User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 91

  1. #41
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I'm beginning to think that his system might just work better for Sensors, honestly.
    Or you just don't understand it, hence the purpose of this thread.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  2. #42
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Or you just don't understand it, hence the purpose of this thread.
    It's so vague it could mean almost anything. That's what I see as the problem with temperament and MBTI. It makes sense until you try to apply it, and then... the nature of details and how people really are, and what they're affected by, make it not add up. That's been my experience.

    Reality isn't doing a good job of falling in line with the abstraction correctly.

  3. #43
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I'm beginning to think that his system might just work better for Sensors, honestly.
    There would be more credit to this if the forum weren't dominated by intuitives..

  4. #44
    No Cigar Litvyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    MBTI is a pair of goggles you put over your eyes - a buildable set of Schemas for you to help digest the world. That's it, no truth, no grand revelations...... just another crazy human perception.
    Asking what a persons "true type" is is like asking what "true Orange" looks like - its just a bad question that leads nowhere
    ^QFT

  5. #45
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greed View Post
    There would be more credit to this if the forum weren't dominated by intuitives..
    Well, actually, I have a theory.

    Intuitives don't get Keirsey's system, and usually end up questioning it and looking at the theory behind it. Then they come on this forum and theorize about various ways to make it make sense, and then compare that to their experiences. The tool becomes a theoretical playground and way of making intellectual conversation rather than a serious measurement of people for us, in other words.

    Sensors usually don't need to come here, because they read Keirsey, get what he's talking about, and never question it because they "just see" what he's talking about in the environment via their senses and realize it works for them.

    What do you think?

  6. #46
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    ...
    I kind of like it.

    Another take could be that sensors probably just take the system as it is.. not a lot to discuss. Intuitives try to add useless things like function order, shadow functions, type pairings, and the like to it, and that has meaty, but overall fruitless, discussion that's ripe for forum content.

  7. #47
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I have read it. It was the first book on it I ever read, and I've been over it several times. But I don't get it, and can't see those traits in people. I also think the stereotypes are ridiculously exaggerated in it.
    What is "it?" Are you referring to the original "Please Understand Me"? If so, I'd let you know that Keirsey has greatly revised and extended his presentation since his original book. But, anyway, can you tell me what "stereotypes" in "it" are ridiculously exaggerated? I mean specifically, not a general impression you got.


    I'm beginning to think that his system might just work better for Sensors, honestly.
    In a sense (hehheh) I agree with you. In as much as the focus on observable behavior is something that Sensing types do more naturally, perhaps our minds are not as clouded with vague theoretical notions and impressions that we can observe these things more clearly when we are looking for them?

    However, I don't believe it is only Sensors who can do this. Obviously, Keirsey himself is an Intuitive type, and I have seen others such as one of my co-workers (who is INFJ) grasp the system quite well and do a bang-up job of observing these behaviors in people she encounters, especially her fellow Idealists, who she seems to now almost have a radar for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    It's so vague it could mean almost anything. That's what I see as the problem with temperament and MBTI. It makes sense until you try to apply it, and then... the nature of details and how people really are, and what they're affected by, make it not add up. That's been my experience.

    Reality isn't doing a good job of falling in line with my abstraction correctly.
    Heh. Yeah, my experience has been the opposite. Since I started getting into this stuff last year, I have started paying attention to the people I know the best, mostly family and co-workers, and have seen the patterns play themselves out right in front of me time and time again.

    In our office, we have an SP boss whose stimulation-seeking, live-in-the-moment personality is a huge factor on the way the company operates. His senior subordinate, another SP, is the person I've related to most in my years with the company, and he is the extroverted version of the boss, living for his next I-phone application, playing Guitar Hero and driving his Corvette fast.

    Our two SJ general managers are the E/I sides of the STJ coin, and their top priority of security-seeking comes out in everything they talk about, from stock market fluctuations, to their vacation bargains, retirement opportunities, family loyalties, and comparisons of their inspecting and supervising of employees and the decline of the work ethic and "proper" parenting.

    Our lone NF, and lone female of the office, tends to tune out much of the daily goings-on and get lost in her fantasy-filled audiobooks, all the while dreaming of her planned future running a petting zoo type place with rabbits and other animals. When she thinks about the way our company is run, it makes her sad, because she sees the human problems that exist but is powerless to change the policies she believes are stifling it from becoming what she can envision it as, the same way she viewed her own store when she was a manager running it, with concern for all the individuals that worked for her and their unique needs. Her "identity-seeking" nature comes through regularly as she constantly re-examines her place in the company, her family situations, and her basic spiritual needs and goals, seeing a much larger picture of the world than her concrete co-workers who are focusing on minute details that seem so trivial to her.

    We don't currently have an NT type in the office (we had one as a GM but he was fired last year) but we do have one store manager that has tested as such, and upon reading Keirsey's chapter on "Rationals" in "Please Understand Me II" declared "By jove, I think he's got me pegged!" His "knowledge-seeking" personality keeps him checking out the latest political news in addition to the latest in his Dungeons & Dragons games and the newest discoveries of anomalies in outer space.

