User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 17

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    10

    Default Invent Your Own Typology

    In thinking about where Jung's typology came from, I naturally started to try to rebuild it from the ground up.

    I asked -- if I were to make my own typology, would I end up with the same divisions as in MBTI/Jung?

    You could start with something like "funny vs. unfunny", but it seems to get you off balance from the start. It seems like an obviously very "random" place to start. You probably want something more abstract, something that encapsulates "funny vs. unfunny".

    (Although, "funny vs. unfunny" seems to be more about personality type than psychological type. A distinction you might want to consider when making your typology.)

    Introversion/Extraversion is pretty damn abstract. It divides the world into the classic Subject/Object division and then asks which way your "energy" is directed. It's holistic.

    Anyway, I'm mostly trying to kickstart my own thinking on this. I'm going to see if I can come up some kind of typology, and post any ideas as a response here.

    But I want to know: How would you design a typology? The goal (or my goal, anyway) is to have a compact structure which spans a huge range of possible behavior.

  2. #2
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    This sounds like a fun thread. I like the idea of poles. The introversion/extroversion one makes sense. Here are some of the poles that come to mind. I should add this is not complete, but just a few notes to consider.

    Socialization (There is some distinction between these three poles)
    Introversion vs. Extroversion
    Intrapersonal vs. Interpersonal
    Initiating vs. Observing

    Cognition
    Holistic vs. Compartmentalized
    Structured vs. Unstructured
    Concrete vs. Abstract
    Distilling vs. Elaborating
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Thanks, Toonia .
    Those could be useful for me too.

    I haven't made much progress, gotten much traction, so I'm going to ramble a bit.

    I understand there's something called the Big Five. It roughly works like this: Say you created a 1000-question personality survey and gave it to a slice of the population. It would cover a wide territory of questions. After giving the survey, you found patterns: people who marked Question #7 as true also marked Question #19 as true 79% of the time. What you have is clustering. Further, you have 5 major clusters. The Big 5. Then you look at each cluster, try to get at its "character", and give a name to it. In Big 5 they are: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. I don't know if that's how the Big Five actually came about, but in any case, it seems like a valid method.

    (*goes to read about Big 5* It looks like it has a more complicated history, but that this is essentially right.) So basically, Big 5 is empirical. At least, kind of. It relies a lot of time on self-report questionnaires (although how *would* you objectively know that a person has a certain personality trait?).

    OK, now Jung. I tried to read Psychological Types but it was rough going - I didn't integrate it that well. Basically, he seemed to arrive at Introversion/Extraversion, Sensing/Intuition, and Thinking/Feeling, by doing a review of past theories of type, and from looking at "literature, aesthetics, religion, and philosophy" (to steal from amazon), and then refining them where he saw issues. So in the end, his theory was supposed to account for all the past work, while transforming it in places he found to be wrong. I seem to recall him calling it "empirical" in the sense that it was also based on working with his own patients, but that just seems weird to me, since that really means his interpretation of them, not any kind of direct data.

    OK, as I said, rambling, but it helped me get a sense of where I am.

  4. #4
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    Socialization (There is some distinction between these three poles)
    Introversion vs. Extroversion
    Intrapersonal vs. Interpersonal
    Initiating vs. Observing

    Cognition
    Holistic vs. Compartmentalized
    Structured vs. Unstructured
    Concrete vs. Abstract
    Distilling vs. Elaborating
    I think you've got the basis for something great, here.. separating out socialization across multiple axes makes perfect sense in discussing psychological factors.

    I'll have more to contribute later, but I wanted to draw more attention to this.

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

    Default

    These are the dichotomies I typically use internally. They tend to tell me more about a person than MBTI, IME (though MBTI can hint at these):

    Compliant vs. Rebellious
    Imposing vs. Tolerant
    Formal vs. Casual
    Cautious vs. Risk-taking
    Independent vs. Dependent
    Analytical vs. Holistic
    Aesthetic vs. Functional
    Expressive vs. Reserved
    Active vs. Reflective
    Mental vs. Physical
    Complex vs. Simplistic
    Curious vs. Content
    Proactive vs. Reactive

    What do you think?

  6. #6
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741
    My stuff (design & other junk) lives here: http://nnbox.ca

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    These are the dichotomies I typically use internally. They tend to tell me more about a person than MBTI, IME (though MBTI can hint at these):

    Compliant vs. Rebellious
    Imposing vs. Tolerant
    Formal vs. Casual
    Cautious vs. Risk-taking
    Independent vs. Dependent
    Analytical vs. Holistic
    Aesthetic vs. Functional
    Expressive vs. Reserved
    Active vs. Reflective
    Mental vs. Physical
    Complex vs. Simplistic
    Curious vs. Content
    Proactive vs. Reactive

    What do you think?
    I see. Is this an exhaustive list? It's like, I make these sorts of judgments, but I wonder if they together can approach fully telling you who a person is. Not that you were trying to do that. I'm just trying to understand / get at my own discomfort with the list.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpn View Post
    I see. Is this an exhaustive list? It's like, I make these sorts of judgments, but I wonder if they together can approach fully telling you who a person is. Not that you were trying to do that. I'm just trying to understand / get at my own discomfort with the list.
    No, not fully, of course. I'd just say they can tell you at least as much as MBTI, and probably a lot more.

    If you're uncomfortable with that list, why are you comfortable with MBTI?

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    If you're uncomfortable with that list, why are you comfortable with MBTI?
    Well. The thing about MBTI is that it is complete, or at least creates the illusion of being complete. You can say "Okay, a person does two things: takes in data (either from the inner or outer world) and makes decisions (mental or actual) based on it." It reminds me of computers, which have data and code. Or physics, which has matter and laws. So maybe it's really the simplicity that appeals to me, the fact that the "data-code" pattern is being activated in my mind, moreso than that it's really a good way of modeling actual behavior of people/their psyches.

    That is what I was trying to get at anyway!

  10. #10
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpn View Post
    Well. The thing about MBTI is that it is complete, or at least creates the illusion of being complete. You can say "Okay, a person does two things: takes in data (either from the inner or outer world) and makes decisions (mental or actual) based on it."
    I'd liken it to MBTI Step II. It's more granular, but it still paints a more complete picture.

    There's probably a way to categorize those poles so that it's more evident how much ground they cover.

Similar Threads

  1. Write your own personal ad
    By proteanmix in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 12-26-2014, 04:04 PM
  2. Create your Own Candy Heart!
    By Totenkindly in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-13-2008, 04:17 AM
  3. Is it easier to type your own?
    By Mort Belfry in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-22-2008, 05:37 PM
  4. The travails of living in your own little world
    By Mycroft in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-16-2007, 11:51 AM
  5. Design Your Own Cognitive Process Character
    By ygolo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-09-2007, 12:55 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