Can you explain the INTP concept of time?

[CreativeChaos]

This is what Keirsey has to say about Rationals view of time. It makes no sense to me. Does it to you, and can you explain it better, or give examples?


The other types tend to view time as a line or a stream running from yesterday (the focus of the Guardians), through the now (the focus of the Artisans), and into tommorow (the focus of the Idealists). But not so the Rationals. For them time exists not as a continuous line, but as an interval, a segment confined to and defined by an event. Only events possess time, all else is timeless.

In a sense, the focus of Rationals is outside of time as it is ordinarily understood, and it is in this sense that they can be considered atemporal. Rationals instinctively, if not deliberately, heed Eindstin's dictum that events do not happen it time, rather that time is of events: "Every reference-body (coordinate system has its own particular time; unless we are told the referecne-body to which the statement of tiem refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event."

The Gestalt psychologists describe time similarly when they speak of "temporal configurations" in which the parts or movements of a whole are "contemporaneous". Thus a melody is composed of notes all of which belong to the same line, even though the last note comes well after the first note. The melody is not complete until the last note is sounded. Thus, time for Rationals, like time for Gestaltists, is not fixed and flowing, but relative and contingent, since it is created by events rather than being a medium in which events occur.

This concept that events are not mere points on a time-line, but create their own period of time, unfolding across their own temporal interval, might be difficult to understand, but it does explain why Rationals tend to lose track of clock time, and can be oblivious to schedules, timetables, calenders, even changes from day to night, absorbed as they are in the unique time interval of whatever event they are considering.

Now, I, as an INFP can easily loose track of time and be oblivious to schedules, but this description of time is totally confounding to me. Do you INTPs understand it? Is it accurate? How do you view time?

[Iblis]

Damn, I didn't know someone had already laid out this theory! It'd be much easier to explain it to my friends! I'll try to explain this to you, but beware: it seems I can never express my ideas clearly.:(

Time is an abstract concept invented so man could control the crops season, work and so forth. Therefore counting it always spring from an specific event: the moon cycle, a star over a mountain (I'm being poetic here). Time does not exist without the events to determine it. Therefore there are so many different calendars: change the reference and the counting changes. Thus, time is not linear. It's made of broken pieces - and remember we're counting only the "memorable events", so we dont have to consider the juxtapositions.

Also, the events limits are blurry. How can you tell that that war started exactly that day? Isn't it a process? So even our tries to determine time is wrong.

Not to mention the infamous biological clock. As you get older, time drags on. What is more valid, the time your body tells you or the imposed time system?

I hope I made myself clear. :whistle:

[Ka.avik]

I can say that I can force myself to see time that way, but it is not natural. I can say that when I finally understood that time is a direction, like up, or down, that relativity made a great deal more sense to me. I can say that this understanding of time allowed me to see why the speed of light is a solid barrier -- that is, we are already hurtling through space in the direction of time! thus any travel through the first three dimensions must be bled off from time.

But I cannot answer your question, because I do not believe I view time as the gestaltists do. Time is what seperates one event from the next; the granularity to which you describe time (msec, days, millenia) is of no consequence to the notion that time sepreates events, although within that definition, by arguing semantics you can say that each event occurs instantaneously, and for all intents and purposes has it's own time stream within it, that can be viewed as seperate from 'the rest of time'

Hmmm....does that rambling help any, CC?

[Ka.avik]

Time is an abstract concept invented so man could

Time is a thing; it is a direction; it is a flow of force. Just as space is -- where you stand, once was called by the indigeneos natives by a name; the conquerors called it a different thing. The current residents call it milwaukee st. But that place, is right there. there was no creation of man, you simply stand there.


Also, the events limits are blurry. How can you tell that that war started exactly that day? Isn't it a process? So even our tries to determine time is wrong.
Do not confuse the labels man has given the forces of nature, with the forces themselves. Have you ever studied Tai Chi? the masters might tell you that 'this is "woman weaving with shuttles"' -- but they might also tell you that the form is supposed to flow, like a river; there is no stopping; there are no 'movements' -- there is only the practice of tai chi chuan. We give parts of it names, so we can teach others....

