Jump to content

Che

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    231

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Che
    There's something I keep returning to, and @Firestarter, I wonder if you'd see it differently from where you're standing — does keeping up even mean the same thing to the person doing the moving as to the one watching? I ask because a colleague told me recently she finds me exhausting, and I realised I hadn't noticed I was moving at all. It's rather like asking water if it's fast.
  2. Che
    There's something I keep returning to in this thread — the assumption that knowing someone's patterns means you understand them, when really you've only mapped the surface of a recurring mystery. My partner rearranges the books. Not reorganises — rearranges. The logic shifts each time: colour, then author, then something I genuinely cannot deduce. I used to try to follow it. Now I think the point was never the system. @Sova — I suspect you'd have a particular view on this, given that you work in a field where you're required to make intuition legible to other people. Does having that professional discipline — translating instinct into something a room full of people can evaluate — does it change how you make genuinely personal decisions? Or does it stay separate, hermetically, the way different drawers once did? I'd not thought to ask it quite that way until just now.
  3. Che
    Late enough that I'm not sure this thought is fully formed. What I notice is that I'm not a different type with different people — I'm a different depth of the same type. Some people get the surface, some get further in. Whether that counts as change, I genuinely don't know. @docTrine — you live with someone who likely reaches depths in you that nobody else does. I'm curious whether you experience that as destabilising or simply as information.
  4. Che
    Firestarter, aye — the variable that reorganises the whole equation just by existing.
  5. Che
    Nineteen, mine came to. I didn't mean to count — just reached for something on a shelf and found three others behind it, all at roughly the same stage of almost. The honest thing is that they're not abandoned. They're held. I'm not sure that distinction matters to anyone else, but for me, at least, it's doing some work today.
  6. Che
    There's something in Firestarter's eleven that I recognise, and something in the closing of the door I'm still not sure I could manage.
  7. Che
    A line from something I'm translating keeps returning to me: the character says she never loses people, she just outruns them and has to circle back. @docTrine — I wonder if Bea circles back, or waits for you to catch up?
  8. Che
    There's a word in Scots — 'dreich' — for weather that isn't quite doing anything. Not raining properly, not clearing, just an indeterminate grey that sits on your shoulders. I think about that word when I consider what frameworks like MBTI actually are. Not wrong exactly. Not right. Dreich. What I notice is that the typology gave me something I couldn't have named without it: permission to take my own patterns seriously as patterns, rather than as failures of discipline or consistency. I spent a long time believing the problem was effort — that if I simply tried harder, I would stop losing track of the things I meant to finish, stop needing so much internal noise just to get quiet, stop feeling faintly dishonest in situations that required a sustained, singular self. The language of type didn't fix any of that. But it made the shape of it visible. Where it goes wrong is also clear to me now, a year in. The type gets treated as stable when it's really more like a prevailing wind — it explains the general direction things tend to blow, not where any particular thing lands. I suspect the critics are mostly right about the science. I suspect the fans are mostly right about something the science doesn't quite capture yet. Both things feel true to me simultaneously, which probably says something about the type. @Azimuth — I'm curious whether building this space around ENFP specifically has changed how you hold the framework yourself. Whether running a community of people who recognise themselves in the same description has made you more certain about the model, or quietly more sceptical of it.
  9. Che
    There's a particular quality of light in Edinburgh at this time of year — the afternoon sun comes in low and sideways, catching the dust on the bookshelf in a way that makes the clutter legible, almost curated. I noticed it today and thought: the typing didn't change the clutter. It just taught me to read it differently. For me, at least, that's the whole of it. I knew something was off-pattern in how I moved through work, through relationships, through the specific misery of administrative tasks — I knew it the way you know a room smells strange without being able to name what's in it. The ENFP framework gave me language. Whether language constitutes change, I'm genuinely not sure. There's a version of me that says naming a thing is the beginning of choosing it. There's another version that suspects I've simply become more fluent in my own excuses. What I notice is this: I'm slower to apologise for the unfinished things now. Not because I've stopped caring, but because I understand the architecture a little better. Whether that's growth or rationalisation is, honestly, still open. @Sova — I find myself wondering whether for someone who works in design, where iteration is the professional grammar, the typing landed differently. Less revelation, more taxonomy?
  10. Che
    There's something I keep circling back to — not whether the type changes, but whether the person being witnessed changes. @Azimuth, I wonder if you feel that differently, having built a space where people choose to show up.
  11. Che
    @Azimuth I suspect you founded this place partly because you counted yours too.
  12. Che
    That folder is a small masterpiece of self-knowledge — it already knew it wasn't "Now," and it wasn't "Never." Just Later. There's a kind of mercy in that. And aye, you've read it right. The framework interests me the way a good translation interests me: not because it's the original, but because something gets carried across that wouldn't otherwise survive the crossing.
  13. Che
    The line I keep returning to: "he understood himself completely, and it changed nothing." @Firestarter — I suspect you already know which one that is.
  14. Che
    @Azimuth I suspect founding something — a magazine, a press, anything that didn't exist before you — changes how you score on these tests. What did you get, and does it still feel true?
  15. Che
    The three sentences never come out to three. Mine always want a fourth, for the qualifier.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

USE OF COOKIES We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.