Jack Flak's Function System Adventure

[Haphazard]

Because they prefer Judging functions, like Thinking and Feeling.

But... they don't.

Just because connections beget the need for action does not mean that the connections are not the dominant, guiding force.

 

[Jack Flak]

But... they don't.

Just because connections beget the need for action does not mean that the connections are not the dominant, guiding force.

You're talking about Humans, not INTJs.

Look at it this way. Even though it isn't true, it's simple:

INTPs spend 2/3 of their time gathering data via intuition, and 1/3 making decisions with thinking.

INTJs spend 1/3 or their time gathering data via intuition, and 2/3 making decisions with thinking.

 

[Haphazard]

You're talking about Humans, not INTJs.

They why not make Intuition dominant for all of them?

 

[Haphazard]

Look at it this way. Even though it isn't true, it's simple:

INTPs spend 2/3 of their time gathering data via intuition, and 1/3 making decisions with thinking.

INTJs spend 1/3 or their time gathering data via intuition, and 2/3 making decisions with thinking.

But the point I was trying to make at the beginning was that thinking is not necessarily decisionmaking!

The reason why NJs don't appear do much 'gathering' is because there's nowhere to go to 'gather.' It's just kind of always there.

 

[Jack Flak]

But the point I was trying to make at the beginning was that thinking is not necessarily decisionmaking!

*eats apple* Information processing. Sorting, selection for analysis, etc.

The reason why NJs don't appear do much 'gathering' is because there's nowhere to go to 'gather.' It's just kind of always there.

That's Thinking!

 

[Salomé]

You're talking about Humans, not INTJs.

Look at it this way. Even though it isn't true, it's simple:

INTPs spend 2/3 of their time gathering data via intuition, and 1/3 making decisions with thinking.

INTJs spend 1/3 or their time gathering data via intuition, and 2/3 making decisions with thinking.

How can you make a serious argument which starts with "Even though it isn't true"?

How have you come to this conclusion? (don't say with thinking!)

 

[Jack Flak]

How can you make a serious argument which starts with "Even though it isn't true"?

How have you come to this conclusion? (don't say with thinking!)

It's a simplified representation. How is this not obvious to you?

 

[Salomé]

It's a simplified representation. How is this not obvious to you?

Err....Because it's wrong?

 

[Jack Flak]

Err....Because it's wrong?

I KNOW. That's why I said "IT'S NOT TRUE." It's figurative.

 

[Salomé]

I KNOW. That's why I said "IT'S NOT TRUE." It's figurative.

DON'T YOU BE SHOUTIN' AT ME, K?

You shouldn't use fractions if you are trying to be figurative - you just know someone like me is gonna challenge you.

But anyway, I disagree, I don't spend 2/3rds or even the majority of my time intuiting. I just don't. And Te is a world away from Ti. How can you not know this and call yourself an INTP?

 

[Jack Flak]

And Te is a world away from Ti. How can you not know this and call yourself an INTP?

It's all T, used for different things.

 

[Mondo]

I don't know about this.
I think a lot of your info is based on observable behavior rather than what is actually going on inside the person.

An INFP could use Feeling more than Intuition but it appears that he is using Intuition more than Feeling. Fi would still be the dominant function.

However, I must admit that I like some of your reasoning. It doesn't mean I entirely agree though.

 

[Salomé]

It's all T, used for different things.

Well, if you're gonna be reductionist, why not just say it's all brainpower - used for different things? How does this clarify anything.

 

[Jack Flak]

Well, if you're gonna be reductionist, why not just say it's all brainpower - used for different things? How does this clarify anything.

Because I prefer to take the conclusions as far as sense will allow. Balance, my friend.

 

[Salomé]

So this is for surface evaluation. Gotcha.

I guess one of my biggest complaints with MBTI, and how it's set up, is that perceiving functions (Ni, Ne, Si, Se) and judging functions (Ti, Te, Fi, Fe) are used alongside terms like 'judgers' (Ni, Si, Te, Fe) and 'perceivers' (Ne, Se, Ti, Fi).

Which doesn't seem to make much sense, because it makes people think that IJs are more like 'perceivers' and IPs are more like 'judgers,' when this is not the case.

That's because you don't understand the theory. The J/P dichotomy is about how you interract with the environment. For an Introvert, this is of secondary importance, therefore, the dominant function for an IJ is actually a perceiving function. That's why introverted Js can sometimes look like Ps and vice versa.

 

[Salomé]

Because I prefer to take the conclusions as far as sense will allow. Balance, my friend.

I think you've thrashed that pony, friend.

 

[Jack Flak]

I think you've thrashed that pony, friend.

That's just your Intuition talking.

 

[cloakofsnow]

There is, of course, a very significant effect on the psyche from being Introverted or Extroverted, but I don't believe it's tied specifically to function direction.

I think you're onto something. Jung seems to think I/E is innate when he gives examples of how every living thing in nature has introversion or extraversion, but he thinks the functions are at least partly developed via nurture. So, people are either I or E already when they're born, even before they've developed a dominant function.

 

[Salomé]

I think you're onto something. Jung seems to think I/E is innate when he gives examples of how every living thing in nature has introversion or extraversion, but he thinks the functions are at least partly developed via nurture. So, people are either I or E already when they're born, even before they've developed a dominant function.

But Jung specifically talks about the introverted intuitive type, the introvert thinking type etc. The whole function/attitude thing comes from him in the first place!

 

[cloakofsnow]

But Jung specifically talks about the introverted intuitive type, the introvert thinking type etc. The whole function/attitude thing comes from him in the first place!

Yes, but I do wonder if he meant for the system to be as neat and tidy as Myers-Briggs has made it. He never specified the E/I direction of the auxiliary function. And the things he says often surprises me when he's speaking outside of his book, Psychological Types. He would say that Freud is actually an Introvert, even though he said he was an Extravert in PT, and that Freud is actually a Feeling type, even though his system is Thinking, etc. I find it hard to know what Jung really thinks regarding people's types as people.