Time is as immutable as the place where you stand.

[Iblis]

Time is a thing; it is a direction; it is a flow of force. Just as space is -- where you stand, once was called by the indigeneos natives by a name; the conquerors called it a different thing. The current residents call it milwaukee st. But that place, is right there. there was no creation of man, you simply stand there.

If it's a direction and directions are abstract... unless you're talking about the aging process, apoptosis, that sort of thing. I'm afraid I didn't get you. Could you please explain it further? Is it something about the dark stars?



Do not confuse the labels man has given the forces of nature, with the forces themselves. Have you ever studied Tai Chi? the masters might tell you that 'this is "woman weaving with shuttles"' -- but they might also tell you that the form is supposed to flow, like a river; there is no stopping; there are no 'movements' -- there is only the practice of tai chi chuan. We give parts of it names, so we can teach others....

Time is as immutable as the place where you stand.

I should do tai chi chuan, then. Maybe I'd get in touch with the "forces of nature". Just kidding. So your take is that time is a force of nature that is present but intangible just like gravity, is that right? But is it linear, is it made of events? The process is the time itself or the events? How so? Please clarify.

[mr. treat]

Time is a thing; it is a direction; it is a flow of force. Just as space is

space, in and of itself, is a concept just as is time. all dimensionality is a concept. time is a tool for measuring the distance between things in that 4th dimension, as i see it.

as for the description of time in the original post, that is pretty accurate for how i view time. time is in reference to events, because events actually happen, whereas time is relative. when i become absorbed in something, time ceases to exist, and whatever specific thing i am involved in becomes the only thing there is. time becomes meaningless.

[nomir_dva]

If it's a direction and directions are abstract... unless you're talking about the aging process, apoptosis, that sort of thing. I'm afraid I didn't get you. Could you please explain it further? Is it something about the dark stars?

I see time as the dimension that measures change. If there were one fundamental, unchanging particle in the Universe, there would be no time. Humans have developed the concept of time, but they did not invent time itself.

[kafkaesque]

This is what Keirsey has to say about Rationals view of time. It makes no sense to me. Does it to you, and can you explain it better, or give examples?



Now, I, as an INFP can easily loose track of time and be oblivious to schedules, but this description of time is totally confounding to me. Do you INTPs understand it? Is it accurate? How do you view time?

I had never seen that description of time before, but it makes perfect sense to me. I do not think I could explain it any better than that though, I would just be paraphrasing it.

[panda]

I've always had an eccentric relationship with time. For example, I often don't know what year it is. I usually don't know what day/week/month it is. I've actually been confused as to the decade; I simply couldn't understand how so much "time had passed."

I don't like imposing artificiality onto my experience. I never wear a watch. I don't like modern clocks*. I don't want to know "what time it is." I hate following schedules.


*Contradictorily, I'm fascinated with unconventional/antique timekeeping devices, such as water clocks.

[kafkaesque]

I've always had an eccentric relationship with time. For example, I often don't know what year it is. I usually don't know what day/week/month it is. I've actually been confused as to the decade; I simply couldn't understand how so much "time had passed."

I don't like imposing artificiality onto my experience. I never wear a watch. I don't like modern clocks*. I don't want to know "what time it is." I hate following schedules.


*Contradictorily, I'm fascinated with unconventional/antique timekeeping devices, such as water clocks.

It is strange for me to think about what year or decade in which things happened. I remember things that happened in a day but seem to encompass weeks in my memory; and trivial things that happened last week I could have sworn occurred a year ago. I have to keep things written on a calander (yay iCal) or else I really do not recall the correct order or duration of events.

