On 2002-02-03 14:39, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

As to visual sense, if I am about to embark on say a watercolor painting; after I have all my equipment at the ready and am going to do a work of imagination rather than a landscape from nature I begin to concentrate.

Do you wear a funny hat when you do this and do the girls call you "Teapot" in stunned adoration, Mr. Saari?

My vision is filled with what I am working on and I can transfer that vision unto my easel. I had been painting an imagined youngster on a small chair in an imitation Norman Rockwell manner and I could look up from my canvas and see his shallow breathing and his bobbing head. This perhaps closer to what the INFPs do when they have words pour forth. HTH

Yes, that is it. We as INTPs can play all sorts of visual games with our brains. But the INFP's auditory games seem to be beyond us. However the INFPs claim to be visual as well from what I read on the other threads. They seem to have our "vision" with an overlay of auditory...cacophony?

On 2002-02-03 14:40, Neisha '67 wrote:

I also don't hear anyone else's voice in my head but my own. So, I would also be really interested to hear from people who hear the voices. That's so interesting. I'm pretty sure I'm more of a visual thinker, but whatever I am doing is so automatic that I don't really think about what it is.

Well, I hope the INFPs weigh in with more detail about their auditory...whatever it is. It really is about the damnedest thing I have ever read.

INFPs are extremely visual, if I am any example of this. That's why we are so good at metaphor and imagination. It's almost another reality in itself apart from the tangible world. This is usually a good thing, and when used contructively can be channelled into various art forms. But it's all too easy to get bogged down in it if isn't used in creative expression; it can become dangerous when no outlet is available and erode all semblance of the rational.

On 2002-02-03 15:36, Stonewall Patton wrote:

On 2002-02-03 14:00, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

Dear Mr. Patton, I as an INTP do not have the experience of other voices. But, I do have the experience of another listener if I am in an intense one-on-one conversation about an important matter (as opposed to an intense conversation upon say which is a better hockey team the Minnesota Gophers or the North Dakota Fighting Sioux, a trivial matter) I add an auditor who listens very carefully to what both my interluctor and Virgil Saari are saying. This may be due neurological defect, injury or common to INTPs. It is an "out-of-the-mind" experience with some parallel to that recorded by those having an out-of-the-body experience due to physical trauma.


I do not recall changing my side of an argument or being influenced but I have perhaps a greater recall and greater precision of the use of language when this happens.


Yo. Ob. Svs. Virgil K. Saari

Mr. Saari, I'm not sure that I understand what you are describing. Would you give a specific example? The one thing which did come to mind while reading your post is the predisposition toward self-correction (read: self-perfection) of grammar and usage. However I never thought of this in terms of any third party intervention, be it speaker or listener.

John and I are arguing about equality of opportunity versus equality of outcome. As this goes on and becomes more intense, I see myself arguing and John arguing the several points and this second self is trying to get information from both sides of the argument. It is not interested (as it is a passive bystander) in the outcome or who wins (a position that the first self often holds)as it is the argument as a game, its technique, etc. that interest this shadow self. It is as if one were playing in a football game and watching the football game in overview on a large screen so that you could see all of both teams at the same instance. But, it is an intellectual contest that I am engaged in and watching from a distance at the same time. I find myself being "sharper" and more precise and yet not at all interested in the decision arrived at but at the way of the arriving itself. HTH

When writing, I transcribe the dialogue as it occurs in my head. I transcribe the going-ons, the scenery, and such, in a similar manner, though I refine it a bit. I usually have to ponder what words to use to describe what exactly I'm "looking" at.

When drawing or designing something not from a plan, I usually "just do it". The actual hand movements: the dragging of a pencil, the cutting of a piece of chipboard, the gluing of said board down, etc, are all unconscious in a way. There are exceptions, when precise cutting and drawing are necessary, and while the results are indeed more accurate, they are not so nice to look at.

Something similar happens when I drive. I'm not conscious of shifting gears or braking. It is all automatic. I'm more aware of what the traffic is around me, while also letting some of my mind drift off.

I think that I am most alive, when I let myself go, and just do things. I get lost in the doing of a task, whether is typing, or drawing, or driving, or problem-solving. I'm not aware that I'm typing, drawing, driving, or problem-solving per se, I'm just doing it. Of course, I do a great deal of thinking while I'm doing these tasks, so I'm not necessarily 100% focussed on whatever it is I'm doing. Thus, the activitied I "get lost in" are usually activities that I'm good at and enjoy and don't require extreme concentration.

Sadly, driving is where I do most of my thinking, and there have been moments when I turn off the car at my destination, not knowing how I got there. It is like, turn on the car at home, then suddenly I turn it off at school, with nothing in between. I fear that I'm missing out on a great deal of life, not to mention driving while (for all I know) essentially asleep.

On 2002-02-03 12:54, Stonewall Patton wrote:
There are a bunch of INFPs on another thread making bizarre claims (hehehe) about how they "hear voices in their heads," and about how their writings are in effect transcripts of these "otherworldly" conversations. I am guessing that this must be part of "auditory thinking" which Robert and I were discussing on yet another thread and it definitely needs to be fleshed out further by those who have it. But this is very confusing because many who claim to have this auditory "talent" also claim to be very visual. So let me put out a few questions for anybody willing to participate:

To fellow INTPS:

Do any of you relate to what Susan, Angeli, Justin and I guess others (INFPs?) are saying? I have tried hard to relate to what they describe but I just do not see it. It seems to me that the only voice I hear in my head is my own. For example, if I am reading something which states, "2 + 2 = 4," then I can hear my own voice in my head saying, "Two plus two equals four." If I am reading the alphabet, then I can hear my own voice in my head saying (retarded voice), "AAAAAAAAAAAA, B-BBBBBBBBBBBBB, CCCCCCCC...." (OK, not THAT bad.) I do not think that I ever hear anybody else's voice.

I only hear my own voice too.

At times I will laugh at a joke which I heard sometime earlier somewhere else (often to the puzzlement of people around me who have no idea what I am thinking and laughing about). It occurred to me that here I might be hearing the joke teller's voice and that is why I am laughing. Well, I am not so sure. I believe the joke caused me to laugh originally because it conjured up an absurd image in my head. When I laugh about it later, I do not believe that I am recalling the joke teller's words specifically, but rather the absurd image which his joke created in my mind at the time. (I can then recall his words based upon the image, probably in my own voice again.) So any way you slice it, I am not relating to what our INFPs are describing.

Actually, INTPs are the type that laughs for no reason. INTPs routinely laugh at a private thought. It can be a joke from anytime, or just something you thought of. I think that the image is pretty funny.

Can any of you INTPs relate to what these people are describing about voices? If so, in what context (perhaps one which I have not thought of)? Can you relate to the visual description I wrote above? How or how not?

I can't relate to the voices, but I can relate to the humor.

Back to INTPs and anybody else:

As far as the auditory brain goes, how would you compare voices to musical notes, for example? I suppose I can clearly hear a Middle C in my head with precision. For that matter, I can hear a full symphony going at it. But how do other people's voices compare? I just don't think I generally replay other people's voices in my head (which seems strange considering the music) but maybe I am missing something. Now if I consciously try to imagine a specific individual saying something, I can then hear their voice in my head saying the words I consciously put in their mouth. But I really do not think that I ever spontaneously hear other people's voices saying things which I have never even heard before (like our INFPs). This really is kind of fascinating so let's flesh it out.

I've never had this experience either.

On 2001-10-21 13:01, Tim Walker wrote:
As I recall, INFJs are rare, the smallest percentage of either gender. We are virtually invisible to others. My family treats me as a sort of imbecile.

Also INFJ, '63. I was always the one in the corner reading at the family gatherings. :lol:

On 2002-02-03 22:47, Sherry63 wrote:

On 2001-10-21 13:01, Tim Walker wrote:
As I recall, INFJs are rare, the smallest percentage of either gender. We are virtually invisible to others. My family treats me as a sort of imbecile.

Also INFJ, '63. I was always the one in the corner reading at the family gatherings. :lol:

My girlfriend ('44)is an INFJ, is hardly invisible, and has never been a big reader. Maybe because her I and E are quite close. No question about the NFJ, however.

