User Tag List

View Poll Results: Is the four function model valid?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    11 39.29%
  • No

    10 35.71%
  • Ambivalent (explain in thread)

    7 25.00%
First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 80

  1. #51
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    I like 1, 2, and 4.

    The rest are eh.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  2. #52
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    I'm inviting for people to bring evidence on it.
    That was the entire point of this thread.

    No one has given anything other than "well I personally have noticed" and they weren't even able to rebut a routine confirmation bias check.

    I'd like to hear someone say why it has to be that way, rather than why it historically has been or other such nonsense.

    Then it's at least plausible.
    we fukin won boys

  3. #53
    Senior Member mlittrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    it is extremely valid for what it is. it is also the model the temperaments were derived from and imho the temperaments are better for understanding people than anything else. any individual system is only so good. its best to use multiple systems to understand people. i tend to use the temperaments for basic understanding. the functions for the cognition and the enneagram with motivation and external behavior. so one individual system is only as good as what the create created it to do. any more and it gets ugly, because it wasn't necessarily created for that.
    "Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress. "

    "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty."

    "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

    Mahatma Gandhi

    Enneagram: 9w1

  4. #54
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mlittrell View Post
    it is extremely valid for what it is. it is also the model the temperaments were derived from and imho the temperaments are better for understanding people than anything else.
    2 most dominant functions suffice to define temperaments. This thread is about 3rd and 4th.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #55
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Eight function model!
    We all obviously use all eight; it's just a matter of what role the other six fall into (regardless of necessary relative strength)
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  6. #56
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    I'll answer that question in a moment -- once we establish this:
    What is the use of a correlation in a typology?
    Perhaps I'm off my mark, but it was always my assumption that the aim of a typology is to enhance individual insight. The first two functions allow for us to reach that, because they're present enough to have a very strong bearing on behavior and personality.

    Tertiary and Inferior on the other hand -- the rare birds; the ones happening along as the Primaries see fit -- don't make a legitimate impact on the insight, and studying a correlation (better named a confirmed bias, as you so aptly did) would inevitably encroach on observation: the very foundation of knowledge seeking.
    There are more than 16 combinations of two functions.

    So...why not apply your logic even further and not even specify a 2nd function? (I've only picked INFJ because it's the closest fit...I could fit even better if Ni/Ti had any legitimacy.)

    Why is the correlation between Ji being the first and Pe being the second (and vice versa, and for Je/Pi) somehow more valid than the correlations I'm talking about?

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    I like 1, 2, and 4.

    The rest are eh.
    Why do you like 2?

    --------------------------------

    Honestly, 2 functions contain far too little information to provide any sort of quasi-deep (at least as deep as a system like this can go) insight. If someone is an NT, I'm usually just as interested in their F function as their N and T (yes, I'm revealing my S bias). If someone is SF, I'm interested in all four.

    And honestly, there are trends in 4 function (8 function really) distributions that are legitimate in the same way as the correlation you've taken for granted in making this thread.

  7. #57
    Senior Member Simplexity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,741

    Default

    I think the argument is that many people by virtue of their environment or other reasons build up different functions, or utilize others to a much greater degree, making their type representation only valid in their mind when you look at the leading two functions.

    I think people sort of aren't seeing your point though. I was trying to sort of flesh that out a little bit but obviously I haven't studied this system too intensively, except for my own type, so making decisive conclusions wasn't in my best interests. In terms of analysis sometimes the weaker functions can tell a little bit more about a person in general, at least based on your own biased interpretations.

    For example as a dominant feeler you have a much greater ability to sort of see just how often and to what extent inferior feeling functions play themselves out. Is it not something that we all do, I know for instance I can easily tell whether someone is a dominant feeler or not by just how often and how weak their impersonal decision making is. The same could be said for sensing. It's a point that other people vehemently denied and glossed over when stating their case for the two function theory.

    I do subscribe to the two function theory in essence, because I really believe that when push comes to shove you make decisions based on the dominant two traits. Sometimes people are so subconscious with their decision making that they don't realize that they are using some tactics in making their decisions. Its a thing that I notice is somewhat common to thinkers.
    My cold, snide, intellectual life is just a veneer, behind which lies the plywood of loneliness.

  8. #58
    Senior Member zago's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,171

    Default

    4 function system. And you don't fuck with it. INTPs are Ti, Ne, Si, Fe, ALWAYS, and in that order. This is how and why the system was created. The system is a system. Obviously it isn't perfect, but it was never given. Since there is no such thing, in reality, as Ti, Ne, etc. etc., that is specifically why you cannot change them. It is taking them out of context. Many people here don't understand them.

  9. #59
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimahn View Post
    I think the argument is that many people by virtue of their environment or other reasons build up different functions, or utilize others to a much greater degree, making their type representation only valid in their mind when you look at the leading two functions.

    I think people sort of aren't seeing your point though. I was trying to sort of flesh that out a little bit but obviously I haven't studied this system too intensively, except for my own type, so making decisive conclusions wasn't in my best interests. In terms of analysis sometimes the weaker functions can tell a little bit more about a person in general, at least based on your own biased interpretations.

    For example as a dominant feeler you have a much greater ability to sort of see just how often and to what extent inferior feeling functions play themselves out. Is it not something that we all do, I know for instance I can easily tell whether someone is a dominant feeler or not by just how often and how weak their impersonal decision making is. The same could be said for sensing. It's a point that other people vehemently denied and glossed over when stating their case for the two function theory.

    I do subscribe to the two function theory in essence, because I really believe that when push comes to shove you make decisions based on the dominant two traits. Sometimes people are so subconscious with their decision making that they don't realize that they are using some tactics in making their decisions. Its a thing that I notice is somewhat common to thinkers.
    The problem with the paragraph I put in bold is that I haven't always been this way. Fe was repressed and Ti was environmentally enhanced until I was 17ish. Ni Ti would have described me much better than Ni Fe would have at that point in my life. At this point, I've consciously pushed myself toward Fe and been slightly less nurturing towards Ti for the last 5+ years, so Ni Fe is a pretty good approximation. But I still think my conscious experience is more Ti oriented than Fe oriented.

    Basically my point is that there needs to be a distinction made between the roles of functions and the amount of usage of functions. The "function order" refers to the roles of the functions, not anything else. If we make this distinction clear, we'd stop fighting so much about all this shit.

  10. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zago View Post
    4 function system. And you don't fuck with it. INTPs are Ti, Ne, Si, Fe, ALWAYS, and in that order. This is how and why the system was created. The system is a system. Obviously it isn't perfect, but it was never given. Since there is no such thing, in reality, as Ti, Ne, etc. etc., that is specifically why you cannot change them. It is taking them out of context. Many people here don't understand them.
    Except....Nevermind, it's not worth it. *violent disagreement*

Similar Threads

  1. Ne - post your dominant, auxiliary, tertiary, and inferior experience with it.
    By ZNP-TBA in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-06-2016, 10:53 AM
  2. [JCF] NF's: How to Practice Tertiary and Inferior Functions?
    By Brendan in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-14-2010, 09:33 AM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-16-2009, 11:29 PM
  4. Tertiary and inferior functions when they're not childish or immature, just subtle
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 03:24 AM
  5. Developing Tertiary and Inferior Functions
    By Alpha Prime in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 01-12-2009, 08:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO