User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 12

  1. #1
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default Alignment MBTI hybridization

    Alright, I was thinking about the D&D alignment thread down in the bonfire subforum, and got to thinking about things perhaps a bit too much in depth >.>

    Whot I ended up concluding, in general though, was that D&D alignment is pretty much a form of a personality indicator of sorts, in line with the concept of MBTI, however, it's got several distinctive differences, and is far more restrictive in its' coverage.

    For the basic concepts, let's start with the advantages and flaws of the two to compare.

    MBTI has 4 axis, or focal points it considers, with more or less a black and white description of any axis; for example, S vs N, T vs F, et cetera. The concept in general though, is that it lists each of these four categories individually as positive, or negative, with no middle ground or explaination past that point. The cognitive functions, Ne, Ti, and so on, are just extensions of this (or rather the ISFJ/ENTP combos are easier descriptions of the functions), but they give very little indication other than yeur dominant functions, and even those, if they're not THAT dominant, can be very unclear.

    D&D's alignment system has 2 axis, but uses a 3 point of referance frame to judge it by. For example, it breaks things down into not just "good / evil" or "chaos / lawful", but also provides a middleground of neutrality as well. This provides greater informational detail for the axis it defines, however, the functions it describes are pretty much mislabled... it's pretty much listing "chaotic / lawful" instead of P / J, which has the same general principle, and if one breaks down good/evil further, it can be interpreted as healthy/unhealthy strengths of whichever is more dominant.

    This realization basically states that D&D's alignment, is in fact a very rudimentary personality ranking system, but only covers a small fraction of the mind and skips most of the MBTI coverage.

    It also implies, however, that the chances are that this information could be further applied and expanded upon to each of the particular functions and possibly expanded further to cognitive functions as well.

    The basic concept, here, is to further outline the basic MBTI functions, by providing further subfunctions in greater detail to better explain the relation of each one.

    This would provide a far better personal understanding of individuals, and would better account for the dispairities which're often found in the basic MBTI profiling (why for example yeu can have two individuals with the same MBTI type, yet still be significantly different to each other). This would also provide far better coverage over the concepts such as 'middleground' people who don't really fall heavily onto one side or the other.

    In this way, I'm hoping to be able to greatly expand upon the standard MBTI functions to provide a more accurate detailed report of the various functions, an 'advanced' MBTI of sorts.



    Now, the standard D&D concept this originally stemmed from, is obviously flawed, and won't work all that well, and will need heavy adaptation to properly coincide with the particular aspects of MBTI, so it really isn't anything other than an inspiration really I guess, and a basic outline for the structured form I'm hoping to take this to.

    Specifically, I'm looking for the following:

    To break down, initially, the various functions (E/I, S/N, F/T, J/P)
    To further define each by a pair of related axis, or subfunctions
    To then provide these subfunction axis in a method of top, bottom, and middleground
    Finally, to display the resultant information akin to multiple 3x3 grids, in direct relation to the 4x2 grid of MBTI.


    In the end, this should make an MBTI profile look more like this:

    E(3,2)N(1,3)T(1,1)P(2,1)

    Which would provide a wealth of additional data.

    As this's obviously a fairly large undertaking, and I'm still a bit shaky on many of the finer details at this point, I'll be subsequently making additional posts to further gain information and definition of each intrinstic function, to see which methods would be the best way to describe each function accordingly.

    For this particular post, I'm mostly just looking for ideas on the basic concept in general, don't bother with information on whot yeu think the individual aspects would correlate to just yet... Imma make individual posts based on each one over time, trying to narrow things down for a more accurate portraital.

    In any case, whot do yeu think of the basic concept to start with? I doubt it'll ever catch on, but do yeu think the idea holds any real merit, and do yeu think it'd even be considered benefitial to have the additional information, or do yeu find the information may be less relevant or not really worth bothering with?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Valuable_Money's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    681

    Default

    ENTJ lawful evil

    INTJ neutral evil

    ENTP caotic evil

    ISTJ Lawful neutral

    INTP True Neutral

    I/ESTP caotic neutral

    INFJ Caotic good

    INFP neutral good

    ???? Lawful good
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh? wgah'nagl fhtagn

  3. #3
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Valuable_Money View Post
    ENTJ lawful evil

    INTJ neutral evil

    ENTP caotic evil

    ISTJ Lawful neutral

    INTP True Neutral

    I/ESTP caotic neutral

    INFJ Caotic good

    INFP neutral good

    ???? Lawful good
    Lol did you even READ the OP? She has a good idea.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  4. #4
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    I'm not going to go back into the thread, but off the top of my head,
    those who scored "neutral" along with me, were from many different MBTI types.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Valuable_Money's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Lol did you even READ the OP? She has a good idea.
    Just stating what came to mind
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh? wgah'nagl fhtagn

  6. #6
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Valuable_Money View Post
    ENTJ lawful evil
    INTJ neutral evil
    ENTP caotic evil
    ISTJ Lawful neutral
    INTP True Neutral
    I/ESTP caotic neutral
    INFJ Caotic good
    INFP neutral good
    ???? Lawful good

    ad nauseum
    Not really true at all, there's actually quite alot of variation here, I'm ENTP but score chaotic neutral not evil; evil is related solely to "application to self" in the DnD scale... for example... an EVIL person cares only about themselves, how things apply to THEM, and noone else. Lawful evil would be interested in using the law, religion, or whotever to their own ends, the law has validity only in how it applies to yeurself. Chaotic evil would not care about anything, as everything exists only to service the self; a law that doesn't benefit yeu is ignored, one that does benefit yeu is embraced. The 'good' applies things to a greater whole and isn't really neccesarily "GOOD" as such... for example, a religious fanatic, would be lawful good... they are heavily interested in enforcing their beliefs and laws, values and so on, to people as a whole; if they saw someone beating a woman, and their religion specifically forbade such, they would automatically attempt to intervene, regardless of whether the woman was actually a theif and that was the law in that area or not; they would be expressing their own personal viewset upon others.

    Therefore, while the vast majority of ENTP's would score CHAOTIC, the remainder is based far moreso on how they percieve it in relation to their own self or as a larger whole.

    As such, whot I've reasoned out, is that "chaotic" is P (in generalization) and "lawful" is J, to a degree, though this isn't a flawless interpretation. The "good/evil" is completely independant of MBTI as it's possible to externalize yeur beliefs without being specifically E nor I.

    That being said, this list is irrelevant to the discussion I'm trying to provoke here. Just matching the types to the D&D alignment WILL NOT WORK because they're not both measuring the same thing.

    My idea is more to break down the MBTI in order to measure each dichotomy against a similar ruleset to the D&D concept.



    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    I'm not going to go back into the thread, but off the top of my head,
    those who scored "neutral" along with me, were from many different MBTI types.
    Exactly, which was part of the point. The only thing that shows up at all really on the D&D alignment, is yeur balance of J/P, and how heavily yeu view such as internalized, or externalized (in relation to self, or groups of people as a whole).

    A 'true neutral', or neutral/neutral score, would only mean yeu have about a 50/50 disposition towards J/P, equally basing things on yeur personal values, and relating them to perception in the context of the situation, and then considering both how it affects yeurself AND those around yeu.

    As such, YES, many many types would show up as "true neutral". IN theory, EVERY SINGLE TYPE could possibly show up as such, because anyone who's not strictly heavily on the side of J nor P would fall under the possibility of such.

  7. #7
    triple nerd score poppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    intj
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    I also did not read the OP because my attention span is very short and the spelling of the word "you" does nothing to garner my interest.

    That being said, good on you if you can find a more in depth way to compare the two systems.
    "There's no need to be embarrassed about it, Mr. Spock. It happens to the birds and the bees!"

  8. #8
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Just to warn people, I wrote this when I'm kinda tired... this's a GREAT time for me to brainstorm ideas, but a HORRIBLE time for me to try to actually explain whot I come up with XD

    So I have this awesome idea but am flat out sucking at describing it I"m sure XD

    Uhm... I'mma try to give this one last shot at explaination before I go to bed though =3



    In short:

    The D&D alignments partially describe the J/P dichotomy, but not fully. It's one key aspect but not enough of it. It also describes a second important aspect as well, but once again may lack further information. It has the largest advantage though, of explaining how these two factors relate to each other, and gives distinctive explainations for how they interact.

