User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 27

  1. #1
    "Everything in its place" fill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    753
    Posts
    507

    Default Is MBTI Definite?

    I've been wondering if the functions of our mind can be simply utilized and used in the right situations. I suppose we naturally act a certain way, but I recently started to balance my Fe/Fi/Te/Ti in order to be more rational in situations and use my feelings and practicality when they are to be used.

    I think I'd be content with being an INxx...
    "Poor bastard. Wait 'till he sees the bats. "
    enneagram - 7/5/3

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fill View Post
    I've been wondering if the functions of our mind can be simply utilized and used in the right situations. I suppose we naturally act a certain way, but I recently started to balance my Fe/Fi/Te/Ti in order to be more rational in situations and use my feelings and practicality when they are to be used.

    I think I'd be content with being an INxx...
    Well, of course.

    The thing is, the functions are archetypical perspectives on human functioning. We all have a basic level on certain things. The functions are more ways of looking at things rather than skills or abilities.

    For instance:

    Intuition =/= Imagination
    Sensing =/= Five senses and reflexes
    Thinking =/= Logic
    Feeling =/= Emotion

    Those are associations most people make that cause them to question MBTI, because it's fairly obvious that everyone has all these faculties.

    For instance, Se isn't about the senses specifically, but about focusing on tangible data in terms of what it means in the present moment, and valuing this interpretation the most. Ni would be about focusing on the data in terms of what it could mean in other moments, and refusing to value any of the interpretations as more valid than any other.

    Essentially, each of the functions is a perspective on the contents of the mind, with it's own values, emphasis, and tendencies. The contents of the mind don't change based on type, there's a core mind that we all share. We have more in common than not. This layer just describes the differences that appear between us on the more superficial layer of conscious choice. What types of rationalization and assessment mechanisms do we prefer to employ, or what perspectives do we tend to take on things, in other words? I disagree with describing type as unconscious tendencies rather than conscious preferences. After all... we were aware of what choices we made when choosing the answers to the test, right?

    Does that make sense?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fill View Post
    I've been wondering if the functions of our mind can be simply utilized and used in the right situations. I suppose we naturally act a certain way, but I recently started to balance my Fe/Fi/Te/Ti in order to be more rational in situations and use my feelings and practicality when they are to be used.

    I think I'd be content with being an INxx...
    I'm not sure how it can be a recent development or how you can stay that way all the time. I believe that we do have certain functions that we favor more than others but that we do have the ability, over time, to strengthen the other functions. However, I still think that we have instinctual ways of thinking, on the fly, that are who we are/ how we are built. Even though you can look at a situation by employing Ti, for example, that isn't necessarily how you see it initially in your thought process.

    I could be wrong here.. I just don't usually buy easily into the concept of changing type by developing other functions. Sure, they are developed, but have you really changed your instinctual self?

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RuffledINTP View Post
    I'm not sure how it can be a recent development or how you can stay that way all the time. I believe that we do have certain functions that we favor more than others but that we do have the ability, over time, to strengthen the other functions. However, I still think that we have instinctual ways of thinking, on the fly, that are who we are/ how we are built. Even though you can look at a situation by employing Ti, for example, that isn't necessarily how you see it initially in your thought process.

    I could be wrong here.. I just don't usually buy easily into the concept of changing type by developing other functions. Sure, they are developed, but have you really changed your instinctual self?
    Instinctive by development, but not unconscious. Type isn't truly unconscious, it's about the way our conscious mind develops. It's right there on that layer between consciousness and unconsciousness, which is why we can be aware of it.

    It wouldn't change your type, because you still have a tendency to prefer one mechanism over another. It would just allow you to better understand the perceptual mechanisms of those who are different from you, and possibly employ them in situations where this seems advantageous, and you're aware of another perspective.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Instinctive by development, but not unconscious. Type isn't unconscious, it's about the way our conscious mind develops.

    It wouldn't change your type, because you still have a tendency to prefer one mechanism over another.
    We can change how we consciously process information, but we can't change how we initially see it. Our personalities are who we are on a fundamental level. We can't change our personalities.. we can only choose to look at things in a different way. Consciously putting ourselves outside of our comfort zones and trying to understand a different perspective does this. Sure, the output may be different by changing the thought process, but you still start at the same point.

  6. #6
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RuffledINTP View Post
    We can change how we consciously process information, but we can't change how we initially see it. Our personalities are who we are on a fundamental level. We can't change our personalities.. we can only choose to look at things in a different way. Consciously putting ourselves outside of our comfort zones and trying to understand a different perspective does this. Sure, the output may be different by changing the thought process, but you still start at the same point.
    Yes, but I don't believe that that initial preference is inherently unconscious. I believe it simply represents the starting point in the development of a person's conscious mind (rather than their unconscious mind), and fairly quickly gets set as "default," unalterably. I don't believe it's truly a product of the unconscious, though it's instinctive, precisely because we can become aware of it.

  7. #7
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    There's some truth to what you're saying. I've grown more logical as I've gotten older, but I'm still very F. As for N vs. S, I think in my life it's best exemplified in my attitude toward art and music. Yes, I can be very S, and live in the experiences of my senses. I love to. But I have this N side that makes me want to also analyze films, books, and works of art which can sometimes irritate the shit out of my more S dominant partner. So I guess my point is, yes, you can develop those latent functions and balance them, for sure. In fact, I've found in taking cognitive function tests my functions don't neatly stack up as an INFP is supposed to. But there's always going to be an inherent preference, I think.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Yes, but I don't believe that that initial preference is inherently unconscious. I believe it simply represents the starting point in the development of a person's conscious mind (rather than their unconscious mind), and fairly quickly gets set as "default," unalterably. I don't believe it's truly a product of the unconscious, though it's instinctive, precisely because we can become aware of it.
    I don't know, really.. I just find it hard to think that someone can change their type after they've fully developed. I can see a person who is naturally Fi taking a step back and looking at it through Ti.. but how can you change your own mind to do that with every single decision or observation you make? Our personalities are about how we interact with the world at large.. our observations, our senses, our decisions, everything. So sure, you can make the effort with things that you are aware of but I'm still iffy on trusting that you can make that change with things that you aren't aware of. OR that you can selectively choose how you will process information that you percieve.

  9. #9
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    There's about 84564643 posts explaining very clearly that:

    1) NO, MBTI is not scientific.
    2) NO, MBTI "tests" don't really "test" anything so much as point you in the right direction/give you a guess at what archetype you might fit.
    3) NO, psychological type is not even a testable or measurable idea.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  10. #10
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    There's about 84564643 posts explaining very clearly that:

    1) NO, MBTI is not scientific.
    2) NO, MBTI "tests" don't really "test" anything so much as point you in the right direction/give you a guess at what archetype you might fit.
    3) NO, psychological type is not even a testable or measurable idea.

    Don't burst their bubble you callous bastard!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-10-2013, 06:57 PM
  2. Is MBTI useful?
    By musicheck in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 11:41 AM
  3. Is MBTI a Cult?
    By Mole in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 10:15 AM
  4. Is MBTI a valid instrument?
    By Mole in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 05-15-2008, 08:28 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