• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Jack Flak's Function System Adventure

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Well, I think that this system at least provides a more useful heuristic for typing other people based on their observable behavior. There was too much ambiguity in the definitions for the introverted and extroverted functions to begin with, and this clears up some of the contradictions between the function theory and the type descriptions that tended to bother me.

For example, the type descriptions of INTJ tend to focus on how well they are able to make decisions and formulate contingency plans using the information at hand, yet states later that their dominant function is intuition (a perceiving, not decision making function). And INTP's usually get a more "indecisive" treatment in the descriptions, yet are assigned thinking, a decision making function, as their dominant function. Plus there was usually disagreement (on this board as well as others) on what behaviors or thoughts or feelings counted as the "introverted" or "extroverted" type, and a lot of the time they could be either, or the difference simply is not clear.
Yes, exactly. Thank you for being a better writer than I am. If you would like to write a small book with my cooperation, we'll split the profits.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
You've been indoctrinated, and I'm sorry. It's extremely difficult for a Thinking Primary to change well-established notions in their minds. I recommend that you ponder my system at a distance, occasionally, for a few weeks, and see what you think then.

You've made something that's able to be decided by observable, objective criteria.

In some ways, that's better than MBTI. Congratufuckinglations.

But it is still not MBTI, and without serious alterations, it never will be.

Oh yeah. And today, I'm an ISTP. :yes:
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Ouh leave the avatar one, it was great @hap
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
You've made something that's able to be decided by observable, objective criteria......

That was real advice I gave you about pondering it at a distance. You wouldn't accept this today if it made more sense than anything in the world. But thanks for the accolades. ;)

I never said it was MBTI. It's a hybrid/evolution. I've kept the same type names, because all (read: most) of the descriptions of types out there still apply, and because we already know our types.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
That was real advice I gave you about pondering it at a distance. You wouldn't accept this today if it made more sense than anything in the world. But thanks for the accolades. ;)

I never said it was MBTI. It's a hybrid/evolution.

An evolution, eh?

This is too new to be called 'evolution.' You're jumping the gun. As of now, it's a simple mutation.

May you learn the terrors of natural selection.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Sorry Jack, I agree with Hap. This isn't MBTI.

It might work (aka it may be internally consistent), but who cares? It doesn't accurately correlate to MBTI type.

I've come up with my own way of making sense of function order that doesn't ask everyone else to change their type, so I'll stick with that.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Sorry Jack, I agree with Hap. This isn't MBTI.

It might work (aka it may be internally consistent), but who cares? It doesn't accurately correlate to MBTI type.

I've come up with my own way of making sense of function order that doesn't ask everyone else to change their type, so I'll stick with that.
I've already told you it requires no one to change their type. You don't need to repeat yourself. It's a different way of looking at mental processes which includes changing the definitions of functions. Don't overlook that.
 

GargoylesLegacy

Kickin' Ass since 1984
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,399
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
8w9
I think that's a cool Chart. I mean it comes in freaking handy, especially for Noobs like me who can't EXACTLY tell what Type is how yet (didn't look into it too much yet, only in mine for now).

So I would be:
INTJ
Introverted.
Primary function: Thinking
Support function: Intuition

Okay, I am a weird INTJ anyways so...sometimes more and sometimes less "introverted" but other then that...great Thing. Thanks Jack! :)
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I've already told you it requires no one to change their type. You don't need to repeat yourself. It's a different way of looking at mental processes which includes changing the definitions of functions. Don't overlook that.

You're wrong. Any introvert that's typed themselves by function order will have their J and P backwards in your system.

I get that you've changed the definitions of the functions, which just means you're confusing the shit out of everyone. When you say "intuition", it doesn't mean the same thing as when I say intuition.

And when you say INFJ you mean something entirely different from me when I say INFJ. This is why your system is pointless. It would be one thing if you completely redefined functions using words and letters that don't occur in MBTI and made up an entirely new system. But you can't expect everyone to magically change all of the definitions in their heads which correspond to an already consistent system.

MBTI works fine (as long as you leave a little more room for function order past the dominant). Your system might work fine too, but it describes less, which means it's less powerful. Why would anyone drop a powerful and working system for a less powerful and novel system?


You can keep saying over and over that you don't think people should change their type, but that doesn't make any sense. I am an INFJ because I am an Ni dominant and use Fe/Ti over Te/Fi. Those are the only reasons I'm an INFJ. If you define a new system, then I have to type myself within that system. Why would you expect everything to magically shift from one system to another?

In order to defend the stance that your system doesn't ask people to change types, you must come up with a way of explaining why someone who would type themselves as INFJ in MBTI via dominant function and direction of judgment would type themselves as INFJ in your system.

And you really can't do that. So you're asking people to change types.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
You're wrong. Any introvert that's typed themselves by function order will have their J and P backwards in your system.
They may or may not have typed themselves incorrectly, considering how silly MBTI functions are.

I get that you've changed the definitions of the functions, which just means you're confusing the shit out of everyone. When you say "intuition", it doesn't mean the same thing as when I say intuition.
That's like saying Galileo was confusing the shit out of everyone. They threw him in jail for it, in fact.

--

You use Ni the way Jung defined it, which is a horrible way to define it. It's not Perception, the way he defined it. It's that simple.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
^Yes it is perception, the way he defines it. He defines perception too.

Perception/Judgment is just unconscious processing/conscious processing.

You should learn Jung before trashing his system.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
You should learn Jung before trashing his system.
I am familiar with the man's work. He intended to be right, but was only half right. This is the other half. I give you the advice I gave Haphazard, another Judging Primary. Keep this system at a distance, but don't forget about it, and see how you feel about it in the future. We may never agree, but we certainly won't agree today.