On 2002-02-03 20:18, Chris Loyd '82 wrote:

When writing, I transcribe the dialogue as it occurs in my head. I transcribe the going-ons, the scenery, and such, in a similar manner, though I refine it a bit. I usually have to ponder what words to use to describe what exactly I'm "looking" at.

I want to say that actual dialog as a conversation never comes to me in my head though I still do not want to fully commit to this statement. The image in my head is always central. I can see an image/situation and I find the right words to put into characters' mouths consistent with the nature of the situation (the image/vision). The image/situation is the horse which leads/determines the characters' words, not vice versa.

What you describe as finding le mot juste is a perpetual task. When I do commit to doing a written piece right, I am constantly revising the words as better, more applicable, more illustrative ones come to me. But again, the image/situation is the determinant of the words/dialog. I am seeking just the right words so as to accurately convey to the reader the image which is fixed in my head.

However I can think of one spontaneous aspect. Before I start on a topic, and if I am really into it, then certain choice expressions or phrases pertaining to particular facets will come to me spontaneously. If I were to simply copy them down alone, the piece would be incomprehensible to the reader because they would appear as unconnected thoughts. The task of writing the piece becomes, in part, one of finding an effective means of joining these ostensibly unconnected thoughts (spontaneously generated expressions). These expressions aptly describe specific parts of the image in my head so the actual writing is an effort to fill out the picture for the reader.

Something similar happens when I drive. I'm not conscious of shifting gears or braking. It is all automatic. I'm more aware of what the traffic is around me, while also letting some of my mind drift off.

I am actually intensely alert when I drive. I am constantly conceiving of every possible move which every driver around me might make so as to minimize the risk of accident. But this probably stems from profound impatience. If am at location A and I wish to be at location B, I really just want a transporter beam to put me there in a split second. I am not interested in wasting time in getting there when there are so many other things I would rather be doing with my time (and life). So I calculate how much I can exceed the speed limit in a given environment while ensuring that guys whose salary I am forced to pay at gunpoint do not harass me. (I am not a cop basher, but in fact a cop supporter [not federal cops any longer, though] -- they are generally good guys. But when there are murderers, thieves and rapists on the loose, it is simply wrong for lawmakers to order cops to dedicate their time to harassing law-abiding citizens [who are the bosses] for purposes of revenue enhancement.) So not only am I constantly anticipating every conceivable action of every driver around me but, in stop and go traffic when cruise control is useless, I am constantly looking for every avenue of egress which will afford me with the opportunity to pump the speedometer needle back up to that formulaic value which ensures the most efficient and rapid transit while avoiding a ticket.

Now that's intense! But it really comes down to a realization that this is time out of a finite lifespan which I will never get back. Unless I am exploring new terrain, transit time between point A and point B is a waste of time, and therefore a waste of my life. So the task is to minimize transit time so as to make the most of my time and my life.

Sadly, driving is where I do most of my thinking, and there have been moments when I turn off the car at my destination, not knowing how I got there. It is like, turn on the car at home, then suddenly I turn it off at school, with nothing in between. I fear that I'm missing out on a great deal of life, not to mention driving while (for all I know) essentially asleep.

This is interesting. My impatient and intensely alert driving is a function of my determination not to miss out on anything of value in life, i.e. to always make the most of my limited time here on earth. You appear to have the same recognition of the value of time given a finite human lifespan, yet you are content to see that valuable time wasted rather than be proactive in maximizing it. I am not sure which choice is better but the same engine is at work. Few people would appear to view the time consumed in a trip to the grocery store within the context of a finite human lifespan, but we INTPs do.

On 2002-02-03 19:40, Xer of Evil wrote:

Sorry to be ignorant, but I have no clue what all those letters stand for.

But ... I hear other people's voices all the time. It doesn't necessarily have to be something that I've heard them say before either. I can pretty much conjure them up at will, or they sort of come up on their own when I'm thinking about someone. I thought that's the way everyone was!

Choselh, go to http://www.keirsey.com and take the "temperament sorter" (or something like that). Seeing as you hear those same voices as the INFPs, it would be interesting to know how you come out.

