User Tag List

Results 1 to 2 of 2

  1. #1
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default Minor overlapping tendencies in temperament groups?

    Tell me if you understand this:

    ----------ENFJ
    ENFP---INFP---INFJ


    --------SJ
    SP-----NF-----NT


    I was thinking about all the types in the NF temperament, when I noticed something: most of them had one or two characteristics of another temperament as well. ENFJ's had SJ traits, ENFP's had SP traits, and INFJ's had NT traits. INFP's seemed most centered in the NF temperament, however.

    I haven't been able to see this in the other temperaments, so could this be why NF's are known as facilitative? Because we're kind of in the center of the temperaments?

    A friend of mine, however, disagreed, and believed you can see this in the other temperaments as well, and even claimed that INTJ's have NF qualities.

    What he came up with was this:

    Most NF: INFP
    Most NT: INTP
    Most SP: ESFP
    Most SJ: ESTJ

    The most NT-ish types in the other temperaments were ISTJ, ISTP, and INFJ.

    The most NF-ish types in the other temperaments were ISFJ, INTJ, and ISFP.

    The most SJ-ish types in the other temperaments were ENFJ, ESTP, and ENTJ.

    The most SP-ish types in the other temperaments were ENFP, ENTP, and ESFJ.

    I can kind of see some of these... but not all of them. I wonder if I'm missing something? Or was he wrong altogether? Was I?

  2. #2
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    I can kind of see some of these... but not all of them. I wonder if I'm missing something? Or was he wrong altogether? Was I?
    What he is talking about is the general nature for people to classify things according to a fairly universal "personality dimensions". All personality systems use different descriptors for these different traits... instinctively, those who observe people at any level push the systems into their own matrix of traits.

    Let me give two examples to show how much we do this;

    What MBTI group would this associate to? (This is not from MBTI at all)

    Is: Sociable, talkative, assertive, ambitious, active, dominance, tendency to experience positive emotions, extroverted, talkative, assertive, gregarious, energetic, self-dramatizing,

    Is Not: reserved, quiet, shy, unassertive, withdrawn


    It doesn't matter if the person is familiar with MBTI, Disc, FFM, Firo... or not familiar with anything. We intuitively understand that these descriptions tend to go together.

    But what about this? Can you tell me what MBTI category it would go under?

    Is: Calm, secure, not nervous, unenvious, relaxed, stable, confident, effective

    Is Not: moody, touchy, nervous, selfdoubting


    It, of course, is not measured in MBTI... yet we all know that these traits are important to personality. If I was to offer many of these descriptions to someone, they would be placed. "Moody? Touchy? F!"... "Confident, effective? J!". We have to place them... and if we are aware of it or not, we are. This is strange considering that MBTI doesn't actually correlate any of these descriptors well at all - intentionally, I might add, now that they have done factor analysis.

    What he is doing is simply transforming the 4 point model into something larger - I doubt he even knows what it is. For example, in his own mind, NF mostly means "Soft, fuzzy", which means I+P traits represent them. Again, this has to with the human error of assuming more traits are present in a "Type" (a generalisation to start with), then pushing the traits back. In other words, to take the generalisation and change it into what the individual knows about personality, transforming the tool they originally used into their own.

    The only reason you feel it is accurate is because of stereotypes - if you did an objective measurement of behaviours from S vs N, SP vs ENTJ... you'd find almost no common ground. We trick ourselves into seeing the common areas... and differences... through our own biases.

Similar Threads

  1. How comfortable are you in a group conversation vs. one on one?
    By highlander in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 12-10-2012, 08:47 PM
  2. Secessionist tendencies in northern Sweden
    By Valiant in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-05-2010, 07:43 AM
  3. Clubbing in mixed groups: Yay or Nay?
    By Risen in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 12:31 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