Another Reason That Dichotomies Can Be Confusing

["?"]

Maybe it's my own limited view of dichotomies, but I responded to Sunshine's inquiry on shyness based on what we normally see as E/I results. Jung's definition never discusses gregariousness or even the direction of energy. Instead he simply says that extraverts focus and take into account the object (anything outside themselves) whereas introverts don't. I originally pasted his definitions, but they're too long. If anyone would like to read them and compare, they can be found again at this site.

I have been wondering for some time whether I am dismissing ESTP because of my limiting view of E/I. I really would like some pro and con feedback from varied theories. One I am considering strongly is Berens' interaction styles.

[arcticangel02]

I haven't time (or motivation) to read the whole definitions now, but I'll definitely come back.

But I wanted to say: It's difficult, because there are different theories out there. Which are all using the same scale. And for someone like me, who's on the borderline, the subtle differences actually make a big impact on our reported type.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think I end up being an INFP according to Kiersey but an ENFP according to MBTI.

What, then, do I call myself?

[Samuel De Mazarin]

There is one and one reason alone for dichotomies to be confusing: Kierkegaard's "Either/Or"

["?"]

Originally Posted by arcticangel02

I haven't time (or motivation) to read the whole definitions now, but I'll definitely come back.

But I wanted to say: It's difficult, because there are different theories out there. Which are all using the same scale. And for someone like me, who's on the borderline, the subtle differences actually make a big impact on our reported type.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think I end up being an INFP according to Kiersey but an ENFP according to MBTI.

What, then, do I call myself?

And this is what it boils down to, personal choice on whose theory you choose to follow. In my case I see no reason to go beyond the original theory which is Jung. With that being said, I am in agreement that not only are his definitions long, but quite abstract. Yet again we have been led to believe that the E/I focuses the energy outward/inward respectively, but Jung merely says that E/I focuses on and makes decisions based on, the objective/subjective and never refers to energy. Thanks. I am hopeful that this will get some recognition and discussion which may help alot of people that recognize their also being bordering on the attitude.