• 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
I'm having trouble making sense of this. First, the names are off now. Normally, the P and J signify which function is extroverted. With your system it is opposite--I don't see why keep them at all. It just makes things confusing.
Socionics does it too, I wasn't the first. I think it makes more sense, that's why. *shrug*

Add: Before anyone tries to tell me INTP is INTj in Socionics: No, you're wrong, it isn't. Do some research.

P and J no longer mean anything now that you've combined Ne and Ni, Se and Si, Te and Ti, and Fe and Fi. Your INTP should be an NT and your INTJ should be a TN. With your system, only 2/4 letters matter in determining the type of the individual. With MBTI, all 4 letters matter....

NTP defines the function order, and I defines introversion. Function order and introversion/extroversion both affect behavior and personality, as I've said. Many other things do too. 16-type doesn't define people completely, it never has and never will.

Also, you seem to have reduced the system to 8 types instead of 16, so I am more confused now because of the E and the I. Why have E and I at all if, say, an ENTP and INTP have the same dominant and secondary functions?

There are eight separate function orders, yes, but there are differences between INTPs and ENTPs.

I think the most telling examples of how MBTI works are people who differ from you by 1 letter. I am an INTP, for instance, so let me look at 2 of my best friends, an ENTP and an ISTP.

The ENTP thinks in a very similar fasion to me, but he is clearly a people person. He is not afraid to go up to someone and do something crazy or ridiculous, and this is in fact his normal way of communicating about half the time. I would love to be able to do these things, but I have dominant Ti--I am much more inclined to stay back as an observer and analyze what is going on.... but that doesn't mean that sometimes I act goofy and random, as someone with dominant Ne is very prone to do.
This is a perfect example of the confirmation bias regarding MBTI function order, and I'm so glad you've stated it (Really).

What you're describing is the difference between Introversion and Extroversion, not some such silly concept as "Ti."

The ISTP is even more similar to me, but we are such good friends because the N/S difference makes for a disparity in our point of view which leads us to something we both love doing--arguing. That is our dominant Ti nature. We love to get to the very bottom of something and put our point of view into a perfect set of words. The ISTP notices details in the environment much more than I do, and I talk about philosophy and big picture ideas much more than he does, but overall we still have the same dominant mode of communication, and thus we get along much better than me and the ENTP do.

INTP: Intuition/Thinking. ISTP: Sensing/Thinking. Similar modes of operation, and the differences you describe can be explained by the Perceiving split.

Overall I see distinct boundaries between each of the 8 functions and I can easily see how they fit into the scheme of MBTI/Jung. It's possible that you may be mistyped and therefore see a need to correct the system. I wouldn't rule out ENTP, INTJ, or ENTJ for you. You seem to be a lot more extroverted than most INTPs.
I am INTP.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
? If it's unimportant, wth is this thread about?

I am not getting this at all. You haven't discredited function theory other than to say it's rubbish - which is less than persuasive. And you haven't provided any reasons to suggest why your approach makes more sense.
yaaa pretty much
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Humbug. Some, not all of you, will approve of this system more after some time has passed, if you continue to consider it. /Intuition.
 

The Ü™

Permabanned
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
11,910
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
So, Socionics. Minus facial recognition.

Um, socionics isn't always about facial recognition.

There is a subculture of MBTI practitioners who do the exact same thing.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
im just not sold on the idea. i really dont see the point thats all. the functions are plenty easy to use so why not just use them. if you simplify a system and make it easier to understand, you lose some of the original system which makes your system not nearly as useful and really just a mere shadow of the original system. now believe me, im not crazy about the functions (gasp) at all, but i find them quite easy to understand. functions, to me, are a model for something we dont understand, the human mind. but narrowing down the human mind to eight little descriptions is definitely quite a bit of narrowing. making a system like that even simpler is pointless if the system is a model for something as complex as the human mind.

my point is i just dont see the point though im quite open to the idea if you can sell me the idea.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
im just not sold on the idea. i really dont see the point thats all. the functions are plenty easy to use so why not just use them. if you simplify a system and make it easier to understand, you lose some of the original system which makes your system not nearly as useful and really just a mere shadow of the original system. now believe me, im not crazy about the functions (gasp) at all, but i find them quite easy to understand. functions, to me, are a model for something we dont understand, the human mind. but narrowing down the human mind to eight little descriptions is definitely quite a bit of narrowing. making a system like that even simpler is pointless if the system is a model for something as complex as the human mind.