If I am missing a link to a better test, somebody please post it for her.

On 2002-02-03 18:37, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

John and I are arguing about equality of opportunity versus equality of outcome. As this goes on and becomes more intense, I see myself arguing and John arguing the several points and this second self is trying to get information from both sides of the argument. It is not interested (as it is a passive bystander) in the outcome or who wins (a position that the first self often holds)as it is the argument as a game, its technique, etc. that interest this shadow self. It is as if one were playing in a football game and watching the football game in overview on a large screen so that you could see all of both teams at the same instance. But, it is an intellectual contest that I am engaged in and watching from a distance at the same time. I find myself being "sharper" and more precise and yet not at all interested in the decision arrived at but at the way of the arriving itself. HTH

Mr. Saari, would you say that this is something that you developed later in life? Your willingness to forego winning a key point in favor of playing a "game" right would imply an inner harmony or contentment which probably only comes with age, maturity, and awareness of mortality. I am still not sure that I am seeing it in myself or at least not in the same way.

It was there as a child, became stroner in my teens and was almost fully developed by the time I hit college. It also causes a great deal of "inappropriate" laughter.


I can find myself amused by an assertion I have just made. This hardly endears me to the person I am having a conversation with at the time. I often get, "What's so funny?"; I reply, "You had to be there." That does not usually help. HTH

On 2002-02-04 04:56, Stonewall Patton wrote:

On 2002-02-03 20:18, Chris Loyd '82 wrote:

When writing, I transcribe the dialogue as it occurs in my head. I transcribe the going-ons, the scenery, and such, in a similar manner, though I refine it a bit. I usually have to ponder what words to use to describe what exactly I'm "looking" at.

I want to say that actual dialog as a conversation never comes to me in my head though I still do not want to fully commit to this statement. The image in my head is always central. I can see an image/situation and I find the right words to put into characters' mouths consistent with the nature of the situation (the image/vision). The image/situation is the horse which leads/determines the characters' words, not vice versa.

Do you create or observe this world. My worlds -- my stories -- are already pre-written in my head. I just have to transcribe what is going on. I do some editing of dialogue, but if one character decides he wants to be a certain way, fine.

What you describe as finding le mot juste is a perpetual task. When I do commit to doing a written piece right, I am constantly revising the words as better, more applicable, more illustrative ones come to me. But again, the image/situation is the determinant of the words/dialog. I am seeking just the right words so as to accurately convey to the reader the image which is fixed in my head.

However I can think of one spontaneous aspect. Before I start on a topic, and if I am really into it, then certain choice expressions or phrases pertaining to particular facets will come to me spontaneously. If I were to simply copy them down alone, the piece would be incomprehensible to the reader because they would appear as unconnected thoughts. The task of writing the piece becomes, in part, one of finding an effective means of joining these ostensibly unconnected thoughts (spontaneously generated expressions). These expressions aptly describe specific parts of the image in my head so the actual writing is an effort to fill out the picture for the reader.

I have had to develop a way of describing what I'm seeing in a way that makes sense when I read it. I found that as I progressed through college, my note-taking became more coherent automatically. The vast blocks of text became transformed into paragraphs, tables, etc. The only exception being classes where the teacher talks in a stream-of-consciousness, thus negating me the opportunity to organize instantly.

Something similar happens when I drive. I'm not conscious of shifting gears or braking. It is all automatic. I'm more aware of what the traffic is around me, while also letting some of my mind drift off.

I am actually intensely alert when I drive. I am constantly conceiving of every possible move which every driver around me might make so as to minimize the risk of accident. But this probably stems from profound impatience. If am at location A and I wish to be at location B, I really just want a transporter beam to put me there in a split second. I am not interested in wasting time in getting there when there are so many other things I would rather be doing with my time (and life). So I calculate how much I can exceed the speed limit in a given environment while ensuring that guys whose salary I am forced to pay at gunpoint do not harass me. (I am not a cop basher, but in fact a cop supporter [not federal cops any longer, though] -- they are generally good guys. But when there are murderers, thieves and rapists on the loose, it is simply wrong for lawmakers to order cops to dedicate their time to harassing law-abiding citizens [who are the bosses] for purposes of revenue enhancement.) So not only am I constantly anticipating every conceivable action of every driver around me but, in stop and go traffic when cruise control is useless, I am constantly looking for every avenue of egress which will afford me with the opportunity to pump the speedometer needle back up to that formulaic value which ensures the most efficient and rapid transit while avoiding a ticket.

