User Tag List

First 5678 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 78

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Indeed?
    I must have misread. As I recall, you said the only difference between ENTP and INTP is difference in personality -- goals and everything else aside.
    This is part of personality. E/I affects methods.
    And how authoritative does that sound?
    Lemme ask you something Flak.
    Do I represent a typical ENTP in this case?
    I mean, this thread seems a strong point to prove your case, but I urge you to take a deeper look into my post history.
    You're like the template for it, starting several threads in which you only had a vague notion on the subject, and sought input before you continued. We don't have to go far: "The P and J Muddling" is an example.

    We are discussing personality difference. Everyone does everything at some point, but I don't really want to add a series of disclaimers before every post on type I write.

  2. #62
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    This is part of personality. E/I affects methods.

    You're like the template for it, starting several threads in which you only had a vague notion on the subject, and sought input before you continued. We don't have to go far: "The P and J Muddling" is an example.
    What I'm saying buddy, is if you look much, you might find a counterexample.

    Predominance is cool and all for figuring out how to label things, but what you do is prescriptive. That is, your theory, and what you've said above, requires the believe or assumption that Jung found the absolute axioms of human psychology.

    This is a mistaken belief. Typology does not describe a psychological apparatus from which we can determine precisely what one will do in a given situation. It simply describes the behaviors themselves.

    Your typology looks like astrology, which is a form of typology to begin with.
    we fukin won boys

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    What I'm saying buddy, is if you look much, you might find a counterexample.

    Predominance is cool and all for figuring out how to label things, but what you do is prescriptive. That is, your theory, and what you've said above, requires the believe or assumption that Jung found the absolute axioms of human psychology.
    Whose posts are you reading? I've said several times that Jung only got it half right. What I do is compare what's written with what I see, and anything which doesn't match, I don't use. Cut and dry.

    This is a mistaken belief. Typology does not describe a psychological apparatus from which we can determine precisely what one will do in a given situation. It simply describes the behaviors themselves.
    No, of course it doesn't direct what people do. It predicts it based on classification and the history of those in the classification. The "science" of prediction is by nature inexact, but if it's usually correct, it has merit.

    Your typology looks like astrology, which is a form of typology to begin with.
    I'm not sure why I bother rebutting crap like this, but: "My typology" revolves around categorizing people based on behavior, and interpreting generalities among those within categories. Astrology is based on when you were born. There are key differences.

  4. #64
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Whose posts are you reading? I've said several times that Jung only got it half right.
    Yours.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    The theoretical ENTP and INTP have different goals when it comes to interaction.

    ENTPs want to bring others into their train of thought, the way I see it being that they want to confirm quality externally on a regular basis.
    This may be true, but not universally. I'm proof of that.
    So at best, we can say ENTP might do this.

    This is what I'm talking about: Yours is falsely prescriptive. It would work if you weren't using false axioms, and didn't try to get so specific.

    The rest of your post is equally as fallible as the rest, and we're not just talking deviance from the generality.
    we fukin won boys

  5. #65
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    For a Ti type, there is a vast inner standard of rationale on which gadgets are built, maps are drawn, and concepts are molded. These things aren't real in the physical sense, but their etherial imaginative 'existence' is something on which external understanding and competence are contingent.
    It's easiest for this form of Judgement to work with extraverted perception because it deals, most commonly with worldly events -- the introverted aspect constitutes "what I think ______" with the underlined section filled by anything from "would work" to "will happen" to "won't fit."
    It's able to deal with the situation, by removing the self from it.
    An introverted perception can still be dealt with by introverted Judgement, but these perceptions are far too simplistic and already polished up according to some ideal.


    Extraverted Thinking has much greater trouble keeping track of what's happening in the world than Ti. The trick for Ti though, is that it's not actually the Ti that's keeping track of anything all. It's the Extraverted Perception. Extraverted Thinking, in all its might and courage, could never attempt to champion every bit of minutia brought in by broad-scope perception. A powerful function indeed, but when two matching forces are pit in opposing directions, the result is exhaustion without movement.
    So thinking turns inward for its perceptions.

    Extraverted Thinking would more quickly accomplish by random act (because it doesn't perceive first) than understand and respond. If a Te is very extraverted, they'll assert and assert and assert a bunch of nothing, with no real structure -- just determination.

