• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Is MBTI Definite?

fill

"Everything in its place"
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
507
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
753
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...
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
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?
 

ring the bell

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
332
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?
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
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.
 

ring the bell

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
332
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.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
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.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
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.
 

ring the bell

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
332
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.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
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.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
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!
 

ring the bell

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
332
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.

Yes.. this is one of the problems I have. I don't see the way you think as being quantifiable. I don't think you can say "I want to think this way, so I will do it all the time from henceforth". If you are having to think about how to think, it's one big messy loop...
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
^ Yes, I agree.

Many of the people with serious criticisms of typology in general (that I've noticed) are Thinking-dominant types, especially Te.

On a side note, it's always been interesting to me that ENTPs and INTJs (N doms) almost always grasp and appreciate typology more quickly than INTPs or ENTJs (T doms.)

Thinking understands the ideas in theory but is too focused on quantitative organization to really get it until iNtuition is allowed to intervene and show the way.

The key is ceasing to hold up one's own frame of reference as objectively the best, which is something iNtuition tends to do a little better than Thinking (at least in my experience.)
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
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.

I wasn't saying they could change their type. Just that the part of the mind that Typology describes is the tendency of the natural bias in the more conscious part of the mind.

There is a default setting, but it's accessible and possible to be aware of it on the conscious level, meaning it can only drift to unconsciousness... it isn't part of the natural unconsciousness.

Does that make sense?
 

fill

"Everything in its place"
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
507
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
753
Interesting discussion. I think I'm simply wondering if there can be a balance kept by a person between all of the judgemental functions in both their introverted and extroverted states. Sure, if I wanted to develop my thinking function as an INFJ I could focus more on Ti, but what about Te? Is there a healthy way to develop Te without it being used as a shadow function from stress?
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
^ Sure, but it'll come out more as a kind of an "alternate mode" of your natural Je function, which for an INFJ would be Fe.

As you grow and continue to develop, each of your functions will kind of learn to imitate its other form...

IxxJ: Pi Je Ji Pe

ExxJ: Je Pi Pe Ji

IxxP: Ji Pe Pi Je

ExxP: Pe Ji Je Pi


So, for instance, if you're an ISTP, as we know your normal function order is Ti Se / Ni Fe, so you'd practice Te primarily as an altered form of your inferior Fe, which means it'll be one of the more difficult skills for you, most likely.

EDIT: Just to elaborate a bit. I figured this out by conceptualizing the functions in terms of Ji/Je/Pi/Pe as noted above, and watching how my INTP friends have these sort of "synthetic ethics" that essentially result from Ti imitating Fi (its Ji brother-in-arms) to balance out SOME kind of feeling function because their natural Fe is so poor.

In any event, they have VERY strong codes of ethics the way Fi users do...in fact, Ti is just as emotionally irrational as Fi, it just bases its internal logic on a subtly different standard (one that's easier to convince oneself is somehow immune to subjective interpretation, hehe.)

Because their system is "objective", Ti users seem to have more difficulty than most types accepting the subjective nature of their own perception. The INTP's Ti conscience won't "let" him do something most people would consider unethical, but this is usually not because he has some feeling-based bias about it, but rather because there's probably a very good logical reason it's considered that way. (Notice how INTPs have a disconcerting habit of ignoring ethical standards that they can't see any "logical" Ti reason for! Fi is barely there if at all; it comes out more via the other Ji function imitating it when it thinks it should. I do this very same thing with Se at times, and it bothers me about myself.)

The only real difference between Fi ethics and Ti ethics is the excuse given for being internally inflexible.
 

fill

"Everything in its place"
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
507
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
753
Very interesting, simulatedworld. +1.

I believe you've answered my question. :)
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Lenore Thomson tries to go strictly back to Jung and comes up with a different take on "individuation" (which is the concept we in the type community are often refering to "as though it meant nothing more than developing the skills associated with a function or all 8 alleged cognitive processes, but that's not what the word means in biology, which was Jung's frame of reference").

Here are the highlights of some points she made to me recently, which I thought were interesting alternatives we could take into consideration when topics like this come up. Hence, it makes me wonder if we really should be spending all this time aiming to try to "develop all eight processes", or change the ones we have come to prefer:

"Individuation ultimately means going beyond the Shadow to the stuff in the psyche we know nothing about. This stuff isn't just a bunch of undeveloped skills that we need to learn how to use. Individuation means accepting whatever is inside us that makes us unique representations of what it means to be human. [It] involves making some kind of bridge to the unconscious, via dreams or art or religion." .