Also keep in mind that your Support function is extremely present in your mental processes.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Lol, I don't need to be condescended to here. I get your system. It's simple. I'm not stupid.

I surely get Jung's system better than you do; I'll trust my comparison of the two systems over yours, because you don't even get the functions.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
You're wrong. Any introvert that's typed themselves by function order will have their J and P backwards in your system.

But I think what he's trying to demonstrate is that function order is not precise, and that typing based on the traditional MBTI definitions is not accurate, and therefore not useful. I tend to agree, because the definitions of the introverted and extroverted functions are not really all that clear (for example, both Fi and Fe have been described in places as capable of producing deep empathy, and Ti has never really had a good definition other than being the more intuitive, mystical version of Te).

Perhaps it would be easier to conceive of switching the function order yet remaining the same type if the person typed themselves based on the descriptions, rather than on Jung's function definitions. Personally, I tried using the function orders to type but didn't find it useful since they seldom corroborated what I observed in my own behavior and in the behaviors of others.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Lol, I don't need to be condescended to here. I get your system. It's simple. I'm not stupid.

I surely get Jung's system better than you do; I'll trust my comparison of the two systems over yours, because you don't even get the functions.
It's not about getting it, it's about changing your notions of what is correct and what isn't. Which is, on average, much easier for Perceiving Primaries. I don't think you're stupid, or close to it.

You may, however, ease back a bit on the "You don't get the functions" business. I get them so well it would blow Jung's mind. He confused information intake with information processing at least some of the time.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
But I think what he's trying to demonstrate is that function order is not precise, and that typing based on the traditional MBTI definitions is not accurate, and therefore not useful. I tend to agree, because the definitions of the introverted and extroverted functions are not really all that clear (for example, both Fi and Fe have been described in places as capable of producing deep empathy, and Ti has never really had a good definition other than being the more intuitive, mystical version of Te).

In MBTI, the only part of function order that is precise is the dominant function. The rest of the "prescribed" order should be questioned, I agree. But there are perfectly simple ways of determining type from functions. You pick the dominant, then you pick the direction of the auxiliary and tertiary. Voila.

And the definitions for the functions actually are quite clear, it's just that 95% of the people here don't know what they're talking about.

It's not about getting it, it's about changing your notions of what is correct and what isn't. Which is, on average, much easier for Perceiving Primaries. I don't think you're stupid, or close to it.

You may, however, ease back a bit on the "You don't get the functions" business. I get them so well it would blow Jung's mind. He confused information intake with information processing at least some of the time.

You obviously don't get them, because you're confusing "processing" and "judging". Perceiving functions do a ton of processing actually. Remember, he defined "perceiving" in a specific way. Not in the general way.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Who gets who is irrelevant. But who says you do not get someone is wrong
 

zago

New member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,162
MBTI Type
INTP
For example, the type descriptions of INTJ tend to focus on how well they are able to make decisions and formulate contingency plans using the information at hand, yet states later that their dominant function is intuition (a perceiving, not decision making function). And INTP's usually get a more "indecisive" treatment in the descriptions, yet are assigned thinking, a decision making function, as their dominant function. Plus there was usually disagreement (on this board as well as others) on what behaviors or thoughts or feelings counted as the "introverted" or "extroverted" type, and a lot of the time they could be either, or the difference simply is not clear.


I don't see a problem with either of those things. Judging functions aren't necessarily about decision making in the "picking and choosing a plan of action" sense. It is also a decision to remain on the fence about many issues, as INTPs do. In reality INTPs are extremely decisive, as is their habit of life. An ENTP will use Ne and make things up spontaneously as he goes along, but an INTP like me will be much, MUCH more concerned of making sense of everything and fitting it all into a massive framework (with the unconscious goal of never having to be surprised or confused by anything again).

This is why INTPs are very reluctant to enter unpredictable social situations. Our Ti preference is so strong we feel that we must understand the rules of the situation before we even partake in it. ENTPs have so much less trouble with this.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
In MBTI, the only part of function order that is precise is the dominant function. The rest of the "prescribed" order should be questioned, I agree. But there are perfectly simple ways of determining type from functions. You pick the dominant, then you pick the direction of the auxiliary and tertiary. Voila.

And the definitions for the functions actually are quite clear, it's just that 95% of the people here don't know what they're talking about.

I've read Jung on the functions, and I don't find them clear at all, especially if we're trying to apply them on a practical level. If they were, there wouldn't be such dispute over which behaviors belong to which function direction.

Also, function order is not the only thing that jack flack changed. He also collapsed the introverted/extroverted distinction, which then calls for a change in the function order so that the types can remain faithful to the MBTI descriptions. For example, if we collapsed the introverted/extroverted distinction, then an INTP and INTJ would only be different in that for the former, the dominant function is thinking, and for the latter, the dominant function is intuition (I know you know this, but bear with me so I can get my thoughts out). No Ti or Te, or Ni and Ne. Just intuition and thinking.

And if we take function dominance to mean frequency of use (and I can't really think of any other way to take it), then the INTP would be using the judging/decision making process more frequently than the INTJ, who would be using the information-gathering/perceptive process of intuition more frequently. This, however, seems to be the opposite of the type descriptions, which calls the INTP the more indecisive, flighty of the two. Same with INFP and INFJ.

My point is that if you get rid of the introverted/extroverted distinctions in the functions, then you kind of have to change the function order if you want the types to stay true to their descriptions.
 
Top