    At this point I urge everyone to remember that Thinking is more a decisive faculty (even introverted) than an organizational one. For Ti, organized understanding happens by logical decisiveness. Logic is not the cornerstone of Thinking. Methodology is. Logic happens to be a preferred method of many Thinkers -- especially the ones in Kiersey's Rational group, and to be sure, most methods are built on logic.
    But thinking is not the equivalent of logical action in human mind -- it just does a splendid job employing it. Better than all the other processes by an exponential margin. Similarly to the utilization of emotion by Feeling.
    I'll get into that later.

    Te, has potential to be as analytic, solidly constructed and practiced as Ti. This of course, is scarcely achieved except without firm introverted perception.

    The role of Introverted Perception in the Te type, is to keep the self aware of the results of Te. How otherwise can Te make a deeper evaluation of the situation? Extraverted Perception is far too flighty to cater to Te's already anxious agenda. Too much action going on to make any kind of a useful evaluation. And without that evaluation, the agenda is slowed ("inefficiency is not tolerated around here." -- a quote from a prospective employer of mine, who was undoubtedly Te), so the Te who shows restraint enough to observe and take care to check the status of his projects and where they're to go will (and frequently do) build something up form virtually nothing very quickly.

    In Joe Butt's description of the ENTJ he mentions some odd thing about the ENTJ being astonished at their rise to the top. This is very plausible -- very often their rise amounts from simply loyalty, the result of Thinking's determination, to a project what starts by happy accident.


    For an Fi type there is a similar world to that of a Ti, one which I have more than a bit of trouble identifying with. In any case, the result is, of course, the individuals' Feeling based judgement on "what I feel _____" with the blank to be replaced with things like "he should have said" or even "I should have said/done"
    These decisions are made based on the emotions experienced by perception. You might even say that Perception actually senses the emotions, and Feeling just decides based on that, or you might say, Perception simply gathers the facts, and Feeling is happening when emotions are being experienced. I tend to prefer the former, but in the end, it doesn't really matter. The essential point is, detailed situational observation takes place, and is reasoned out according to the individual's standard of emotive valuation.
    These standards may or may not be methodically defined -- depending on the level of Thinking employed -- but will always be the result of a feeling.

    It all hinges on the nuance of the situation. And Feeling is as directive and strict on its Extraverted Perceiving workhorse as Thinking it (despite the tough/soft standards typically surrounding these two).
    By this I mean, Fi will choose to ignore 'irrelevant' aspects of a situation so that it can more strongly focus the Extraverted Perceiving, the same way Ti would. And at the flip of an unhappy coin, the entire interest can be lost. Again, nuance is of importance.
    Just the same, interest can be regained through the right works. This can make the Fi user resourceful, if they have a vested interest.


    On that note, both camps of Introverted Judgement will search for a way -- either by their own means, or by what BW would undoubtedly call 'desperate, reckless Extraverted Perceiving experiments' -- to rectify the situation to their individual goal. This of course takes the form of deliberate alteration of the situation.
    And so, in turn P's are often marked as manipulative. And they will use others as lab rats.
    Introverted judgement, while dependent on the situation for its validity and information, has less interest in maintaining the fidelity and structure of that situation, if it suits its goal.
    And the goal of introverted judgement is not always (the better the Introverted Judger, the moreso this is true) overtly defined. It can be, and even when it's not, it can be deduced based on the individual's action.


    It pays to keep a very very close eye on these differences of introverted and extraverted judgement:

    Concerning (perceived) reliability, and excluding forgetfulness -- a majorly muddled area in the P and J muddling;
    - The P is unreliable because he has troubled defining his plans or feelings outwardly, making them at best, hard to read, and causes misunderstanding resulting in confusion in collaboration
    - The J is unreliable in the case of deliberate betrayal/disobedience or lying
    - Both P and J have potential to, and very well might lie about their plans, and might, even more frighteningly be fiendishly adept at concealing their trickery, making them appear only unreliable, when in fact it was their plan all along to deceive and betray


    The inescapable fact is that the Introverted aspect of Judgement makes it ultimately impervious to the onlooker, since it's not defined by external measures -- only depends on them.
    That's why a P might promise they're going to do something, but might only get half way there. They hadn't sufficiently and effectively defined their objectives to the world.
    Of course we know it's not as if Ps are incapable of defining their ends to the world, it's just easier not to, so they frequently don't.

