• 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

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
How is that conjecture? Looks like a hypothesis supported by evidence to me.

It's scientific fact that regions of the brain are/become highly specialized for specific tasks. You're not seriously debating that are you? Everything else is conjecture, including your system. Personality differences ARE brain differences. The answers lie in neuroscience.

But you have already indicated that you aren't open to reason on this. Your mind is made up.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
How is that conjecture? Looks like a hypothesis supported by evidence to me.
Applying a conjecture-based system to incomplete neuroscience is exactly conjecture.

It's scientific fact that regions of the brain are/become highly specialized for specific tasks. You're not seriously debating that are you? Everything else is conjecture, including your system. Personality differences ARE brain differences. The answers lie in neuroscience.
Everything is brain difference. Your opinion is brain difference. Can be explained by neuroscience doesn't mean is explained by neuroscience. This sytem is psychological, not neurological. It works at what it does.

But you have already indicated that you aren't open to reason on this. Your mind is made up.
What I'm not open to, I wouldn't define as "reason."
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
God! I hate you, hate you, HATE YOU!
I had to look back through this whole @#$%!#Q$^@#$^ thread to find this:

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.

Applying a conjecture-based system to incomplete neuroscience is exactly conjecture.

Everything is brain difference. Your opinion is brain difference. Can be explained by neuroscience doesn't mean is explained by neuroscience. This sytem is psychological, not neurological. It works at what it does.

What I'm not open to, I wouldn't define as "reason."

Bullshit. If it can't be explained by neuroscience at any point, then it is invalid. And you can't argue against conjecture when it's all you have. You're pulling the rug out from under your own feet!
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
God! I hate you, hate you, HATE YOU!
I had to look back through this whole @#$%!#Q$^@#$^ thread to find this:
LOL

Bullshit. If it can't be explained by neuroscience at any point, then it is invalid. And you can't argue against conjecture when it's all you have. You're pulling the rug out from under your own feet!
I hypothesize that it may well be explained by neuroscience at some point, but to say it all is today isn't true. Not only that, but this system can peacefully coexist with any neurological findings.

I wouldn't say this system is fundamentally conjecture, but the concept is unavoidable. It's descriptive, and allows for the unavoidable flexibility within types and individuals. The difference between MBTI and this is the lack of at least sometimes false conclusions based on theoretical extrapolation here.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The difference between MBTI and this is the lack of at least sometimes false conclusions based on theoretical extrapolation here.

So your 'system', in addition to being all kinds of excellent, and simplicity itself is now also infallible?

Earth to Planet Deluded, come in Jack!
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
So your 'system', in addition to being all kinds of excellent, and simplicity itself is now also infallible?

Earth to Planet Deluded, come in Jack!
It takes the usually obvious, such as preference for T or F, P or J, etc., and redefines it as a basic function order. As defined, there really can be no flaw. The only perceived error in yours or anyone else's observation is lack of specificity, but when this specificity is defined clearly, you end up saying shit which isn't always true.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
dissonance: It seems that your arguments against the new system are shifting over time, leading you to take mutually exclusive positions.

Interesting. Quotes?

Otherwise I'll just assume I won this argument, since you haven't responded to the last few of my points.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Interesting. Quotes?

Otherwise I'll just assume I won this argument, since you haven't responded to the last few of my points.
Oh, great. No, there was a good reason for that, and it was "Not cluttering up my thread with your illogical meanderings."
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
True that. I'm always right!

/nocapszy

No but seriously...I think I have the same ego he does, I just don't put it on display... lol.

wont save you from the people who like to loot things that are not on display :D
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
I'll recycle a statement I made elsewhere. "Some are skilled at analysis in spite of using MBTT functions. Terms are redefined to fit analyses." I think this applies to you. I also think you're still insisting on defining Intuition here as "Ne," which it isn't. It's a lot like Ne, and quite like Ni, but the definition here is simpler.

simpler isn't always a good thing.
also you dont have a definition.
and im thinking intuition in terms of the temperaments not functions but as far as the functions go, there is a difference between Ne and Ni.
also it has a little vibe of socionics (i know it was mentioned) but essentially its a simplified socionics imho

and i still dont get the system lol. as many times as ive looked at it, it still doesn't make (complete) sense.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Oh, great. No, there was a good reason for that, and it was "Not cluttering up my thread with your illogical meanderings."