[Ka.avik]

If it's a direction, and directions are abstract...
I'll grant you, that in order to define 'up' you have to first pick a reference; but you know the direction meant by 'up'. Likewise, you know how time flows, whether you describe it as flowing out of the future, and into the past, or from the past into the future...aging is the cause and effect stacked one event upon another, of our bodies adapting to the flow of time. It is perhaps a marker for the passage of time, but aging is simply an event, after all.

And, I'm a little bit tipsy atm, but forgive me if I have absolutely no idea what 'dark stars' are, or how they effect time as I'm trying to describe it.


Is it linear? Is it made of events?
Hmmm. A good question, thank you for spurring the thought process....but, events happen within time. Time is the force that seperates cause, from effect.

Time is not, according to the theory of relativity, totally linear. There are eddys and backwaters, made by forces like gravity and hurtling speed. What I recently read in the comments of a slashdot (http://www.slashdot.org/index.pl?lowbandwidth=1) article (So it must be true! :) ) is that, according to quantum physics, a GPS sattelite orbiting above earth should lose 45000 clock-ticks per day, because it's so far from the gravity well where the quartz-clock was calibrated; or according to general relativity, about 9500 clock-ticks because it's 'falling' so fast. (I may have theories or numbers reversed, your pardon for detail-innaccuracy) but the observed actual-deviance was about 38,500 clock ticks per day. No idea now of the clock speed, whether they were 1Mhz or 20Ghz clocks, but the sattelites keep track of exactly where they really are, by counting clock-ticks since they were released over a known-location. That's how they can locate you to within 10' of you physical location on the ground.

That time is immutable is, in part measurable by this thought experiment: have you ever met someone who was born with all the knowledge and experiences he would ever have, at birth? Only to slowly find them innaccessible regardless of biological capacity, until he died a newborn babe, some eight decades hence?

There is one more thing, that may be heavily coloring my vision: I am a Christian. Imagine how Shroedinger and his cat would be effected by the presence of an omnipotent observer at all locations of space, regardless of the granularity of measurment used -- He is aware of how this electron floats over to be with that proton, and is inside that box, watching the cat eat poison, and die.

If a tree falls in a forest, and and no one is there to time how long the tree takes to fall, does it have qualit^H^H God laughs at your simplicity, and the inherent beauty of his creation. quality=Dilbert ref.

Hope this helps clarify...

[C.J.Woolf]

Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once!

But seriously...

Time perception is definitely elastic. Subjectively, "eventful" time passes quickly (the conversation with a new friend; look at the time and see it's 4 am) while "uneventful" time passes slowly.

[Edmond Zedo]

I can see time that way, I guess. But I can see it in a few ways.

[mgb]

This is what Keirsey has to say about Rationals view of time. It makes no sense to me. Does it to you, and can you explain it better, or give examples?



Now, I, as an INFP can easily loose track of time and be oblivious to schedules, but this description of time is totally confounding to me. Do you INTPs understand it? Is it accurate? How do you view time?


It is really accurate.

I think I've had to force myself to live in another sense of time in able to communicate with people. For me, time is in tasks. Like, when the 5th Harry Potter came out I read it in one block of time. It took about 18 hours cover to cover, but really, it was just the amount of time it took to read the book.

It's not that you lose track of time particularily, it's just that I think if we could, we'd own time instead of time owning us.

[immol8]

Internally, I do not have a desire to know what time it is, how long I've been doing something, how long till the next thing is going to happen, etc. It seems strange how much other people put stock in such a constant awareness. I look at the clock if I have an appointment for a specific time, but otherwise, I couldn't care less.

[Biff_Loman]

I had some very interesting ideas as to what the hell Kiersey is driving at here, including the manifestation of ephemeral concepts temporally inside our minds as framing the passage of time, but I kept coming back to one thing: weak sauce.

Seems like fancy-sounding fluff to me.

[Magajy]

Interesting discussion. The discussions of what time is and its direction, flow, liearity......All that's cool and may well be the subject of another thread called "Define time".

But the original post was asking of how we use time as a type. Whatever it may be, how does it play in your life. Though it may be hard to separate use and definition; atleast we shuold keep use in the picture.