    Js on the other hand plan to do precisely what they say. It's hard not to. They may be able to show restraint in expressing their goal, so then might appear unpredictable, a situation which might confuse the J into thinking they are a P. Similarly, they might even plan to lie which, given the unreliable vocabulary acumen of Meyers, Briggs, and all their followers, might also trick the J into assuming the role of P, but this is not the case. That J who lied is actually still defining their plan/feelings via the environment; in the negative.


    In terms of organizing one's items and their affairs, Tes are more conventional.
    Extraverted Judgement attaches itself to the object -- it employs the object as its measuring stick. Its decider.
    What has made itself readily available is the preferred metric of Te.
    Because of this, when organization is in question, the Tes prefer to use what's made itself available. Common (or obvious) rationale in their filing system.
    Additionally, we should note that Tes are likely to be more adept at quickly organizing, as their introverted perception can choose (arbitrarily) a single dimension of the objects to be organized, and attend only that one dimension, making the perception much quicker, which makes deciding which cubby to place the parcel in faster.

    TPs on the other hand, perception being extroverted will continue to notice newer, potentially easier dimensions which could be used to decide where the object goes. Obviously, the Ti then has to get used to the new idea that Pe just acquired. Since there's such a flood of newer and newer perceptions, and the method for organizing changes, the TP is left with a choice: To start over, or to implement the new on top of the old.
    As experience teaches the TP, the latter is much easier, and so the TP who does bother to organize -- many, if not most, become so frustrated by their ineptitude in the field that they give up entirely, and instead continue to enhance their Perceptive ability, and individual problem solving and learn to work around and within the chaos -- will rarely appear organized, because of the layers of sediment style of order they force themselves into.

    It should be noted that a very very very staunch majority of what is J, regarding organization, is in closer affinity with TJ. Fe is not a great organizer.
    Fs, rely entirely on their perception to maintain organization, as Feeling is not capable of methodology.
    For this reason, SFJs are the only ones who can hold their own in this arena.
    Neither introverted intuition nor Introverted Sensing lend themselves well to organization outright. SFJs are better because Sensation will, as with the TJs be able to pick up on the necessary ingredients for making the decision. It will likely take a while for the SFJ to get used to the system, but once they do, it will be such an easy task that they will be able to successfully and accurately do it even while talking on the phone or to a co-worker... basically they'll be able to put their mind to other things once the system has embedded itself into the unconscious perception.
    NFJs are far worse, because they lack the attention to concrete detail. Typically they're not very organized spatially, but Ni lends itself just fine to remembering appointments, and Fe tries not to stand anyone up.

    FPs are markedly horrible at organizing. Extraverted perception rises the same problems it does with the TPs, but the FP doesn't even systematize.
    They depend on those functions which they have trouble with to do it. This is not to say however, that an FP can't organize. FPs might do fine if what they want necessitates it -- Thinking will step in, or if not that, then they'll probably be able to enlist a TJ to help them.
    Quite correct. A well done job.
    Thank you, Nocapszy.

    The dichotomy of I and E and the dichotomy of J and P take place simultaneously.
    It is an undivided process.
    Why differentiation mechanics is so hard to understand?

    It goes against our culture.

  6. #66
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    This is good information Nocapszy, you put a lot of thought into it. From your thoughts you focus more on the cognitive process of type(s) and not as much the auxiliary function or J/P in general. I maintain that the J/P process has a very rudimentary consideration when it comes to type overall. Moreso when considering the introverted type, you are referring to a function that at best is supportive of the dominant function and at worst can be a hinder. Consider this from Berens:
    The supporting role is how we are helpful to others as well as supportive of ourselves. Once we have developed some facility with our leading role process, we are likely to engage a different process in supporting role behavior. In it's most positive form, it can be quite like a nurturing parent. In it's more negative aspect, it be overprotective and stunting rather than helpful.
    This is a good point, which leads me to say that the most important dichotomy is not J/P in my opionion but the strength of the E/I attitude of your dominant function. My Se gives me some relief from over analyzing by allowing me to get out of my head and into my body in experiencing things vividly. However at some point I will return to my dominant way of Ti-ing. Strong E/I may make it's user dismiss it's secondary function (which controls the J/P) and go directly to what Berens calls the relief role:
    The relief role gives us a way to energize and recharge ourselves. It serves as a backup to the supporting role and often works in tandem with it. When younger, we might not engage in the process unless our life circumstances require it or make it hard to use the supporting role process.
    My relief role is comfortable for me because I am a strong introverted type, so it's possible that I give very little consideration to interacting with the world and when I do it's mostly doing mindless things that as I gain more experience allows me to give my Ti a break. Again, the J/P process is over considered since there are too many reasons why we forego it and go directly to our relief role depending on how strong one's attitude is. Just my opinion, but it's still good information that you have written.

  7. #67
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    I don't focus on the tertiary and final functions because I've empirically seen that the notion of a prevalent consistent grouping of more than two functions is a non-truth.

    I experience no compulsion to elaborate on the machination of thing which are not consistently true. I prefer to leave those up to case by case analysis.
    we fukin won boys

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Yours.

    This may be true, but not universally. I'm proof of that.
    So at best, we can say ENTP might do this.

    This is what I'm talking about: Yours is falsely prescriptive. It would work if you weren't using false axioms, and didn't try to get so specific.

    The rest of your post is equally as fallible as the rest, and we're not just talking deviance from the generality.
    Man, I even qualified it with "The way I see it." It wasn't stated as fact, I was just trying to explain something to someone. You could just chill if you want.

  9. #69
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    I don't focus on the tertiary and final functions because I've empirically seen that the notion of a prevalent consistent grouping of more than two functions is a non-truth.

    I experience no compulsion to elaborate on the machination of thing which are not consistently true. I prefer to leave those up to case by case analysis.
    If your assertion is true, then I think we're in agreement that the two most prevalent functions are the greatest concern and everything afterwards is a free fall. Except you still don't provide an answer of why focus on the J/P at all since it at best is a supportive role and based on Jung is subordinate of the dominant function. Again this is most paramount when considering introverted types.

  10. #70
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    That was a nice reading. You did clarify the E/I difference once and for all and the thing about Ti and Te was especially intresting.

    Thw two problems, I have had is for one thing, was that actually the idea that was behind the original MBTI ? I admit I refuse to read books on psychology. The thing is with all that benting and interpreting, I loose trust in the system. But if it was meant that way to be understood and I see nothing that does speak against it, I can relate to your ways of interpretation. I think you hit several good points.

    One thing though, didnt came off right to me. The thing about F in general. I can see that a motivation to a F action can be emotions, but I personally think F to be more than that. Maybe it's due to a total absence of emotions within myself, but I think that F is like it is described sometimes, a holistic view of the situation. That means, while the T sorts things methodically, the F could be prone to take in seemingly unimportant information about a situation, which sometimes when understood correctly could bring them to that holistic understanding of a situation, which includes aspects, the T would have missed.

    There was that example of my girlfriend telling me that she stood next to the phone in her hospital, when a husband of a nurse called. Another nurse answered the phone and told the husband that the wanted nurse was at work and has got no time right now. My gf didnt know the wanted nurses duty shifts but she had a hunch about something being rotten in Denmark. And when she checked, she found out the other nurse wasnt on duty that day. So she concluded that the nurse was probably cheating on her husband.

    has no linear logic in it, was just explained through linear logic, but the story lacks facts, for the murder to be arrested. My gf should find out some weeks later, when the nurses were talking that she was right.

    I admit there is a lot of intuition involved in such a process, but her holistic broaded understanding of the situation struck me as something new.

    This was absolutely motivated by an emotion, like you interpreted F, but I think the process, which the motivation lead to, was somewhat different than a T process aswell and I think that needs to be mentioned also.

    Keep up your work, will continue reading

    P.S.: yes I forgot what the thread was originally about
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. The Internet and Introverts
    By The Unknown Essence in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 09-25-2007, 10:23 AM
  3. The difference of the N and the S mind in Art and Music
    By wildcat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-11-2007, 02:22 PM
  4. [Te] The Message and the Messenger
    By proteanmix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 09:39 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