I was trying to get it higher than that usage definition.

```People who prefer Sensing:

tend to notice sensory facts and details in the present
like data to be grounded, practical, concise, orderly, clear-cut
like ideas that are factually verifiable or have practical application
like to describe or recollect interesting facts and details
become easily bored/impatient with speculation/ambiguity
tend to perceive Intuitives as impractical or unrealistic

People who prefer Intuition:

tend to read between the lines to speculate, infer, extrapolate
like info to be generalized, conceptual, figurative, open to interpretation
like ideas regarding gist, significance, implications, complexities
like to talk about meaning, purpose, hopeful potential/possibilities
become easily bored/stressed with explaining/sequencing little details
tend to perceive Sensors as narrow-minded or short-sighted```

using a book as a paperweight,

wait wait wait

according to this, I am not a sensor, I am an intuitive

you're a thinker

dunno about intuitive

maybe?

@Exilarch Jung thought intuitives had esier faculty of thought movement from the unconscious tot he conscious

MBTI is occultism

to accept its premises

He isn't intuitive.

ultimately requires an occultic mindset

that's what I was trying to get across with the bit about jungian language.

It's not like the big 5 test.

ewild

I literally wrote 1000 pages about all of the patterns I noticed in life

how am I a "sensie"

because you wrote a 1000 pages

and not 1

and I'm sure to you, there is some big subjective importance and meaning behind the number of pages I wrote

sensors observe detail

intuitors simply, they miss detail

make basic mistakes

Exilarch, we're both introverted thinking dominant types. (Jung calls it subjective rationalism)

but also see the underlying things

I will never let anyone convince me it is a bad thing to notice detail

its not a bad thing

idea: a person can both notice detail AND underlying phenomena. Perhaps, they can even notice underlying phenomena BECAUSE of details

Now, we both interact with objective (extraverted) information in some way.

sorry above I was supposed to type

intuitors *simplify*

you guys do realize that none of this really exists, right?

no, that is the opposite of my realization

this is toddler level simplification of millennia worth of philosophy

seems like it pretty fuckin exists

to you, it seems to be the fundamental principle determining human behavior, these 4 dimensions of analysis

simplification = essence

unfortunately it has to be 4

and not 1

pong is tennis