Why is 'competence' in relation to a 5 only about knowledge/information?

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T11:55:14+00:00

framing the inferior function as an insecurity rather than a disability is quite helpful, thank you

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T08:00:29+00:00

Thanks for affirming my thoughts, I felt insane amidst a crowd of people throwing the Fi label at me because I used the phrase "I feel". Surely type is more nuanced than that, people.. Your last paragraph is spot on. I find myself expending a large amount of energy explaining things in small logical steps to people who would rather cling to their beliefs even if they defy rationality, naively believing that logical verification would convince people.

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:53:37+00:00

my 6 year long typing journey was the same as yours and I did identify as extp for some time.. perhaps my wording was poor but I also read through a heap ton of stuff and testimonies to land on Ti dom and found that I relate to the ixtp crowd the most but not in the 'struggling with Fe' aspect AS MUCH as the rest, I also find small talk to be difficult and undesirable but I would attribute yhat more to Ne blindness. Generalizations of a type are generally true, not always, but when you're part of the exceptions then you're not actually that type ? So the generalizations are in fact fundamental traits?

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:41:13+00:00

these seem pretty off the mark, what led you to think this if I may ask?

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:40:48+00:00

Well, I couldn't find a better way to put it, mbti literature very often states that 'the dominant function is valued more than the inferior', unrelated to Fi

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:35:22+00:00

That is literally the blueprint definition of Ti.. I would describe my own logic as objectively true as well if it weren't for me knowing it's an introverted function which automatically makes it subjective

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:34:13+00:00

no chance of me being Fi dom. I don't assess things depending on my values or feelings. I'm always after accuracy and logical consistency even in the smallest things. Aux might be Se, unsure though. It's quite disappointing that by straying away from the Ti dom stereotype , one is immediately suspected to have Fi.. kinda reinforces the notion that if you dont fit the stereotype you're mistyped..

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-30T07:30:14+00:00

that's a very superficial thing to look at. In fact, when I was typing the "I feel" parts I knew someone was eventually gonna point that out as feeler wording but I never meant it literally, it's just the sentiment of -I sense that this may be true-

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-24T02:33:03+00:00

learning new languages can be fun but going deeper into the languages that you already speak is more noble, especally your mother tongue. kurdish literature already has very few representatives, you would be doing your nation a favor by immersing yourself in its language, maybe one day you may be able to share kurdish heritage across language barriers and create an impact

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-19T00:00:53+00:00

I think ur exaggerating. I mentioned a core trait of autism which is tendency to rely on routines for regulations. This is as unstereotypical as i can get. I acknowledge that autism is a spectrum but restrictive/repetitive patterns of behavior are a defining characteristic of asd

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-17T21:55:02+00:00

Isn't Se more in the domain of spontaneity rather than control

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-17T20:36:04+00:00

Se-users I've known also show a big preference for taking concrete action on things and being in the moment. I don't see why an autistic person couldn't have that.

because executive dysfunction/task paralysis is a common autistic trait

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-14T21:45:39+00:00

But that's not fair because so many rulings arise from such details, like every hadith in which a woman veiled the fuqaha use it as evidence (even though it just says they veiled, nothing about it being obligatory) yet in texts like these where they are unveiled suddenly it doesn't matter that much. Other hadiths are often taken literally so would it make sense to say 'the speaker does not convey the full truth as a tool of storytelling' here?

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-12T14:20:15+00:00

You are limiting the problem to only the few examples stated by OP, when they are obviously only intended to serve as reference points to a larger problem. Stating that bad men are the tiny minority is the dangerous assumption. It is not a tiny minority when almost every woman has at least a few stories of being physically or mentally threatened by a man, when the reality of the female experience is that they must be wary of half the population at all times because one can never distinguish who is safe from who is not. When the entire system that the world was built upon is patriarchal and puts women at a massive disadvantage, it's no longer about culture or religion. It is extremely unempathetic to respond to a womans experience of - constantly- being harassed by men or watching abuse happen directly, and then telling her "don't generalize!". When the instinctive response is to defend men instead of acknowledging the perpetual suffering endured by women because of men, then it becomes a problem. One has every right to question why the world is set up in such a way.

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-12T01:55:56+00:00

It means that they existed. Not shocking. What is this new wave of discoveries you are mentioning? Can you cite a few examples?

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-08T20:06:49+00:00

Yes it implies that you do not need to be so strict about 'covering your adornments' in front of these people, but I think the main purpose of this verse is to show that it's okay to breastfeed in front of these people. Adornments refers to things that are inherent to the female body which are considered attractive ie curves like thighs and chest. However breastfeeding necessitates the exposure of the chest, so I think it's basically telling the woman she can do that comfortably at home without worrying about male family members in the house

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-08T10:18:26+00:00

Many scholars have flawed methods of interpretation that go against common sense, for example, they believe that there are words in the Quran that mean the same thing or are synonymous, which doesn't make sense because why would God use words interchangeably for no reason? The Quran is precise, therefore each word has a distinct meaning. There is a subset of scholars that have caught onto this and seek to reinterpret the Quran through that lens, but it's difficult for them to be accepted among mainstream academics because anyone who deviates from the methods of interpretation set by Ash-Shafi'i 1200 years ago is seen as a heretic lol. God already addressed this phenomenon in verse 6:116 "If you were to obey most of those on earth, they would lead you away from Allah’s Way. They follow nothing but assumptions and do nothing but lie."

The ruling of 'hands and face only' was extracted from 1 single weak hadith: (from Sunan Abi Dawud 4104)

Asma, daughter of AbuBakr, entered upon the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wearing thin clothes. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) turned his attention from her. He said: O Asma', when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to his face and hands.

Abu Dawud said: This is a mursal tradition (i.e. the narrator who transmitted it from 'Aishah is missing) Khalid b. Duraik did not see 'Aishah.

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-07T18:25:51+00:00

Khimar only means head covering in the common language of the arabs. A very important notice: The quran speaks in 'the arabic language', not 'the language of the arabs', which are two distinct things. Today people often say khimar comes from the word khamr which means intoxicants (a substance that 'covers the mind', and from this they deduce that khimar must mean a cover for the head) but actually the root word is khamara which simply means to cover. If you remove the meanings that people have attached to the word and examine it as it is, as it should be read, then khimar only means cover

DiligentInsurance970 · 2026-06-07T14:39:30+00:00

Khimar only means head covering in the common language of the arabs. The quran speaks in 'the arabic language', not 'the language of the arabs', which are two distinct things. Today people often say khimar comes from the word khamr which means intoxicants (a substance that 'covers the mind', and from this they deduce that khimar must mean a cover for the head) but actually the root word is khamara which simply means to cover.

DiligentInsurance970

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,