"Type essentially characterizes the strategies we've used to adapt to the social context we happen to be in. That's what differentiation means -- adaptation to a specific time and place. When a cell differentiates, it switches off what is irrelevant to the organ it's supporting. When its environment requires something else, the cell reorients itself accordingly."

"There aren't 8 cognitive processes that offer us skills we need to develop in order to be whole. There are 4 functions, and by differentiating one, we've set aside some of our generic potential for the sake of real-world form." (which actually builds an identity different from any innate blueprint.)

"Whatever we habitually put aside to make our willful conscious choices will inevitably make its alliance with the unconscious -- emotions we don't want to feel, desires we don't recognize, the body itself. I think this is why Jung described type preference as a wound in the psyche, that place where we've torn our conscious standpoint from full integration with our instinctual life."
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
I think this is why Jung described type preference as a wound in the psyche, that place where we've torn our conscious standpoint from full integration with our instinctual life."

Jung also referred to type only when certain preferences become habitual.
Lenore Thomson pointed out that contrary to what MBTI claims,
Jung did not say people are born with a preference for certain functions.
Therefore, we are not necessarily born a type.

And if Jung viewed type preference as a wound in the psyche,
that's not exactly a glowing testimonial for it, now is it?
Here we have another common misconception that has been allowed to run wild:
those who are undecided about a type "just aren't differentiated enough!"
How often have you read that verbal pollution?

Dare I say, if Jung were here he'd claim the less differentiated we are,
the closer we are to being whole.

I personally dislike the word: shadow.
It conjures up an immediate negative connotation.
It makes no sense to me to suggest our unconscious is inherently "bad."
Or that some monster lurks within us all.
In my opinion, our most fertile gifts and talents began in the womb of our unconscious.

Every person is comprised of both conscious and unconscious parts.
When we pull a coin from our pocket, we don't think:
"Damn that tails side is evil."

No side is evil.
It only becomes evil, if we make it so.
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yes MBTI is definite. Your type can't change, it's within you. You can make yourself "use" the other functions, but it won't be natural like using your main ones.

Use it as a way to make yourself better. That's what I've done. I've covered my weaknesses.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Jung also referred to type only when certain preferences become habitual.
Lenore Thomson pointed out that contrary to what MBTI claims,
Jung did not say people are born with a preference for certain functions.
Therefore, we are not necessarily born a type.
Yeah, she told me this straight up, and I was shocked. (Never picked up this much on Ben Kovitz' wiki. But then that was primarily about that one book, and I don't know if she goes into all that there. At the library right now looking for it, but it seems to be out).
I have not gone into that, as I'm not sure of it. But it is true that there was always a question of whether type/ttemperament was really inborn, or just developed when really young.

And if Jung viewed type preference as a wound in the psyche,
that's not exactly a glowing testimonial for it, now is it?
Here we have another common misconception that has been allowed to run wild:
those who are undecided about a type "just aren't differentiated enough!"
How often have you read that verbal pollution?
I had not heard the word differentiation until she mentioned it to me.
But yeah; in light of this, that's ridiculous.
I now think that the simple approach of determining the dominant function and attitude and then the auxiliary would alleviate a lot of this indecision. Often it is from focusing on too many other things, like all eight of the functions.
Dare I say, if Jung were here he'd claim the less differentiated we are,
the closer we are to being whole.
From what I'm seeing, that sounds like it would be right.
I personally dislike the word: shadow.
It conjures up an immediate negative connotation.
It makes no sense to me to suggest our unconscious is inherently "bad."
Or that some monster lurks within us all.
In my opinion, our most fertile gifts and talents began in the womb of our unconscious.

Every person is comprised of both conscious and unconscious parts.
When we pull a coin from our pocket, we don't think:
"Damn that tails side is evil."

No side is evil.
It only becomes evil, if we make it so.
Terms like "shadow" spooked me out too when I first heard them. The reason it has taken on that connotation is because it deals with what the ego has rejected; which often comes up in negative situations.
Yes MBTI is definite. Your type can't change, it's within you. You can make yourself "use" the other functions, but it won't be natural like using your main ones.

Use it as a way to make yourself better. That's what I've done. I've covered my weaknesses.
Lenore points out that you don't even have to "use" the other functions, since they are not differentiated. Again, that would solve a lot of the ambiguity people face when they or others think they are "using" an opposite function too muhch to be their type.
 
Last edited:
Top