User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 51

  1. #21
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    I don't think I'm explaining myself very well. That is what I wish to figure out, but what I was trying to say was this: Doesn't this theory compensate with change by encompassing a set of 16 combinations that you can have with functions? The theory compensates for change through allowing the fluidity of being able to change types at any time. Sorry if I didn't explain that very well the first time.
    Absolutely. But it's just not broad enough to capture the whole range of personality.

    Easy example. Attachment anxiety. Some people have phobias of losing people in their life. Those phobias get triggered when they become close to people and invest in them. Typology isn't the right tool for accounting for that at all.

  2. #22
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Absolutely. But it's just not broad enough to capture the whole range of personality.

    Easy example. Attachment anxiety. Some people have phobias of losing people in their life. Those phobias get triggered when they become close to people and invest in them. Typology isn't the right tool for accounting for that at all.
    Alright, I can live with that. Next, in the line up. With this problem in mind can the theory be added onto in order to start describing strange happenings such as this. Perhaps instead of just calling something 'unhealthy' figure out which function is 'unhealthy' and then creating a sub-forum, or another set of cognitive functions designed to describe why that unhealthy view towards something occurs. Vague, but it's a start.

  3. #23
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Hypothetically, is your goal to understand personality, or to fit people into categories? They're different. If you did want to build a cogent theory of personality, why not start with the building blocks and move your way up? To me that would be the most efficient way.

    Let's give it a try, shall we? I would prefer a model that can account for the full range of personality traits, including disorders and typological functions. Here's how I would set it up. This is tentative and kinda off the top of my head, so criticize and elaborate away.

    Divide personality into 2 fields: content and management.

    I. Content: All the stuff that filters into your experience. Includes:
    _ A. Sensory input from the 5 senses (sight, sound, taste, touch/pain, smell)
    _ _ 1. Feelings: Maybe controversial, but I think feelings are actually physical changes in the body, as tension or relaxation (touch/pain sensation). They break down into two categories:
    _ _ _ i. Pleasant (comfort)
    _ _ _ ii. Unpleasant (discomfort)
    _ _ _ Note: Feelings can also get triggered by mirroring another person, which is essentially sensory input, but a special class because it's more direct and immediate
    _ B. Thoughts, which are basically associative, based on current Content
    _ _ 1. Unconscious: automatic thoughts and associations
    _ _ _ i. From memory: comes in the form of the 5 senses
    _ _ _ ii. Needs and fears: Images like an attractive person or tasty food or a wild bear that trigger Management (below). Can be either innate or learned and have varying levels of power.
    _ _ 2. Conscious: Hypothetical/analytical mind-stuff that you generate on purpose
    _ _ _ i. Auditory/Semantic
    _ _ _ _ a. Auditory: the sound of a car alarm
    _ _ _ _ b. Semantic: most thinking falls into this category; occurs in strings of words
    _ _ _ ii. Visual/Spatial
    _ _ _ _ a. Visual
    _ _ _ _ _ _ (a) Hypothetical
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (1) Impersonal: unicorn, the Dalai Lama's brother
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (2) Personal: Imaging yourself losing and being sad, or winning and being happy
    _ _ _ _ _ _ (b) From memory
    _ _ _ _ b. Spatial: concerns the relationships between things
    Note on moods: Thoughts are constantly triggering other thoughts as well as feelings. Certain thoughts and certain sensory input will trigger lingering thoughts and feelings. The combination of thought and feeling can be called a mood, but I wouldn't give it a separate category. Moods, however, do break down into different components:
    _ _ 1. Anger - thoughts: conquer, subordinate, or hurt competitors; feelings: pleasant tightness around the chest area
    _ _ 2. Fear - thoughts: loss, self-subordination; feelings: unpleasant tightness in the back and chest, sometimes stomach
    _ _ 3. Apathy - thoughts: pointlessness; feelings: [have to think about this one]
    _ _ 4. Sadness
    _ _ 5. Excitement/Restlessness
    _ _ 6. Happiness
    _ _ 7. Intimacy
    _ _ 8. Beauty/Joy
    _ _ 9. Care

    II. Management: Content triggers Management "programs" that motivate the organism. The purpose of Management is to modify or retain certain Content. You could generally think of it as resistance or maybe preference. It's the problem solver. In this personality model, Management can be thought of a the Motive component of personality. Motives are triggered by
    _ C. Motive
    _ _ 1. Modify
    _ _ _ i. "Pursue" or acquire
    _ _ _ _ a. Compete
    _ _ _ ii. "Avoid"
    _ _ 2. Retain

    I have to think about this more and need a little break.

