Jack Flak's Function System Adventure

[Jack Flak]

well in that case i invented this system subconsciously the day i understood the temperaments. im not saying its wrong (or right for that matter), its just the basics of typing people and doesn't really "simplify" anything. the functions are as simple as they can get and the temperaments are...well...the temperaments.

I beg to differ. If you take an individual with no prior knowledge of type study, show him Keirsey, and this. The average individual will be more adept at understanding than if introduced to MBTI/Jung functions at any point.

This is just my intuition speaking...

 

[mlittrell]

if you show him keirsey and not your system it will be just the same. i didn't even mention the functions as far as me learning MBTI. generally i steer away from functions as most people should. functions are just the model for how everything works.

that is just me speaking...

 

[entropie]

like f(x) = 2x + 2 could be a member of g(x) + h(x) in which it is totally blurred into z(x) = 2(x+1)

 

[redacted]

If it would please you to define something in greater detail, you have that option.

You're ignoring the fact that there are two poles to each function.

Your system is oversimplified; it neglects that factor.

So while it may be an easier system to learn, it just doesn't go as far.

Your system contains a subset of information that MBTI contains. Nothing new here (except distracting attention from introversion/extroversion); you're only castrating the system.

 

[Jack Flak]

You're ignoring the fact that there are two poles to each function.

No, I've ignored nothing. It is you who is choosing to ignore the fact that MBTI function theory is far from perfect. We will convince one another of nothing today.

 

[Orangey]

You're ignoring the fact that there are two poles to each function.

But isn't that precisely what he is addressing?

Your system is oversimplified; it neglects that factor.

So while it may be an easier system to learn, it just doesn't go as far.

Your system contains a subset of information that MBTI contains. Nothing new here (except distracting attention from introversion/extroversion); you're only castrating the system.

Who's to say that having two poles to each function is necessarily true, or better, or more useful? I don't personally think that it corresponds to reality to any greater degree than any other system (socionics, this one, Keirsey), and I find that it's certainly not helpful in terms of clarifying one's own type, or determining the types of others.

Your criticism seems to boil down to this: that jack's 'system' doesn't have introverted/extroverted functions like MBTI, therefore it is not any good.

 

[entropie]

you make my head acheing

 

[Haphazard]

I don't personally think that it corresponds to reality to any greater degree than any other system (socionics, this one, Keirsey), and I find that it's certainly not helpful in terms of clarifying one's own type, or determining the types of others.

Your criticism seems to boil down to this: that jack's 'system' doesn't have introverted/extroverted functions like MBTI, therefore it is not any good.

You may personally think that introversion/extroversion of functions is not useful, while me and Dissonance do.

Case closed. The end, I guess.






Wow. That was anticlimactic.

 

[Jack Flak]

I personally think it's kind of awesome that the Judging Primaries are so true to type in their disagreement with it, on average.

 

[Orangey]

You may personally think that introversion/extroversion of functions is not useful, while me and Dissonance do.

Case closed. The end, I guess.






Wow. That was anticlimactic.

*shrugs*

 

[Haphazard]

I'm bored now.



*wanders off to find someone else to fight with*

 

[mlittrell]

None of us are going to budge. Jack, if you can write a description of each, no matter how bad you are at it, then I think you will see that more people are receptive to your idea. Though I think it is wrong by definition, I keep an open mind and will admit if I'm proven wrong. If you do not write a description or explain your system a little bit better or give examples of everyday application, then I don't see why you expect people to accept your function system. Props for trying to come up with something new though I don't want to discourage what your trying to develop, I just want to be realistic about it.

 

[Jack Flak]

None of us are going to budge. Jack, if you can write a description of each, no matter how bad you are at it, then I think you will see that more people are receptive to your idea. Though I think it is wrong by definition, I keep an open mind and will admit if I'm proven wrong. If you do not write a description or explain your system a little bit better or give examples of everyday application, then I don't see why you expect people to accept your function system. Props for trying to come up with something new though I don't want to discourage what your trying to develop, I just want to be realistic about it.

I haven't read Keirsey's in a while, and I'm not in the mood right now, but let me just go out on a limb and say "Use those" for the sake of simplicity.

 

[mlittrell]

I haven't read Keirsey's in a while, and I'm not in the mood right now, but let me just go out on a limb and say "Use those" for the sake of simplicity.

Fair enough sir. Keirsey's temperaments are EXCELLENT. They are simple, yet fluid and flexible (bend with situations), but grounded enough (defined) so you can grasp them. You can talk to a person and logically deduce what they are by saying "hmmm intuitive... ya... NT or NF... definitely not NF... NT...yaaa introverted...." and then judging and perceiving should fill itself in (if you understand it well enough).

 

[Jack Flak]

Fair enough sir. Keirsey's temperaments are EXCELLENT. They are simple, yet fluid and flexible (bend with situations), but grounded enough (defined) so you can grasp them. You can talk to a person and logically deduce what they are by saying "hmmm intuitive... ya... NT or NF... definitely not NF... NT...yaaa introverted...." and then judging and perceiving should fill itself in (if you understand it well enough).

Yep. And now I have a new tool, and I love it also.

 

[entropie]

Yep. And now I have a new tool, and I love it also.

you could call me by my first name

 

[mlittrell]

well in that case i have a whole craftsman toolbox

 

[zago]

I say if you are really confident about this system then present it to INTPc

 

[Kora]

I have nothing interesting to add, but I think it's a good new perspective. It makes sense to me.

 

[Nocapszy]

Jackie I'll explain what I meant yesterday.
But I can't do it now. I don't have time.

This system is reparable.