How I see it (from Keirsey's text);
The Gurdian SJ is so disciplined he's so orderly that every event has to fall in a box after the previous event. And thats the only way things can be arranged. Doesn't care much of the future cos, he knows how to handle it; its just a matter of applying one of his "principles in line with he's duty or role".

The Idealist wants things to happen in a certain order and hence the focus on tomorrow. But to achieve his aim, they have to be in a certain order, and what better mechanism than compartmentalise time. Don't care much of the past cos you cant change it.

The Artisan (closest to Realist; in my view) Is only concerned on what he is doing right now. Right now! But cos he is focused on his sensory inputs he is still linked to the physical world. So if the sun sets and he can't play base ball; he is sad. "If I cant sense it, it is not."

The Realist: Same as Artisan; Drive is right now; but he doesn't care much of sensory input (as the artisan) and he cares only for the ideas in his head. And he is not trying to explain why they have happened (as the Gurdian) or should happen (as the Idealist) in a certain order; just trying to understand them. Agreed, there might be some element of time in the details of his thought, but overall he is not connected with it in his real life, just wants to understand. The power of theorising resides here, and its all hypothetical, no bearing whatsoever on the real world (or at least no intent to carry it to that level). So time's irrelevant.

[Nadiar]

This is what Keirsey has to say about Rationals view of time. It makes no sense to me. Does it to you, and can you explain it better, or give examples?



Now, I, as an INFP can easily loose track of time and be oblivious to schedules, but this description of time is totally confounding to me. Do you INTPs understand it? Is it accurate? How do you view time?

I never noticed that other people view time differently than I do. Days are seperated by what time I go to sleep. If I don't sleep one night, my mind cannot seperate the events of one day from another. If I sleep for 4 hours, do a bunch of stuff, sleep for another 4 hours, and then do a bunch of other stuff, my mind will seperate this into two days, even if the events all took place on, say, Tuesday. It takes a conscious effort to figure out what day something took place on when I end up with weird sleeping schedules.

[CreativeChaos]

I see time as the dimension that measures change. If there were one fundamental, unchanging particle in the Universe, there would be no time. Humans have developed the concept of time, but they did not invent time itself.

Wow! These are some really cool posts! I'm amazed at how differently you (INTPs) view time. I think the rest of us see it as linear, whether we focus on the past, present or future.

This post by nomir_dva, made the most sense to me. It helped me to understand what the rest of you were talking about (I think). Time is the dimension that measures change.

Like the example given of a tree falling in the woods. If we weren't there to measure the change, the "time" as a construct wouldn't exist. It only exists in our heads. Change exists, yes. But "time" is only our specific measurement. Just as sound waves would exist, with the perverbial tree in the forest (if the planet had atmosphere) but "sound" as in the construct our brain produces by interpreting the sound waves with our ear drums and then our brains, would not exist. So time does not exist, objectively.

I know the "definition" of time might get confused with our perception of time. But how you define time, also defines how you view it, or perceive it. I can see (I think) what you guys are saying, but it is still difficult for me to perceive it that way.

However, did I get close with the explanation?

[Biff_Loman]

So time does not exist, objectively.

Well, time is more just the entropy of a system; the steady degradation of the energy therein via events of any kind. So time does exist in an objective sense.

The tree falling in a forest business is kind of a silly scenario. The tree falls and produces a signal in the atmosphere consisting of waves of high and low sound pressure. Whether or not a mammalian ear is there to convert the sound into neural impluses and thereby into a conscious sensation is completely irrelevant, even though many of the above mentioned mammals have pondered this.

If the question is: does a tree falling produce an atmospheric signal, then yes, it always does. If the question is: does a tree falling produce a neural impulse in a mammalian brain, well, that depends on the presence of a mammal.

[Biff_Loman]

The Realist: Same as Artisan; Drive is right now; but he doesn't care much of sensory input (as the artisan) and he cares only for the ideas in his head. And he is not trying to explain why they have happened (as the Gurdian) or should happen (as the Idealist) in a certain order; just trying to understand them. Agreed, there might be some element of time in the details of his thought, but overall he is not connected with it in his real life, just wants to understand. The power of theorising resides here, and its all hypothetical, no bearing whatsoever on the real world (or at least no intent to carry it to that level). So time's irrelevant.

I'm think I'm beginning to understand. I think he's saying that NTs will study the past and speculate about the future to better understand the present or, more precisely, the conceptual. The other temperaments would not see time as a field out of which timeless concepts can be plucked.

Perhaps this is one reason why we tend to be realists. An SJ might look at, say, the state of electrical wiring in our culture, and assume that we will go on wiring structures using the same methods indefinitely, because that's what works. An NF might look at the improvements in wiring methods and assume that they will go on improving, becoming more efficient and complex and also more widespread so that every man, woman and child on earth will have their fair share of electrical outlets and light fixtures.

An NT might analyze the past and speculate as to the future, and assess the reality that demand for copper is increasing while yields from copper ore are decreasing. That means that we may have to shift to using higher voltages and thinner wires in the future, or move to triple-phase power, or to use aluminum or a different material in wires, or that we should come up with a better way of utilizing our copper resources to make sure that we have adequate copper for wiring.

An SP, of course, would think "Wiring is fun!" or something. I don't mean to sell them short. My one ISTP friend is very intelligent, but he has a "cross that bridge when we come to it" mentality with respect to any problem.

[Ka.avik]

Days are seperated by what time I go to sleep. [...] If I sleep for 4 hours, do a bunch of stuff, sleep for another 4 hours, and then do a bunch of other stuff, my mind will seperate this into two days, even if the events all took place on, say, Tuesday.

In an effort to bring this back to the topic of INTP usage of the concept of time, yes this is correct for me also. I would call it 'early tuesday' 'late tuesday' and no one would initially realize that I considered these different days, seperated by the diurnal cycle that was just simply being badly abused.

But this brings to mind an early memory: When I was young, perhaps 7, or 8... If I slept in, and missed the accostomed 'breakfast' time, I would call the sandwhich I ate, which was everyone else's lunch, 'breakfast' -- and that necessarily made dinner 'lunch'. I would have 'dinner' in the form of some cookies, snuck in before bedtime .... my propensity to name my meals subjectively, according to the order I ate them rather then according to the objective time of day they were fixed, was a cause of some consternation among my parents. Fortunately they got over it, because I haven't quit doing it :D

[last_caress]

Shit happens. Unless exactly when it happens has a tangible and relevant effect on an outcome, pinpoint accuracy is not important.

Eg. scientific experiment vs. when I eat lunch

[attila_the_hunny]

Time is only noted when something important happens. I have gaps which I cannot say what I did for anything, because nothing worth remembering occured.
I keep journals now just to know what happens.

[Iblis]

I also agree with nomir_dva: no events, no time. At least, no chronological time. There's still the circadian rythm, and the regulator of life and death: the mitosis process. Apart from philosophy and physics, let's not forget the biological part of it too. Time takes on many faces.

But hey, that wasn't in the Keirsey description. :boohoo:

[Nighthawk]

Time as intervals is quite accurate for the way I perceive it. My entire life is broken down into intervals that can be sliced and diced many different ways ... from music, to relationships, to jobs, to careers, to locations. If I can define it, I probably have an interval (or intervals) in my life that corresponds to it.

[PsiKik]

Time for me is defined and perceived by events. Not much happened to me in 2005 so it went very quickly.

I have always been fascinated by time, especially time travel.

I read somewhere(perhaps somewhere here) an interesting theory as to the phenomena that is time speeding up as you get older.
The idea is your short term memory deteriorates as you get older so you remember less events per unit 'real time', the result being the perceived speeding up of time.