The types aren't changed because I've explained the functions in a new way. There are still sixteen of them. This is only about functions. People are obsessed with these intellectual constructs when discussing MBTI, and these are simpler and more realistic.

Btw, most of your argument can even more easily be applied to MBTI function theory itself.

my point is i just dont see the point though im quite open to the idea if you can sell me the idea.
I'm a horrible salesman, man, so I suppose there's a position open for a better one, if they happen to agree with me.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
The types aren't changed because I've explained the functions in a new way. There are still sixteen of them. This is only about functions. People are obsessed with these intellectual constructs when discussing MBTI, and these are simpler and more realistic.

Btw, most of your argument can even more easily be applied to MBTI function theory itself.


I'm a horrible salesman, man, so I suppose there's a position open for a better one, if they happen to agree with me.

i was talking about functions not types. the functions do not need to be simplified.

and being a good salesman only means so much. if the product can sell itself then whats the point of a good salesman :).
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
i was talking about functions not types. the functions do not need to be simplified.
Define "need." MBTI functions are inaccurate. They are basically redefining concepts based on analysis of people. One small example which leads to immeasurable misunderstanding being:

The definitions of judging and perceiving are inconsistent.

Even if they were accurate, they would still be a problem, because many don't understand them. The simpler something is, the easier it is to be understood, as a rule.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
You have to determine I/E independently. And if you're NFJ your Primary function is Feeling, which commonly works in tandem with Intuition.


No, I'm not. I'm telling people that their function order isn't what they thought it was.

Typically INTP of me, I've pondered this for years, have come to a conclusion, and I won't be persuaded that it's incorrect. You do have the right to think it's wrong, of course.

Dude, people type themselves WITH the function order.

I'm definitely not an INFJ in your system; I'm an INFP. I guess it's all internally consistent, but it just seems like a pointless switch -- it doesn't even explain anything any better.

I like the idea of not having separate functions for introversion/extroversion; I think introversion/extroversion of a function should be thought of as a spectrum, not an either/or. The rest of it seems to suggest that you just don't understand the whole of function theory...
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Dude, people type themselves WITH the function order.
DUDE, I know. And they'll be better off if they type themselves with this function order. No one save for maybe locke has brought up anything I haven't considered, and rejected or accepted.

I'm definitely not an INFJ in your system; I'm an INFP. I guess it's all internally consistent, but it just seems like a pointless switch -- it doesn't even explain anything any better.
You're showing just how INFJ you are in my system. Note: I do not think it is a bad thing to be INFJ. Your Feeling judgments are occupying more of your concentration than your Intuition is.

I like the idea of not having separate functions for introversion/extroversion; I think introversion/extroversion of a function should be thought of as a spectrum, not an either/or.
That's one way to put it, but I just consider the application. For example, Thinking is a tool which can be used on a variety of things.

The rest of it seems to suggest that you just don't understand the whole of function theory...
NO U. But I really do, as well as almost anyone. Well enough to find flaws.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Can you talk a bit about how it is that you can accept the results of MBTI tests as valid, but not the thinking that went into developing them?
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Can you talk a bit about how it is that you can accept the results of MBTI tests as valid, but not the thinking that went into developing them?
A general answer to your specific question:

Many people accept Jung's analysis as the word of God, whereas I don't. He had the right idea. I think it was obvious to all the developers of type systems that people are fundamentally psychologically different in several ways, but they were also human, and made errors in diagnostics and definitions. I got tired of picking and choosing what makes sense from what doesn't in each mutually exclusive system, so I've developed a system which corrects some errors, and removes some classifications which aren't sensible to make.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
A general answer to your specific question:

Many people accept Jung's analysis as the word of God, whereas I don't. He had the right idea. I think it was obvious to all the developers of type systems that people are fundamentally psychologically different in several ways, but they were also human, and made errors in diagnostics and definitions. I got tired of picking and choosing what makes sense from what doesn't in each mutually exclusive system, so I've developed a system which corrects some errors, and removes some classifications which aren't sensible to make.