Oh God, are you are the type of drivers who I wonder why such the hurry? Personally, I favor speed-limit cameras to enforce mundane laws. Cops don't like enforcing traffic laws either.

In any event, I found driving to be either boring (Oh, look, there's a car behind me. He's gonna tailgate me because I'm doing 55 in a 55 in a Corolla, therefore I'm an "idiot", and need to be cut off in a no-passing zone and given the finger) or terrifying (Oh, look, that guy is aiming that gun at me because I'm doing 55 in a 55 and traffic prevents him passing me a no-passing zone. I guess this is how I will die.). I ride the bus whenever possible, as bus crashes almost never occur in my town, and I can read. I find that I use my time much more wisely when I ride the bus. The schedule commits me to being at a certain place at a certain time. Impatient people hate it, but still, what's the hurry?

Now that's intense! But it really comes down to a realization that this is time out of a finite lifespan which I will never get back. Unless I am exploring new terrain, transit time between point A and point B is a waste of time, and therefore a waste of my life. So the task is to minimize transit time so as to make the most of my time and my life.

Sadly, driving is where I do most of my thinking, and there have been moments when I turn off the car at my destination, not knowing how I got there. It is like, turn on the car at home, then suddenly I turn it off at school, with nothing in between. I fear that I'm missing out on a great deal of life, not to mention driving while (for all I know) essentially asleep.

This is interesting. My impatient and intensely alert driving is a function of my determination not to miss out on anything of value in life, i.e. to always make the most of my limited time here on earth. You appear to have the same recognition of the value of time given a finite human lifespan, yet you are content to see that valuable time wasted rather than be proactive in maximizing it. I am not sure which choice is better but the same engine is at work. Few people would appear to view the time consumed in a trip to the grocery store within the context of a finite human lifespan, but we INTPs do.

Define "to waste time". I waste time driving because that is all I'm doing. I read -- an activity I highly value -- on the bus, so I'm getting something that would never otherwise get done. I'm not under the illusion that I will live 76 years. I could die right after finishing this post. I go for quality of what time I do have. One hour on the bus, reading, means more to me than thirty minutes of boredom and terror.

For what it is worth, I'm the only person I know of who never complains of traffic, parking, gas prices, and shows up to class feeling fine. Driving is such an angry activity. Why waste my time?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chris Loyd '82 on 2002-02-04 09:59 ]</font>

As an infp, i can vouch for the other voices thing. As a person of reasonably sound mind, I am also able to discern that these are simply coming out of my imagination.

Hey, how about them Pats? As a new emigrant to Greater Boston, this is a nice omen.

On 2002-02-04 04:56, Stonewall Patton wrote:

This is interesting. My impatient and intensely alert driving is a function of my determination not to miss out on anything of value in life, i.e. to always make the most of my limited time here on earth. You appear to have the same recognition of the value of time given a finite human lifespan, yet you are content to see that valuable time wasted rather than be proactive in maximizing it. I am not sure which choice is better but the same engine is at work. Few people would appear to view the time consumed in a trip to the grocery store within the context of a finite human lifespan, but we INTPs do.

Stonewall, I find my "alone driving time" to be a valuable time-out from all the things going on in my life, whatever they happen to be at the time. I get to listen to music at top volume (not something I can do w/a 4-year-old in the car!). I can actually think for an extended span w/o being interrupted. I can relate pretty well to Chris' experience of arriving someplace w/o remembering much of the drive. During one 10-hour trip I mentally designed, decorated, & furnished an entire passive solar-heated home; during others I've worked out various episodes in the novel I'd like to write. So for me, driving time isn't wasted time at all. Perhaps this is more typical of INFJs?