Sometimes I will stop and deliberately try to take in as much information about the present where I am as possible, creating a 'marker' in time that I will think about in the future and be able to reconnect to.
At the time I will think about my future self thinking about this moment.

[Nighthawk]

I read somewhere(perhaps somewhere here) an interesting theory as to the phenomena that is time speeding up as you get older.
The idea is your short term memory deteriorates as you get older so you remember less events per unit 'real time', the result being the perceived speeding up of time.


I can certainly attest that time seems to go by much faster for me now than it did when I was in my teens or 20s. My 4 years of high school seemed to go on for the equivalent of a decade in present years. My 4 years at the academy were even longer. Attributing this to short term memory deterioration is not a happy thought. No wonder my test taking abilities suck nowadays. So much for a PhD program.



Sometimes I will stop and deliberately try to take in as much information about the present where I am as possible, creating a 'marker' in time that I will think about in the future and be able to reconnect to.
At the time I will think about my future self thinking about this moment.

I have many markers like that ... some going back even before age 10. It is interesting what types of things can become markers ... my father yelling at me at age 5 for ripping open a Christmas present ... a certain song playing at a certain time ... sitting atop my tank in the moonlight on a cold winter night. I wonder what causes the electro-chemical reactions to fire, making these markers. So many possible events ... why do these particular ones make it and others do not?

[Jasz]

as keirsey says, i think, i definately can "wait for things to come together at the perfect interval" before taking any action - this i see is a huge burden to action

it could be as simple as "i can only study if 1) i have fresh coffee, 2) nobody bothers me, 3) i have a red pencil, 4) i get that wax out of my ear etc etc"

obviously, the list of criteria is often so long that it is practically impossible to meet all and in the end - nothing gets done ..

[last_caress]

As opposed to others who seem to see things in discrete slices, I just see it as a loose continuum where events are not seperated by any imaginary barrier but are like spray paint splotches on a fat rubber band loosely pinned to cardboard.


as keirsey says, i think, i definately can "wait for things to come together at the perfect interval" before taking any action - this i see is a huge burden to action

it could be as simple as "i can only study if 1) i have fresh coffee, 2) nobody bothers me, 3) i have a red pencil, 4) i get that wax out of my ear etc etc"

obviously, the list of criteria is often so long that it is practically impossible to meet all and in the end - nothing gets done ..

That's definitely how I justify a lot of procrastination.

That's why I am trying hard to let things not be perfect and not sit around and wait for inspiration to strike before taking action (in my given area(s) of interest).

[Nighthawk]

as keirsey says, i think, i definately can "wait for things to come together at the perfect interval" before taking any action - this i see is a huge burden to action

it could be as simple as "i can only study if 1) i have fresh coffee, 2) nobody bothers me, 3) i have a red pencil, 4) i get that wax out of my ear etc etc"

obviously, the list of criteria is often so long that it is practically impossible to meet all and in the end - nothing gets done ..

This happens to me often as well. My time in the military helped get me into the mindset of doing something ... even if all the criteria were not met beforehand. They had a saying that, "A bad plan vigorously executed is better than a good plan that is poorly executed." Sounds quite SP to me ... just do it!

Since I left the military however, I find myself falling back into old habits of waiting for perfect alignment before acting. Once in a while, I can still motivate myself to act "prematurely."

[kendoiwan]

Time as intervals is quite accurate for the way I perceive it. My entire life is broken down into intervals that can be sliced and diced many different ways ... from music, to relationships, to jobs, to careers, to locations. If I can define it, I probably have an interval (or intervals) in my life that corresponds to it.


Yup. I define time by events... I'm remember things by the events that surrounded them...

[Biff_Loman]

Since I left the military however, I find myself falling back into old habits of waiting for perfect alignment before acting. Once in a while, I can still motivate myself to act "prematurely."

Ironically, I rely on self-doubt to get me past that hurdle. Not for everyday things - procrastination is a lifestyle for me - but for major life changes. I tell myself that I'd probably fuck up even the most carefully crafted plan anyways, so I might as well just muddle through inefficiently.