    For the moment, we have J and P. Yeu are J. Or yeu are P. There's no real middle ground. If yeu take a more advanced test and score say... 30/70 J to P ratio, it states yeu're more P than J, but it really doesn't do much to explain whot this difference MEANS. Alright so yeu're more P than J, so... whot? >.>;;


    Imma just copy paste this from a discussion I'm having in AIM right now as it kinda makes more sense than if I were to try to re-explain this again XD

    Right, so yeu have judgement in that yeu have strong morals, and understand the concept of rules and such, but yeu also have perception in that yeu're equally able to place those morals into context to apply them, so really, even though yeu're technically a "J", I think yeu're probably not an exceptionally heavily sided one either, maybe 60/40?
    Which the standard MBTI test just doesn't display very well
    If yeu were truly and heavily J, yeu would be far more likely to insist 'stealing is bad no matter whot' and punish them regardless of the reason behind why
    Whereas if yeu were heavy heavy heavy P, yeu would be looking at the context and perceptions far too heavily, and may refuse to punish someone who killed his wife for cheating on him
    The strong J would punish him regardless because he has no right to kill, the extreeme P would refuse to punish him because by his perception he was correct in his action
    A more medium value would be somewheres in the middle, applying such based on the situation but within reason
    Which's really why I want to hybridize this so badly =3
    Because there's currently no real explaination for such... I mean there's some tests which state like "70% J!" but there's literally no explaination for whot that MEANS



    That was an excerpt of a conversation (the other side got discluded from it but anyway) I hope that clears the concept up a bit more here ^^

    Imma go to bed and rest on this, I doubt it'll help, Imma need to talk to people to understand my own ideas, but it'll give me time to sort the thoughts I do have a bit, and get enough rest to be coherant at least XD

    Anyways I shall return to this tomorrow, and begin with the in depth explaination comparison of D&D alignment, to the internal/externalized form of J/P, and start a thread to see if we can't come up with a better description to use for evaluation.

  9. #9
    triple nerd score poppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    intj
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    Right, so yeu have judgement in that yeu have strong morals, and understand the concept of rules and such, but yeu also have perception in that yeu're equally able to place those morals into context to apply them, so really, even though yeu're technically a "J", I think yeu're probably not an exceptionally heavily sided one either, maybe 60/40?
    Which the standard MBTI test just doesn't display very well
    If yeu were truly and heavily J, yeu would be far more likely to insist 'stealing is bad no matter whot' and punish them regardless of the reason behind why
    Whereas if yeu were heavy heavy heavy P, yeu would be looking at the context and perceptions far too heavily, and may refuse to punish someone who killed his wife for cheating on him
    The strong J would punish him regardless because he has no right to kill, the extreeme P would refuse to punish him because by his perception he was correct in his action
    A more medium value would be somewheres in the middle, applying such based on the situation but within reason
    Which's really why I want to hybridize this so badly =3
    Because there's currently no real explaination for such... I mean there's some tests which state like "70% J!" but there's literally no explaination for whot that MEANS
    J/P has nothing to do with this, especially for introverted Js who are dominated by a perceptive function (example: Ni would also be looking at all the different contexts and ways of interpretation).

    Fi would be far more influential in suggesting moral rigidity.
    "There's no need to be embarrassed about it, Mr. Spock. It happens to the birds and the bees!"

  10. #10
    Senior Member Keps Mnemnosyne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    Mm
    Posts
    400

    Default

    I think I get your idea with the only problem I can think of is how do you propose to determine how strong a preference is within a single person?
    Love wouldn't exist without loneliness to inspire it.

    Peach yogurt is made of love. And gnome kidneys. - Domino

    I can cope and will cope without polluting my lungs. - Saslou

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI types as D&D character alignments
    By Scapegoated 4 fun in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-10-2017, 12:55 PM
  2. MBTI Types in the 5x5 Alignment
    By RandomINTP in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-23-2015, 06:50 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 07:00 AM
  4. Alignment --> MBTI?
    By mrcockburn in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 09-03-2011, 04:17 PM
  5. Thoughts on Hybrid MBTI/Keirsey Types?
    By Usehername in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-09-2007, 03:52 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