We'll never know if my "meanderings" were "illogical" unless you point out a logical inconsistency.

Otherwise, how about not cluttering up your own thread (and others) with assertions that aren't backed up?

If your system is so great, I'm sure it can withstand my arguments.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
yea the problem is only, once first have to break your arguements before someone gets the chance to enlighten you. At least it seems that way.

And I do not want to break you. :D
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
simpler isn't always a good thing.
also you dont have a definition.
and im thinking intuition in terms of the temperaments not functions but as far as the functions go, there is a difference between Ne and Ni.
also it has a little vibe of socionics (i know it was mentioned) but essentially its a simplified socionics imho

and i still dont get the system lol. as many times as ive looked at it, it still doesn't make (complete) sense.
If you haven't gotten it by now, I don't think you ever will. Its logic is so clear to me that I have no idea how better to explain it, and Orangey has done a far better job, even.

We'll never know if my "meanderings" were "illogical" unless you point out a logical inconsistency.

Otherwise, how about not cluttering up your own thread (and others) with assertions that aren't backed up?

If your system is so great, I'm sure it can withstand my arguments.
Well, your first comments were like "Good idea removing the e/i distinction in functions." And your last comments were more like "The functions are fine the way Jung wrote them." So I don't even know where you'll stand tomorrow.

But we don't have to go on and on about it.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Well, your first comments were like "Good idea removing the e/i distinction in functions." And your last comments were more like "The functions are fine the way Jung wrote them." So I don't even know where you'll stand tomorrow.

But we don't have to go on and on about it.

I said

One thing I do agree with, though, is scrapping the separate functions for introversion/extroversion.

I didn't mean that the data from introversion/extroversion of a function should be thrown out. I meant that thinking of Te and Ti as distinct and separate functions is misleading.

Which is what I explicitly said in my next post:

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...

The functions are NOT fine the way Jung wrote them. But there is validity in his idea. Each function should have a spectrum value of introversion/extroversion instead of a binary value. That is all, and I've been quite clear and consistent throughout the thread.

Your system throws out introversion/extroversion of functions entirely, which means instead of enhancing the grey-ness of the data, you just scrap it. A pointless move, since all you are doing is making a system that at its best describes significantly less than even the unchanged MBTI.

My idea adds to the already existing MBTI structure instead of subtracting.

If you keep deliberately misunderstanding or ignoring me, you're just proving your lack of knowledge and openness.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I have increased the accuracy of your statement.

Fine, ignore one of the 2-3 people in this thread with the knowledge to accurately assess your system.

I can't think of a reason for ignoring me except that you can't defend yourself against my points. If you could, it would only strengthen your position.

You understand that this is a forum, right? It's about getting feedback. If you ignore all negative feedback, then the forum just acts as a validation tool instead of a place to discuss ideas.

Sad that you need validation like this. Reminds me of a first grader. Aren't you like 8 years older than I am?
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Fine, ignore one of the 2-3 people in this thread with the knowledge to accurately assess your system.

I can't think of a reason for ignoring me except that you can't defend yourself against my points. If you could, it would only strengthen your position.

You understand that this is a forum, right? It's about getting feedback. If you ignore all negative feedback, then the forum just acts as a validation tool instead of a place to discuss ideas.

Sad that you need validation like this. Reminds me of a first grader.
You have no idea. I put a lot of effort into discussing this with you, and it went NOWHERE. We don't see eye to eye. I gave up for that reason. We have nothing more to discuss regarding this issue.
 
Top