[Nighthawk]

Ironically, I rely on self-doubt to get me past that hurdle. Not for everyday things - procrastination is a lifestyle for me - but for major life changes. I tell myself that I'd probably fuck up even the most carefully crafted plan anyways, so I might as well just muddle through inefficiently.

Not bad ... I'll have to try that frame of mind.

[C.J.Woolf]

Ironically, I rely on self-doubt to get me past that hurdle. Not for everyday things - procrastination is a lifestyle for me - but for major life changes. I tell myself that I'd probably fuck up even the most carefully crafted plan anyways, so I might as well just muddle through inefficiently.
"No plan survives contact with the enemy." -- Helmuth von Moltke

"We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo

[Ferrus]

This happens to me often as well. My time in the military helped get me into the mindset of doing something ... even if all the criteria were not met beforehand. They had a saying that, "A bad plan vigorously executed is better than a good plan that is poorly executed." Sounds quite SP to me ... just do it!

Since I left the military however, I find myself falling back into old habits of waiting for perfect alignment before acting. Once in a while, I can still motivate myself to act "prematurely."
Hah, I have the same problem there. In a way like you say in order for me to work at full pace I need someone watching over me and putting pressue on me to do it now. When I do start something though, time just vanishes. It can even be something quite mundane.

[Ivy]

Noah just explained this to me in an interesting way, because upon reading it I didn't get it either. Instead of a line, he thinks of time as bubbles (events or groups of events), and in this way it can be said that the universe effervesces time.

[kendoiwan]

I saw a billboard the hit it right on the head... "the class took 2 hours, the post class discussion 3 mocha lattes..."

[tatsutahime6]

In a sense, the focus of Rationals is outside of time as it is ordinarily understood, and it is in this sense that they can be considered atemporal. Rationals instinctively, if not deliberately, heed Eindstin's dictum that events do not happen it time, rather that time is of events: "Every reference-body (coordinate system has its own particular time; unless we are told the referecne-body to which the statement of tiem refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event."

I don't exactly know /precisely/ what this means in the heads of other Rationals, but I suppose that my own perception of time can be defined in this way.

Allow me to elaborate. First, consider any interval... for the sake of this demonstration, let that interval be a human being's lifespan. Now, like any other linear function, that lifespan is it's own continuum, moving along a path over a set of infinite, yet specific points. Next, note that this particular continuum is 'definite,' meaning it has boundaries -- a beginning and and end -- even though it is infinite, meaning it has a limitless number of points between the two endpoints, equal to the cardinality of the set of all Real numbers, i.e., a cardinality of א1 (aleph one). What that means in plain English is that there are more moments in a person's life than there are whole numbers. If THAT weren't exciting enough, it also means, mathematically, that there are AS MANY MOMENTS IN A HUMAN BEING'S LIFE AS THERE ARE IN ALL OF ETERNITY, FROM ALPHA TO OMEGA.... Kinda makes you feel like God, in a way... existing for eternity and all.

So the lesson of the day is this: What the hell do I need a clock for? I have all the time in the universe dammit! :yay:

If you're still not convinced, click here for a more detailed mathematical explaination of continuums and their cardinalities: http://www.ii.com/math/ch/.

Edit: One must realize that this view of time is based solely on the Continuum Hypothesis, parts of which are still debated among the mathematical community. I am not liable for any grade penalties, late fees, or physical injuries that may be sustained due to any use/misuse of this theory. Use at your own discretion.

[rivercrow]

I had an INTP-time revelation today. Might have been related to my 5 hr migraine as well.

Hubby and I met in 1988. We married in 1993. In about 10 days, we will have been married for 13 years.

Just tonight, on the way home, I realized that hubby and I are in a long-term relationship.

When I announced this amazing discovery to my hubby, he was less than amused. This fact has been apparent to him--maybe he always knew it.

For me, it's all been just a matter of "We're together; yeah, we're still together."