    No single person fits every literal word of a type description 100 percent, but just in the time that I have actually been looking for them, I have seen a ton of examples of the basic temperament behaviors going off like fireworks all around me, and I have about a 90 percent success rate in guessing an individual's temperament from a few conversations with that person, and then testing them and being correct. So, as much as it makes any sense at all to try to group people for whatever purpose, I have seen the validity of these particular groupings with my own eyes and ears over and over again.

    And keep in mind this is all coming from someone who once declared that "psychology is a fake profession" and that "some egghead that wrote a book a long time ago has no chance of understanding me, and probably no other person. People are all unique and can't be put in boxes just to make some elitist snobs feel like they know stuff." I don't work for Keirsey or the Myers family, or anybody else who has a stake in people accepting any particular theory, and just a few years ago, I scoffed at the very concept. So I of all people had to be convinced the hard way, by actually seeing the practical application of it for myself.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  8. #48
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    What is "it?" Are you referring to the original "Please Understand Me"? If so, I'd let you know that Keirsey has greatly revised and extended his presentation since his original book. But, anyway, can you tell me what "stereotypes" in "it" are ridiculously exaggerated? I mean specifically, not a general impression you got.
    Yes, you guessed correctly.

    I'm pretty sure there was a story about an SP who snuck off to Vegas and drank as an example of the stereotype, for instance. Surprised you don't remember that. That's probably the source of the whole "SPs are totally hedonistic and decadent" stereotype.

    I don't remember as much with the other types, though... all I can remember are general impressions of those.




    In a sense (hehheh) I agree with you. In as much as the focus on observable behavior is something that Sensing types do more naturally, perhaps our minds are not as clouded with vague theoretical notions and impressions that we can observe these things more clearly when we are looking for them?

    However, I don't believe it is only Sensors who can do this. Obviously, Keirsey himself is an Intuitive type, and I have seen others such as one of my co-workers (who is INFJ) grasp the system quite well and do a bang-up job of observing these behaviors in people she encounters, especially her fellow Idealists, who she seems to now almost have a radar for.
    Yeah. The thing about me is, I don't like typing people based on observable behavior, because most of it could just be social programming. I guess I think type has more to do with figuring out how a person sees the world, than how the world sees a person. Figuring out how the world sees a person is easier, so now I can see how you're doing it.
    No single person fits every literal word of a type description 100 percent, but just in the time that I have actually been looking for them, I have seen a ton of examples of the basic temperament behaviors going off like fireworks all around me, and I have about a 90 percent success rate in guessing an individual's temperament from a few conversations with that person, and then testing them and being correct. So, as much as it makes any sense at all to try to group people for whatever purpose, I have seen the validity of these particular groupings with my own eyes and ears over and over again.
    I guess I just don't know how to "see" basic temperament behaviors. To me, behaviors just look like independent, tangible events with thousands of possible causes, motivations, and connections. You can come to predict what behavior is likely in a particular situation through observation, but you can't see why it's likely, or how it would change if the situation changed in even a small way.

    And keep in mind this is all coming from someone who once declared that "psychology is a fake profession" and that "some egghead that wrote a book a long time ago has no chance of understanding me, and probably no other person. People are all unique and can't be put in boxes just to make some elitist snobs feel like they know stuff." I don't work for Keirsey or the Myers family, or anybody else who has a stake in people accepting any particular theory, and just a few years ago, I scoffed at the very concept. So I of all people had to be convinced the hard way, by actually seeing the practical application of it for myself.
    I guess I believe that the theory has potential, but I don't believe it's reasonably applicable in it's current state. I mean, you're seeing it, but you're seeing it because you've unconsciously accepted particular assumptions. As long as you accept certain assumptions and correlations between type and reality (especially unconsciously), you can see type clearly. The problem is that the assumptions are unfounded and could be explained in many ways.

    Well, I guess I've decided to try and hold off on application, and go back to not putting people in boxes. It looked promising, but it turns out it just doesn't work for me after all.

    One thing that bothers me about temperament. SJ is associated with Melancholic, while NF is associated with Choleric. How many Choleric ESJs and Melancholic INFs (like me) do you know?

  9. #49
    Senior Member NewEra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    I
    Posts
    3,104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    What does all of this mean?
    You have to look at it in a more fuzzy sense. Don't look at the exact words and what they say. Get the definitions from many sources, and then combine them into one, that should help.

  10. #50
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheChosenOne View Post
    You have to look at it in a more fuzzy sense. Don't look at the exact words and what they say. Get the definitions from many sources, and then combine them into one, that should help.
    Oh. Think in fuzzy terms? I was afraid that's what people would say.

    That's really hard for me, I like knowing precisely what I'm dealing with, what it is and what it isn't. Maybe I'm not smart enough to understand this stuff...

Similar Threads

  1. I still don't know my MBTI type...
    By Purplemoon in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-01-2017, 09:48 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-05-2015, 02:07 PM
  3. still don't know what my type is (let's try this MBTI thing again)
    By anastasiatremaines in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-03-2014, 06:15 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-06-2011, 09:12 PM
  5. They just don't understand.
    By Ilah in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-26-2008, 04:53 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