User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 126

  1. #41
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Am I the only one who that divides up personalities into sub factors and measures each trait? It seems like most generalise to a particular type, or some hybird of the two, with the emphasis on finding a "type".

    (ie: I measure I/E, T/F, N/S, J/P by observing actions and adding ticks next to each side, then combine them into a sub-trait scores, which when strong enough, indicates an overall trait (ie: I+/E- score))
    I do this too, I'm just more wrong than my temperament method IMO, so I don't do it with people I don't know well.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  2. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    A desire to socialize is something of E, but the desire and having social skills are totally different.

    Social skills are something an S, and particularly SF, tends to have more of. It's easier for them to fit in.

    An N, on the other hand, may wish to socialize, but they are often less effective. And since their behavior is less mainstream, they have greater risk of becoming alienated, because an S-dominated world perceives the N's unconventional behavior as obnoxious. Individualistic behavior is often considered anti-social or non-social.
    There are some who consider unconventional behavior as obnoxious. I say screw them!

    But usually I have found that unconventional behavior comes only as a shock or surprise, not as something obnoxious. Although, I still sometimes feel like most people think my behavior is unacceptable, I realize that most just think it's strange.

    Some people actually chose to hang out with strange people, because they tend to be more tolerant of other strange people....and there is no such thing as normal.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Am I the only one who that divides up personalities into sub factors and measures each trait? It seems like most generalise to a particular type, or some hybird of the two, with the emphasis on finding a "type".

    (ie: I measure I/E, T/F, N/S, J/P by observing actions and adding ticks next to each side, then combine them into a sub-trait scores, which when strong enough, indicates an overall trait (ie: I+/E- score))
    It seems like you are trying to mentally run the tests and I thought even the pros. say that the tests usually get one letter wrong-- Hence the charge by critics of being just a form of cold-reading. I don't think any test has passed a double-blind application for consistency (If that's changed. Please, let me know).

    I find that using multiple models and cross-checking is working better than most things I've tried (not that I've had much luck in general).

    Looking for clear preferences seem like they get only one letter for me, usually E/I, and that's if I see people in many contexts. Even then, I find that some I would type as Es (especially EFJs) actually get very quiet in 1:1 situations (with me), then I get confused, are they just acting as extroverts, or have I shut down the stimulus that they need to keep their energy high.

    The way I nailed down my own type was Temperament+Interaction Style. Plus I was very sure I was an I, an somewhat sure I was a P.

    I sometimes find the motive/structure distinction useful for distinguishing technical SPs and NFs from technical NTs and SJs, since they tend to have the ability to move to pretty much any level along the abstract to concrete scale. The N/S distinction is essentially useless in the circles I hang out in.

    Similarly, in a corporate environment, it seems like the type of complaints I hear from people regarding the organization, "not enough freedom" vs. "not enough direction", is helpful in distinguishing NF/SJs from NT/SPs (though this has to be weighed against how much chaos or oppression is apparent).

    Still looking into some peoples cubes can potentially give a clear P vs J impression (usually just shows a clear P). Then, if this is confirmed by their scheduled vs. probing styles, that is another clue.

    Some one you wants a lot of direction, likes things scheduled, and tends to ignore motive in structuring people gives me a strong SJ vibe, thought she could be an NTJ also (but the wanting a lot of direction part, I think, makes it less likely).

    Someone who wants the freedom to act in the moment to make an impact, is very probing, has a messy room/cube/car, and very motive focused I would guess as SP, though could be an NP or even INJ. But then I could look at interaction style and the T/F preference to get more evidence.

    I think you get the idea. Sorry, I am being long winded again.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  4. #44
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    There are some who consider unconventional behavior as obnoxious. I say screw them!

    But usually I have found that unconventional behavior comes only as a shock or surprise, not as something obnoxious. Although, I still sometimes feel like most people think my behavior is unacceptable, I realize that most just think it's strange.