[Melody]

I saw a billboard the hit it right on the head... "the class took 2 hours, the post class discussion 3 mocha lattes...":rofl: exactly

now time for some caramel macchiato *off to starbucks*

[last_caress]

:rofl: exactly

now time for some caramel macchiato *off to starbucks*

Starbucks may excel at gourmet concoctions but Dunkin Donuts has the best coffee.

[C.J.Woolf]

For me, it's all been just a matter of "We're together; yeah, we're still together."
I'm a creature of habit, but I remind myself that anything I have today I could lose tomorrow. That includes relationships.

[rivercrow]

I'm a creature of habit, but I remind myself that anything I have today I could lose tomorrow. That includes relationships.

True. I've become more aware of the normal passage of time in the last few years. It is an active awareness.

I'm just amused that all these years of days passing has somehow amounted to a "long-term relationship", and that somehow everyone else seemed to see it and I didn't.

I forget my own birthday sometimes, too, including those of others. I don't make for a good stereotypical woman, but I do make for a good stereotypical INTP.

[Ferrus]

I'm a creature of habit, but I remind myself that anything I have today I could lose tomorrow. That includes relationships.
And, as has been driven home to me on a few occasions, your life.

[rivercrow]

I'm stuck on this time thing.

How about Alfred Korzybski's concept of time-binding?

http://www.synearth.net/TBT/TBTwhatIs.html


The second link has this line: "This is to be contrasted with groups who only maintain impersonal records, if any, and have little sense of their own historical continuity."

Do INTPs lack a strong sense of personal historical continuity?

Or am I quoting out of context again?

[Iyan]

I have always been a firm believer in the timeline, as a medium in which events occur. But when I get absorbed in something, time seems to "disappear," or otherwise seems to become hidden in the background. At times, I do have a distorted sense of time, especially when having fun. Time flies when you have fun, like you spent two hours doing it but it felt like 30 minutes.

Time is relative and therefore arbitrarily set, especially if you're on a different planet. We live in terms of Earth days and years, but what about Plutonian years? A Plutonian year is so many times larger than an Earth year. 248 Earth years are in one Plutonian year. You wouldn't be able to see your 2nd birthday. Or what about Venusian days? A Venusian day is longer than a Venusian year. And the time it takes for Venus to make one complete revolution around the Sun (a Venusian year) is shorter than Earth's.

And, in a precise sense, this may not be the best example, but I can similarly liken Martian Years to Earth Years as the Meter Stick is to a Yardstick.

Take this into consideration and the concept of absolute measurements in time becomes moot, just like we set up arbitrary measurements on a meter- or yardstick.

And another thing, the Mayans viewed time as a circle or a wheel. Same goes with some African cultures. I guess it is usually heard that "history repeats itself." Since time is abstract, it may entirely depend on how you see it, be it a wheel or a timeline.

It is therefore true, as said in Keirsey's "Please Understand Me II" that Rationals are aware that different time-oriented coordinate systems can exist; it simply depends on the coordinate system used.

[screamingflies]

I think this is denoted from focusing on one narrative
fiend independent vs dependent testing- the "find the objects hidden in the picture" demonstrates this concept
do you see the whole or the parts relation to the whole

do you notice how it is when you try to make music as an INTP- its kinda like that. the note B is seen in relation note A. note A is the base inwhich note B, C, D, etc modifies. its never "just this riff" as a whole
Just listen to music and youll know what i mean- go analyze music like INTPs always do
REGARDS- ian

[tinribz]

There is no time, all events are instantaneous. We can construct models of the world based on what we have learned and predict what will happen in the future based on the past. But there is not really a future or past, only memories and predictions.

Time is not subjective, only the perception of it is.

Although logical (to me) intuitively I don't think the above is correct, I am uneducated in physics maybe someone can enlighten me?

[screamingflies]

your right i recently realized im a depressed & lazy INTJ, not an INTP and i attribute what i said to being INTJ (that is the way an INTJ views music)
regards