I wouldnt say that BSing is really all that correlated to N.. at first thought anyway.

BSing verses general improv....

True N types are not actually BSing i think. true BSing requires no real understanding while still managing to sound like you know what is going on.

Personally my debates and all my major arguments are by talking about the most fundamental points, which are general and intuitive.

Hmm, wrong choice of word then, perhaps. But I think despite myself I am still suspicious of anything I "know" without knowing why. It all works fine-I can solve math problems without seeing all the steps in my head, or see the essential point of an argument without thinking about all the details- but it worries me a bit because I can't control the process. I'm not saying "S" thinking would be better, but understanding the idea behind something but not the thing itself isn't all that much deeper than seeing just the facts. Just because we see the forest doesn't mean we know the totality of what it truly is. That's why I called it BSing- you can make it look like you know a subject thoroughly when all you've done is figure out what that understanding looks like. Arguably this is all that you would end up with after studying a subject in depth anyway, and there isn't much need to get bogged down with details, but it does get in the way of explaining things to other people. "S"'s need to be given the facts, and it's not really fair to "N"'s to give them your own conceptual model rather than letting them make their own out of the facts/details. But this may be more a reflection of my own struggle for understanding than it is a generalization about intuition.

Although...


What I mean is I learned how to look for patterns, how to optimize time on tests, how to generally know enough to get by, how to build connections to get copies of old tests...etc etc


What i am saying is that intuition is not always used to "understand", so much as "improvise on understanding". This is definitly not the same thing. Much more is gained in the long term from intuitively understanding rather than intuitively improvising through tests, labs and courses in general.

I'm a little confused about what you're saying, because if...

true BSing requires no real understanding while still managing to sound like you know what is going on
...are you saying "improvising" isn't the same thing? Or did you mean that it is, but N doesn't necessarily have to be used that way...ie. it is better to understand the ideas behind the material than the ideas behind the system (school, for example) in which you have to learn or use the material? If that's true, I suppose what I was arguing with was the former claim, and therefore was somewhat off-topic...sorry! So, er, in conclusion I pretty much agree with you :) .

I'm still curious about what kinds of things INTP's actually choose to learn, details and all. There have only been a few subjects in my experience that I will actually voluntarily absorb and remember the specifics of. I have a theory that it's the things that I actually care about figuring out for myself...sort of like a jigsaw puzzle: for most things I am happy to look at the overall picture, and I don't really care what shape the pieces are, but if for some reason I feel like the puzzle either isn't complete or somehow wrong, then I have an insatiable need to assemble as many pieces as possibly can, the more specific and detailed the better. But I'm not very good at it....hence the thought, again, that N has its limitations.

[philonightmare]

In short I feel that I improvized my way through my degree (at least for a lot of courses), which is a feat in itself, but wasnt what most people get out of doing the same thing.
I don't know how I get by either. Improvisation works well for me though because I don't have a strong memory cache for details. Learning things on the spot when I *need* to doesn't leave a lasting impression facts-wise, rather gets piled along with all other general information I've attained. I end up picking up on themes and concepts faster, no matter the complexity, than my peers who depend on knowing things every step of the way (plus how to get to every step of that concept --which, to me, seems like a waste of time).

[nihilist]

I am not exactly sure what improvising refers to in this context, but I know very few who can get decent grades in college without ever studying from a textbook, unless they know the material beforehand. Intuitives search for the generalities and patterns while sensors look for details, but they both study in some way.

Needless to say, intuitives and sensors are suited for different majors. In the future, you're not required to remember the details for something like philosophy as opposed to engineering.

[Sight-Ascended]

i find this thread interesting read, most if not all of you are INTPs or at least NTs, th!nkstyle like me has a very extreme N, i too often test at 100% or at least past the 80s, yet you say you dont retain what you gain understanding of? for me the only way i retain something is BY gaining understanding of it. If it requires memorization, practice, repition of any sort really, i wont get it, it goes in and out, yet for anything i can fit into a system in my mind, i understand it and retain it with easy. yes i do lose some of the detail, but not all, in history classes for instance, i take no notes, i dont study. i just listen to the lecture and retain it, make make decent grades (high C - low A), but i do it with no effort expended other than to listen. i can do this in any science, and most humanities. the only exception is if i am totally apathetic to learning the subject, i wont retain what i hear in lectures, rather it will be tuned out and i struggle to not fail.

[Pugly]

i find this thread interesting read, most if not all of you are INTPs or at least NTs, th!nkstyle like me has a very extreme N, i too often test at 100% or at least past the 80s, yet you say you dont retain what you gain understanding of? for me the only way i retain something is BY gaining understanding of it. If it requires memorization, practice, repition of any sort really, i wont get it, it goes in and out, yet for anything i can fit into a system in my mind, i understand it and retain it with easy. yes i do lose some of the detail, but not all, in history classes for instance, i take no notes, i dont study. i just listen to the lecture and retain it, make make decent grades (high C - low A), but i do it with no effort expended other than to listen. i can do this in any science, and most humanities. the only exception is if i am totally apathetic to learning the subject, i wont retain what i hear in lectures, rather it will be tuned out and i struggle to not fail.

Thats nearly how I learn things. If I do rote memorization, it only helps for maybe half a day... enough to get by on a test or something. But if I have a good frame work of how something really works, all these details just fit into place supported by my web of core understanding.

My learning is even better if I can derive the concepts in my own head though. So while following a an explanation is the okay, if I can follow my own reasoning I will retain the understanding much better.

And details can be looked up in books, and procedures can be handled by computers. But deep understanding is what is really important. I'd much rather get Cs with deep understanding, than As and just memorized things.