    Some people actually chose to hang out with strange people, because they tend to be more tolerant of other strange people....and there is no such thing as normal.
    ENxPs tend to be quirky, INxJs tend to be stubbornly rebellious, because they are both dominant N's.

  5. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    ENxPs tend to be quirky, INxJs tend to be stubbornly rebellious, because they are both dominant N's.
    Some people like outspoken individuals. Life is more interesting with these types around.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  6. #46
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Some people like outspoken individuals.
    And some people don't...particularly SJs.

  7. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    And some people don't...particularly SJs.
    I know some ISTJs and even an ESTJ that does. The ESTJ is very traditional himself, but acts like a side kick to an INTP.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  8. #48
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    It seems like you are trying to mentally run the tests and I thought even the pros. say that the tests usually get one letter wrong-- Hence the charge by critics of being just a form of cold-reading. I don't think any test has passed a double-blind application for consistency (If that's changed. Please, let me know).
    Absolutely. However, I don't see that are relevent if one intends to attempt to type. The question of "if I am doing this, why do I do it (x) way" is best answered by behaviour intentories. It helps that I think typing people is a waste of time, of course, since I'm very much a behaviouralist. That's all I really care about and inventoring past reactions is far more effective at predicting future behaviour. Same reason I care about the biological link - it is the base way of knowing that is connected so that reactions of one type can predict another reaction that isn't obvious. No biological background, no value to identifying the "type".

    I guess that's what I was really asking. Why "type" people in boxes at all?

    I find that using multiple models and cross-checking is working better than most things I've tried (not that I've had much luck in general).
    Yup, I have my own internal model that I translate when people ask.

  9. #49
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    ENxPs tend to be quirky, INxJs tend to be stubbornly rebellious, because they are both dominant N's.
    I am rarely rebellious. I don't like to be. I'd rather be a suck up and will be if circumstances allow. I usually only get rebellious if something is violating my values (a perceived gross injustice, for instance) or I'm being protective and I would rather none of that ever happened so it could be all harmonious and stuff.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  10. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Absolutely. However, I don't see that are relevent if one intends to attempt to type. The question of "if I am doing this, why do I do it (x) way" is best answered by behaviour intentories. It helps that I think typing people is a waste of time, of course, since I'm very much a behaviouralist. That's all I really care about and inventoring past reactions is far more effective at predicting future behaviour. Same reason I care about the biological link - it is the base way of knowing that is connected so that reactions of one type can predict another reaction that isn't obvious. No biological background, no value to identifying the "type".
    Oh. Well, we can notice people's habits without the aid of MBTI (or other inventories). I know a guy at work who almost always comes in later than everyone else (he also almost always stays latter than everyone else). He generally gets a pop-tart at breakfast time. He usually drinks a fat-free Milk Chung at lunch time.

    People have particular events they participate in on regular days of the week. There is basketball night, ball-room dancing night, Chinese class night, a regular meeting of a chess club, etc.

    You can tell if certain women are stressed if they aren't wearing making despite the fact that they usually do.

    I think most people are noticing patterns in behavior (though some a lot better than others). I had a friend in college (ISTJ, I'm pretty sure), who was a regular Sherlock Holmes.

    As for the value of "typing" people. I am not sure myself. It seems like you put in as much into making those models work as you get out from the models (so i becomes a simple short hand). So far, I agree with you, but I am not well-practiced, so there may be some benefit.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

Similar Threads

  1. Socionics video representations of the types
    By Lotr246 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-20-2014, 11:37 AM
  2. Stereotypical favourite bands of the types
    By dynamiteninja in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 04-20-2011, 01:34 PM
  3. Typical Work and Social roles of the types
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-04-2009, 10:08 PM
  4. Division of the type?
    By alcea rosea in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-05-2009, 08:36 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Introverted Intuitionists' eyes/Tell-tale signs?
    By Into It in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 09-20-2008, 03:10 PM

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