On 2002-02-04 10:13, jcarson71 wrote:
As an infp, i can vouch for the other voices thing. As a person of reasonably sound mind, I am also able to discern that these are simply coming out of my imagination.

Hey, how about them Pats? As a new emigrant to Greater Boston, this is a nice omen.

Jcarson71, for a bit more on the Pats, hop on over to Generations-->Generations in Sports. :smile:

I commute one hour each way to work. I've done this since 1986. It's ingrained in my lifestyle.

Those two hours are totally mine. Now that I have a car with a CD player, it's allowed me to play more of the music I like. I've also started listening to audiobooks.

Which brings me somewhat onto the current topic of auditory and visual learning styles. I'm definitely a visual learner; even more so, I'd call myself a "graphical" learner, to coin a phrase. I learn best by reading, and I read a great deal.

For a long time, I have resisted listening to audiobooks in the car. I know that my auditory learning skills are somewhat underdeveloped. So what I did was this: I started out listening to books that I knew very well. That way I didn't feel like I needed to concentrate too hard on the story (and risk taking too much of my attention away from the road!).

I discovered that I really enjoyed a well-narrated audiobook. So I started listening to some less familiar works, trying to see if I could follow the stories. Finally, I tried out a book that I had never read before. I found that I could follow the plot just fine.

So maybe sometimes it's a matter of re-training one's brain in order to learn a new skill.

Kiff '61

On 2002-02-04 10:13, jcarson71 wrote:

Hey, how about them Pats? As a new emigrant to Greater Boston, this is a nice omen.

Mr. Rush Limbaugh opined that it was a victory of "socialism" as the team was announced as a Borgian "one" as it entered the stadium. Some good vibes there?

On 2002-02-04 09:56, Chris Loyd '82 wrote:

Do you create or observe this world. My worlds -- my stories -- are already pre-written in my head. I just have to transcribe what is going on. I do some editing of dialogue, but if one character decides he wants to be a certain way, fine.

This is a good question. I am much more given to theoretical writing than creative writing so I generally observe what is in my head rather than create it. However I suppose that I must create the image in the first place before I can observe it for transcription purposes. But at least when I get to the writing phase, I am observing.

Perhaps the theoretical/creative distinction correlates with the visual/auditory distinction? Those who are more visual may be more given to theory. Those who are more auditory may be given to creative writing and fiction.

Regardless, I am not sure if you are saying that you are transcribing what voices say in your head. But I am definitely describing an image.

Oh God, are you are the type of drivers who I wonder why such the hurry? Personally, I favor speed-limit cameras to enforce mundane laws.

Well, let's just say that I prefer to live in the country where there is less congestion and, I still hope, less technological advance with respect to this Big Brother stuff of which you are so fond.

I ride the bus whenever possible, as bus crashes almost never occur in my town, and I can read. I find that I use my time much more wisely when I ride the bus. The schedule commits me to being at a certain place at a certain time. Impatient people hate it, but still, what's the hurry?

Riding the bus is no problem since you can bring books, get something done, and generally do something worthwhile to you. The downside is of course that you lose the freedom to come and go when you please and must meet the bus schedule.

Define "to waste time". I waste time driving because that is all I'm doing. I read -- an activity I highly value -- on the bus, so I'm getting something that would never otherwise get done.

You defined it pretty well yourself. I guess, in the end, wasted time is time not under your control; time when you are not free. So long as you can do something which you consider to be of value, time is not wasted. However when you are in a situation where you are deprived of the ability to do anything which you consider to be of value, then time is wasted.

For what it is worth, I'm the only person I know of who never complains of traffic, parking, gas prices, and shows up to class feeling fine. Driving is such an angry activity. Why waste my time?

"Oh give me land, lots of land, under starry skies above.
Don't fence me in.
Let me ride through the wide open spaces that I love.
Don't fence me in...."


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Stonewall Patton on 2002-02-04 14:54 ]</font>

Rush Limbaugh is full of it sometimes. There is a difference between teamwork and state-level socialism, isn't there?

On 2002-02-04 15:08, jcarson71 wrote:

Rush Limbaugh is full of it sometimes.

