Every time I read a thread where people venture into specific function analysis whether it be talking about Ti specifically or trying to predict things based upon the functions position in their order of preference my intuition says there's something wrong.
Now that seems quite unscientific and it is but those of us who've been through the mill with our intuition probably know that when something doesn't ring true it's best to investigate as most often it's a piece of missed information but every once in a while it's because the thing being viewed is not sound.
Anyhow, the subject at hand...
INTP tells you a lot about me. It describes my preferences as a model which I comply to, to a certain degree.
My last process test
Now based on that I'm no where near the INFP that many mistake me for and the whole ENTP "mask" which people think I have is also absent. Now either function analysis is picking up something different, people are generally mistaken about me or function analysis isn't quite the full deal.Originally Posted by Cognitive Processes Results (21/5/2008)
Now personally I have a problem with one of the principles of function analysis and that's the separation of the four functions into eight and then treating them as separate entities.
If I prefer T most of all and I prefer to use it in the introverted world. Okay that's labelled as Ti. However who says that my preference as to when I apply the same function T to the outer world that it show's anything about my person? It's a preference and not an ability, a repeated choice and not a measure of proficiency. I mean there's carry over, if you're used to analysing things in your head then there's a whole skill set there which is definitely transferable to the outside world. I happen to do quite a good ENTJ impression when roused.
So basically is this function analysis just a bunch of theoretical mumbo jumbo with little application to the real world? Is it missing the primary roots of the functions in it's focused outlook? Am I missing how this works?
I mean I know the theory and I've seen people go on and on ad infinitum about the witch, the hero and all that stuff but it just does not seem to hang right. It's like having a wall that's on the wonk, perfectly aligning a picture on that wall to a spirit level and yet every time you look at the picture from a distance it looks on the wonk. The theory just does not seem to marry up with the reality and that bugs me.
To me the whole point of the MBTI is that it's ill defined enough to not require a precise fit and yet encompassing enough that it enables people to discuss things which aren't very apparent and to a degree where some wisdom can be gained. To add all these hard edges just seems to ruin the whole thing.
So basically why is function analysis valuable? What's wrong with the approach of just using the types as they are with all their nuances and seemingly different manifestations? Why try to go to the level where you are essentially trying to map someone's personality? It just doesn't seem to work.