• 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.

Pi = Judger, Pe = Perceiver; why?

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Does the fact that the system is subjective really make it a load of horse manure?

The same could be said of all philosophical discussion. There's no empirical evidence, but does that deprive it of any value or meaning?

No, I said it was a "possible" answer, not the answer.

Note that I continue to discuss MBTI ideas. I believe they are worthy of discussion and that the vocabulary is remarkably useful for discussing personal perspectives, even if the "rules" of MBTI are complete hogwash. I suspect there is a lot of (subjective) truth in those "rules," but that it can be difficult to discern.

I also suspect that the rules, assuming that they are true, are but the barest outlines of what is really going on, and that it is possible for individuals to "step outside" of the rules as understood, though such claims must be naturally met with much skepticism. Mostly, I think that if one understands that there are different patterns of thinking, and gains an understanding w/r to "how to think" in various ways, then one starts to violate the typical rules of MBTI.

My personal perspective is that MBTI describes common "equilibrium states" of the human psyche. This is balanced with that. These are balanced with those. So if one adopts an extreme posture in one regard, then a compensating posture is adopted in another area of the psyche. There are certainly imbalanced states which various investigators have tried to research (e.g., shadow functions), and I suspect that there exist human equilibria that do not technically exist in MBTI, and thus violate the "rules" of MBTI.

The main thing to recall is that if it is a subjective system, then the best one can do is share perspectives and understandings. The notion of proving others right or wrong just doesn't fly, unless such proof rests on the inconsistency of the others' ideas ... and even that is only a disproof of the other ideas, not a proof of one's own ideas.
 

onemoretime

Dreaming the life
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,455
MBTI Type
3h50
One of the reasons I do not argue vociferously for any particular view/hypothesis/interpretation of MBTI and Jungian functions is that every single one, including my own, is not falsifiable. This is pseudoscience, after all. I just offer up my own internal observations, compare to MBTI/Jung, and see what others think of them. Never forget that one possible answer to all of these disagreements is "MBTI is a load of horse manure, therefore all of you are wrong."

Always nice to have the nuclear option available, isn't it? :)
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
I applaud you for acknowledging the existence of INTJ weaknesses in the first place. I'm afraid some NTJs don't even realize there's such a thing.

The more you keep thinking an entire group of people all have the same weaknesses, the more you can justify ignoring your own.
Attaboy!
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Hmm, I think the topics between your thread and AGA's threads are blurring in my mind. They're mildly related in that AGA is sure that INTJs use Fe, not Fi. The same way that Pi goes with Je and Pe goes with Ji, Te goes with Fi and Fe goes with Ti. Yet AGA seems certain that Te and Fe go together, which breaks the whole pattern.
There is the brain lateralization theory, which would pair Te and Fe as "left-brain alternatives". If the Te doesn't solve a problem for an INTJ, it could degrade to it's Fi "tandem-mate", or go into the shadow, either as its "double-agent", Ti, or left brain alternative, Fe. Not sure what specific situations would determine which it degrades to, but it probably involves stress level. The more stress, the further down in preference it will resort to.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Does the fact that the system is subjective really make it a load of horse manure?

The same could be said of all philosophical discussion. There's no empirical evidence, but does that deprive it of any value or meaning?

i.e., absence of evidence ain't evidence of absence.

I mean, we're working under the cognitivist umbrella, aren't we? Not the behavioralist?
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Interesting that you have examples without explanation, never mind the potential for confirmation bias.

"Oh, that perfectly describes Orobas, so it MUST be true." :wtf:

The Orobas example was pretty thoroughly discussed in the ENFP bitchslap thread. I said I thought she was an ENTP, then we went through the whole discussion of her defunct Fi. I thought it was convincing.

Sim provided the explanation for the other two. As I said, I don't really know them at all.

I can do the same with a horoscope. Just ask the lovely Ms. Sapienne.

Look up "cold reading" while you're at it.

I've heard, and I know what a cold reading is.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Always nice to have the nuclear option available, isn't it? :)

It's tempting to use at times, but really I'm just pointing out that none of us is on solid ground discussing MBTI, and it would behoove us all not to pretend that we are.

If I discuss/answer a physics question, I have an entire world of knowledge and library of references to make it clear to everyone that my answer is correct, and leave little room for discussion. It's one of the reasons physics discussions are boring for me, in spite of my fascination with the topic.

MBTI is interesting to discuss because there appears to be a good deal of validity to it, but no one is quite able to make any definitive statements about it, beyond well, um, definitions. Where the rubber hits the road, and MBTI is applied on real people, every statement is a guess, every statement has a degree of uncertainty.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
So can we agree that all definitions are subjective?
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
No, because your assertion itself is subjective. :devil:

Yes, but at what point does subjectivity turn into objectivity? Who defines that or is that itself subjective as well? Can anything ever really be objective? If this is the case cant we just get rid of the whole objectivity functions. This is just a subjective opinion though.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Yes, but at what point does subjectivity turn into objectivity? Who defines that or is that itself subjective as well? Can anything ever really be objective? If this is the case cant we just get rid of the whole objectivity functions. This is just a subjective opinion though.

:) I'm just letting you follow your logic to its inevitable conclusion: there is no such thing as objectivity, everything is "just an opinion," and there should be no such thing as "T" or "e" w/r to MBTI and Jungian functions. The only judging function is, therefore, Fi, and the only perceiving functions are Ni and Si.

You're going to have a difficult time selling "there is no such thing as objective truth" to one trained as a physicist. Of course, it's only my opinion that there is such a thing as objective truth, thus any objective statements I make can be dismissed by virtue of their subjectivity.

Solipsism is fun!
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
:) I'm just letting you follow your logic to its inevitable conclusion: there is no such thing as objectivity, everything is "just an opinion," and there should be no such thing as "T" or "e" w/r to MBTI and Jungian functions. The only judging function is, therefore, Fi, and the only perceiving functions are Ni and Si.

You're going to have a difficult time selling "there is no such thing as objective truth" to one trained as a physicist. Of course, it's only my opinion that there is such a thing as objective truth, thus any objective statements I make can be dismissed by virtue of their subjectivity.

Solipsism is fun!

Isnt it fun when you learn a function well enough to understand its use ;)

The only objective thing in this world is really an object is equal to itself. But this wont be realized or deemed true unless the object can be true to itself and true to others.

You can define this however you want, but take this over to subjective feeling and you get the same result in regard to Solipsism.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
To continue...:D...if you deem something as objective truth and it goes against your subjective self you will feel like you are wrong. You will hide what you think is wrong because it makes you feel wrong. The way to go around this is to promote your subjectivity as objectivity and at that point you will feel right.

To me the only thing that is really wrong is that which is not itself.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
To continue...:D...if you deem something as objective truth and it goes against your subjective self you will feel like you are wrong. You will hide what you think is wrong because it makes you feel wrong. The way to go around this is to promote your subjectivity as objectivity and at that point you will feel right.

To me the only thing that is really wrong is that which is not itself.

I think that may be a Ti/Fe perspective.

To me, the objective is objective (Te) and the subjective is subjective (Fi). They might "conflict" but they're really two different things. The conflict is that they can indicate two different conclusions. E.g., I want to eat the ice cream (Fi), but I know it will make me fat (Te). I can hold both thoughts in my head at the same time. It's a dilemma, not hiding the truth from oneself.
 
Top