I'm not asking about many people. And Jung didn't write the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (clue is in the name).

The fact is, you can't accept the instrument but not the theory behind it - that's illogical.

You don't have a system. You need to write your own test, to have a system.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
I'm not asking about many people. And Jung didn't write the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (clue is in the name).

The fact is, you can't accept the instrument but not the theory behind it - that's illogical.

You don't have a system. You need to write your own test, to have a system.
In order:

I hesitate to ask, since I assume you're aware, but "Did you know that the MBTI functions are based on Jung's work called Psychological Types?"

I accept some of the theory. Why don't you understand my position? I can't figure it out.

This is a function system related to the types everyone already knows about, and tests aren't the best way to type people anyway. Analysis is, self or otherwise.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
Jackie, I am inspired!
I'm going to make my own typing system using runes to explain functions and write everything in ASCII binary.

It'll all be the same, just like yours, it'll just be explained differently.

Pardon my absence for the next few minutes while I work on it.
I'll post it then.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Jackie, I am inspired!
I'm going to make my own typing system using runes to explain functions and write everything in ASCII binary.

It'll all be the same, just like yours, it'll just be explained differently.

Pardon my absence for the next few minutes while I work on it.
I'll post it then.
View Nocapszy's demonstration that while he is Extroverted, he can only hope to parallel the INTP when it comes to Intuition. Quite unlike MBTI function order theory.

I invite the audience to make other type comparisons of individuals, using my theory, and discover how much sense it all makes.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
In order:

I hesitate to ask, since I assume you're aware, but "Did you know that the MBTI functions are based on Jung's work called Psychological Types?"
Naturally. I've read it and everything. See further down the thread.

I accept some of the theory. Why don't you understand my position? I can't figure it out.

This is a function system related to the types everyone already knows about, and tests aren't the best way to type people anyway. Analysis is, self or otherwise.

What I'm trying to say is that the theory came first. The test was written with the theory in mind (including attitudinal functions), The test in part, proves the theory, because of the accuracy of its predictions.

You accept the test, and its results, but not the theory. It's like Keirsey, another arrogant INTP, who discredits Myers and Jung whilst standing on their shoulders. He prefers the simple approach you describe as well - in fact I don't really see how you differ from Keirsey. Except that he has the decency to write his own test.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Simply because the framework of MBTI makes a lot of sense does not mean the theory it's based on is perfect.

He prefers the simple approach you describe as well - in fact I don't really see how you differ from Keirsey. Except that he has the decency to write his own test.
That's a compliment. The difference, however, is that Keirsey stuck to his guns and abandoned functions, while I've decided to create a simple system, because people don't want to live without their functions. They are the wellspring from which MBTIc flows.

And I have written tests, that worked. Not recently, because I've gotten very adept at analysis.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Simply because the framework of MBTI makes a lot of sense does not mean the theory it's based on is perfect.

That's a compliment. The difference, however, is that Keirsey stuck to his guns and abandoned functions, while I've decided to create a simple system, because people don't want to live without their functions. They are the wellspring from which MBTIc flows.

And I have written tests, that worked. Not recently, because I've gotten very adept at analysis.
I didn't say it was perfect. There is a lot of work to be done. But you are rejecting the fundamentals upon which it is built - that is the framework.

You keep functions in your 'system' because people don't want to live without them?

I'm applying for your INTP membership card to be withdrawn.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
you forgot the EMTP :D

No looks quite nice. Makes the whole thing simpler and less open to speculation :)
 
Top