The Flatulent One is full of Sierra Hotel India Tango ALL the time.

On 2002-02-04 14:51, Stonewall Patton wrote:

This is a good question. I am much more given to theoretical writing than creative writing so I generally observe what is in my head rather than create it. However I suppose that I must create the image in the first place before I can observe it for transcription purposes. But at least when I get to the writing phase, I am observing.

Perhaps the theoretical/creative distinction correlates with the visual/auditory distinction? Those who are more visual may be more given to theory. Those who are more auditory may be given to creative writing and fiction.

Regardless, I am not sure if you are saying that you are transcribing what voices say in your head. But I am definitely describing an image.

Hmm...let me try describing it like this. Imagine watching a movie on your TV, and typing as fast as you can to keep up with it. Yes, you have the power to pause, rewind, and such, but the tape keeps moving at a set speed. You hear the dialogue and see the action, and you frantically try to keep up with it. This is pretty close to what my creative writing is like. I do have the power, of course, to go back and edit anything that I simply don't like, but that must come later. There is a difference between transcribing what you saw as you were seeing it, and editing what you wrote in accordance to how you remember it, as well as how you prefer to remember it.

Well, let's just say that I prefer to live in the country where there is less congestion and, I still hope, less technological advance with respect to this Big Brother stuff of which you are so fond.

Excuse me, but where is my privacy when I'm in public spaces? When I'm out and about, I expect other people to be watching me because I happen to think that other people are bored and like people-watching. I do the same. I don't tend to break laws in public because, well, they are laws and I might get caught. Murders don't tend to occur in large public areas in broad daylight for obvious reasons.

I support the use of machinery to perform tasks that are mundane and repetitive and dislikable-but-necessary, like enforcing traffic laws. I'm against speed limits myself, preferring instead that all road and gasoline subsidies be canceled, thus allowing potholed freeways doing the slowing down. For what it's worth, Germany's Autobahn is very successful at reducing the number of people.

Riding the bus is no problem since you can bring books, get something done, and generally do something worthwhile to you. The downside is of course that you lose the freedom to come and go when you please and must meet the bus schedule.

Schedules cease to be an issue when the frequency of arrival is greater than every 15 minutes. I come and go according to my school schedule, the closing times of libraries, as well as other various thing. My life is scheduled anyway, with or without the bus.

For what it's worth (to beat that phrase to a pulp), I dislike buses. I'm much more found of rail-bases transit, but that requires high population density in urban areas. America is rather bad at building areas in general, so I don't expect much.

You defined it pretty well yourself. I guess, in the end, wasted time is time not under your control; time when you are not free. So long as you can do something which you consider to be of value, time is not wasted. However when you are in a situation where you are deprived of the ability to do anything which you consider to be of value, then time is wasted.

You like driving, I like reading. We agree to disagree, yes?

"Oh give me land, lots of land, under starry skies above.
Don't fence me in.
Let me ride through the wide open spaces that I love.
Don't fence me in...."

Is this sentimental? I don't do sentimental.

I love driving. I also happen to live in a rural area where most things are long distances from each other. At present, there is still relatively little traffic, so I can drive for long stretches along I-40, 19-23 or other highways unemcumbered by stop-and-go traffic.

This is my alone time, the only time of day (other than trips to the bathroom) I can be completely free of other humans and their demands, and just converse with my thoughts, feelings and observations, sometimes even with God. As an INFP (JCarson, I didn't know you were one too! that makes four of us now, I think), it is absolutely necessary for my sanity.

Unfortunately, of late, the Carolinas have been getting increasingly built-up (mostly retirement communities and subdivisions for summer residents), and the traffic is becoming more and more like what I remember it to be in northern Jersey (wehre I grew up).

On 2002-02-04 15:50, Stonewall Patton wrote:

On 2002-02-04 15:08, jcarson71 wrote:

Rush Limbaugh is full of it sometimes.

The Flatulent One is full of Sierra Hotel India Tango ALL the time.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is my alone time, the only time of day (other than trips to the bathroom) I can be completely free of other humans

That one's for you, Stonewall! :wink:
*snicker*