  4. #24
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Fitting people into categories would help greatly when describing and figuring out personalities/disorders dealing with the personality. Irrational feels and what not.

    I think the part of this idea that I think we should linger on more is the 'Moods' section. You said, and rightly so, that the combination of thought and feeling create moods. Since this is a combination of both thought and feeling it encompasses in one section what you were expounding upon in the beginning.

    I feel that we should start with how thought (I'm assuming we know more about this than feelings, but if not either starting point works) effects mood right now. This would help us immediately figure out how the original cognitive processes that exist right now can reach out to what we are creating. I must away for now. I'll get back to this soon though.

  5. #25
    ¡MI TORTA! Amethyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 so/sx
    Socionics
    SLE Ti
    Posts
    2,182

    Default

    This is just categorizations of people as a whole...but...

    People are like toys, and are always put in 'boxes'. Labels put on the boxes help people see the differences between the boxes and their contents. Even though you look through a box or two and see the similar 'toys', they still stand out in their own way, and might even fit the description given to the contents in the box.

  6. #26
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    Fitting people into categories would help greatly when describing and figuring out personalities/disorders dealing with the personality.
    What's missing from MBTI but found in a system like Big 5 is the neuroticism dimension (somewhat accounted for by type dynamics theory). I personally think that's a good thing. I think neuroticism is more a function of nurture and it's more appropriate to study it in that context. MBTI is about innate predisposition. So is the Enneagram to some extent but it also describes the interaction between nature and nurture. It's a bit like Google Maps - you can look at an abstracted view (map), real view (satellite) and at different levels of detail. One isn't any better than the other - they are differently useful.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    I would prefer a model that can account for the full range of personality traits, including disorders and typological functions. Here's how I would set it up. This is tentative and kinda off the top of my head, so criticize and elaborate away.

    Divide personality into 2 fields: content and management.
    ....
    What you've drawn up is just an another classification scheme...after criticizing classification schemes as inappropriate tools for studying personality...
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  7. #27
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    What's missing from MBTI but found in a system like Big 5 is the neuroticism dimension (somewhat accounted for by type dynamics theory). I personally think that's a good thing. I think neuroticism is more a function of nurture and it's more appropriate to study it in that context. MBTI is about innate predisposition. So is the Enneagram to some extent but it also describes the interaction between nature and nurture. It's a bit like Google Maps - you can look at an abstracted view (map), real view (satellite) and at different levels of detail. One isn't any better than the other - they are differently useful.
    Mmhmm!

    Co-existence! That is until we create another system that is flawless and elaborates perfectly on the entire human psyche!

  8. #28
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    R.

    ???

  9. #29
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    Fitting people into categories would help greatly when describing and figuring out personalities/disorders dealing with the personality. Irrational feels and what not.

    I think the part of this idea that I think we should linger on more is the 'Moods' section. You said, and rightly so, that the combination of thought and feeling create moods. Since this is a combination of both thought and feeling it encompasses in one section what you were expounding upon in the beginning.

    I feel that we should start with how thought (I'm assuming we know more about this than feelings, but if not either starting point works) effects mood right now. This would help us immediately figure out how the original cognitive processes that exist right now can reach out to what we are creating. I must away for now. I'll get back to this soon though.
    I would prefer to get away from the term cognitive processes altogether. Let's make a brand new personality theory.

  10. #30
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    I'm down with that.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-19-2015, 02:50 AM
  2. I have been wondering about this.
    By Haphazard in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-18-2010, 10:31 PM
  3. [NF] How often do you wonder if you're being yourself?
    By thinkinjazz in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 10-05-2009, 03:31 PM
  4. [ISFP] ISFPs - Do you have the hermit/non-conformist/wonderer/philosopher tendencies?
    By swordpath in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-31-2008, 12:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO