NJs are bad J's, SPs are bad Ps?

[tenINsFJ]

Of course not in all situations, but what do you guys think about that? Are iNtuitives Judgers not as good of Judgers as Sensors would be since Ns are less "intune" with reality and the present. Same with SPs... are they not as bad P's since they are more in touch with what is around them? Thoughts?

 

[Jeffster]

I'm....bad...P....kitty...head bounce...what?

 

[Thursday]

i notice the SP NJ coupling everywhere
or at least when an intuitive finally realizes sensors aren't bad

 

[Engler]

There is no such thing as a "bad" type. Each type has its advantages, just as each type has its disadvantages. The behavioral patterns of NJs are quite different than the behavioral patterns of SJs; however, this does not mean that one behavioral pattern works more efficiently than another.

 

[Cimarron]

Of course not in all situations, but what do you guys think about that? Are iNtuitives Judgers not as good of Judgers as Sensors would be since Ns are less "intune" with reality and the present. Same with SPs... are they not as bad P's since they are more in touch with what is around them? Thoughts?

If you're starting to slide into the thinking that one side of the S/N scale makes more sense with one side of the J/P scale, then you're probably losing focus on the differences between the two scales. (I guess) Remember that S/N and J/P "measure" different things, for MBTI theory to be true, that is. So maybe take a step back and remember how those two scales are different.

Then again, I've done similar before, so I haven't got much room to talk. But maybe you mean when matched together, N and J amplify a certain behavior, and S and P amplify another certain behavior...? I usually think of NJs as more "flexible" than their SJ counterparts, for example. So sometimes I wonder whether a person I think is P actually is NJ.

The difference is that in the first paragraph, we're starting with theory and working outward, and in the second paragraph, we're working inward towards the theory.

 

[527468]

Initially on test scales, if you were to answer most J/P questions toward J, you would be a J, toward P you would be a P.

Js usually make bad Ps, Ps usually make bad Js. Any type can be bad at both P and J.

In ratio format consider that an INTP has scored 99% in P... He can still be a horrible perceiver, and bad at all of the P characteristics, but implying ratio he would then be 99% much worse at J (however that works out mathematically.)

Another thing to consider is that the test J/P mosty apply to extroverted functions of F/T and S/N. So this INTP can actually be much better at judging, even better than the INTJ counterpart, but not specifically good at what J assumes... the Te.

Introverted functions are pretty much disregarded in this theory's typing. Bastards...

 

[INTJMom]

There is no such thing as a "bad" type. Each type has its advantages, just as each type has its disadvantages. The behavioral patterns of NJs are quite different than the behavioral patterns of SJs; however, this does not mean that one behavioral pattern works more efficiently than another.

Exactly.

Every type has its strengths and weaknesses.
In the end, we are all necessary.

 

[raz]

In the end, we are all necessary.

^_^ Your type is vital to my plans. You are relevant. The moment you become ineffective in your traits, you are to be eliminated. That is all.

 

[Unique]

Is this thread serious?

Bad types?

*facepalm*

 

[Giggly]

Of course not in all situations, but what do you guys think about that? Are iNtuitives Judgers not as good of Judgers as Sensors would be since Ns are less "intune" with reality and the present. Same with SPs... are they not as bad P's since they are more in touch with what is around them? Thoughts?

I tend to enjoy NJ's and SP's the most BECAUSE they aren't as extreme.

 

[raz]

Is this thread serious?

Bad types?

*facepalm*

Check your morals at the door, please.

 

[Unique]

Check your morals at the door, please.

I wasn't expressing any morals

I was asking if the thread was serious or not

as in haha joke or not

if its a joke it deserves me to say something hilarious if not... something serious

 

[raz]

I wasn't expressing any morals

I was asking if the thread was serious or not

as in haha joke or not

if its a joke it deserves me to say something hilarious if not... something serious

Try both. Like:

(Insert serious post here)

(Insert joke post here)

 

[Unique]

Try both. Like:

(Insert serious post here)

(Insert joke post here)

*computer voice*

Does not compute.... too structured..... J overload.... RHAHRHAHRHAHAH

*explosion*

;D

 

[raz]

Bad P!

 

[Wild horses]

I know an ISTP who claims to never loose anything ... how is that even POSSIBLE?! I am envious

 

[Jeffster]

I tend to enjoy NJ's and SP's the most BECAUSE they aren't as extreme.

but...but I AM extreeeeeeme baby! I'M ALL XTREME UPINYOFACE!!!!!

or something.

 

[cascadeco]

He's not saying NJ's or SP's are 'bad' in the sense of having worse traits or being worse personalities than the others.

He's saying NJ's maybe don't fit all of the stereotypical 'J' traits that tend to be on the J/P descriptive lists, so may appear to be more 'P' than SJ's, and the SP's maybe don't fit all of the stereotypical 'P' traits, so maybe appear to be more 'J' as compared to NP's.

 

[FDG]

Well, no. SJs can be very "bouncy" with their decisions, if you examine them over a longer time-scale - even if they seem to be very prepared on shorter ones. NJs may be more messy, but their decisions are rarely "bouncy".

 

[Cimarron]

The point of the thread, I think, is that:

P is known for being flexible
J is known for being rigid

then he's claiming that:

N is also kind of flexible
S is also kind of rigid

so when you match them:

NP = very flexible
SP = kind of flexible (more rigid than NP)
NJ = kind of rigid (more flexible than SJ)
SJ = very rigid

And I think it may appear that way, or I may be misunderstanding what N/S and P/J mean. Sometimes I have trouble deciding whether a person is P or NJ.