User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 32

  1. #11
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zergling View Post
    Whether or not toe Keirsey divisions actually work well on their own or not, I'm not surprised to see a different way of classifying S's and N's. If people's minds do work with the functions as described, it's not surprising that functions would interact in unusual ways to produce different behaviour patterns of S's and N's (Or other letter differences), to cause them to be classified differently in some system.
    I think originally in the MBTI, this was the archetype selection (SF, ST, NF, NT).

    I became acquainted with Keirsey almost at the same time I found the MBTI, so I learned later that his four archetypes were his own creation, not the standard.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #12
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I think originally in the MBTI, this was the archetype selection (SF, ST, NF, NT).

    I became acquainted with Keirsey almost at the same time I found the MBTI, so I learned later that his four archetypes were his own creation, not the standard.
    Yes, I've read the Keirsey book and saw how that classification system worked. (While it was fun to read, most other parts of it, like the "directive vs. informative" or different types of intelligence, seemed way to symmetrical to be useful for much.)

  3. #13
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    I'm more inclined to see people as NF, NT, SF, ST myself. I've never understood why it was SJ/SP. Why would it be one way for the Ns and another way for the Ss? I relate to the STs in an entirely different manner than the SFs, and I think the F/T makes that initial distinction first and foremost, well before the J/P.

    Just what's bugged me, I guess. Then again, I'm not a scientist.
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  4. #14
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    I'm more inclined to see people as NF, NT, SF, ST myself. I've never understood why it was SJ/SP. Why would it be one way for the Ns and another way for the Ss? I relate to the STs in an entirely different manner than the SFs, and I think the F/T makes that initial distinction first and foremost, well before the J/P. Just what's bugged me, I guess. Then again, I'm not a scientist.
    Well, Keirsey is INTP (I think) and a theorist, so much of his work is constructed from the theory side of things.

    I think he is grouping off motivations, primarily, here.

    Concrete J's (SJ) = Si as first or second function
    Concrete P's (SP) = Se as first or second function

    Apparently to Keirsey, he saw this as creating more of a separation than the T/F difference. He was looking at "motivations," and concrete J's are more interested in creating the inner map of the world and changing the OUTER world to conform, while concrete P's are more interested in responding to the outer world in the moment -- they change THEMSELVES [i.e., their actions] to accommodate and overcome what is happening in the outer world.

    One imposes on the outer world, one responds to the outer world.

    <Sorry if this is not going anywhere, I have never thought in this direction before... this is very raw!>

    Now if we did this with intuitives, what happens?

    Abstract J's (NJ) = Ni as first or second function
    Abstract P's (NP) = Ne as first or second function

    Is there a useful delineation here? Probably there still is... except that N's generally are more "free" like the SPs are, they have flex because they're looking at possibilities. So perhaps they are harder to distinguish until you begin to look at HOW they interact with the world and what they try to change/enact? (This is why T/F perhaps seems more influential with N's.)

    Sorry, I'm losing my train of thought and need to get back to work, but please feel free to take the ball and run with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zergling View Post
    Yes, I've read the Keirsey book and saw how that classification system worked. (While it was fun to read, most other parts of it, like the "directive vs. informative" or different types of intelligence, seemed way to symmetrical to be useful for much.)
    There is that problem -- it balances out nicely on paper... but does it accurately reflect reality in the most coherent way? I don't know.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #15
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Well, Keirsey is INTP (I think) and a theorist, so much of his work is constructed from the theory side of things.
    Ah, you think so too. After reading the Please Understand Me manual, I sat back and mused, "That man is an INTP. Bless his heart!" *laughs* I pointed out the entries for INTP to my sister because I can see where he feels very misunderstood as a private person. I applaud his efforts on behalf of demystification, for himself and all of us involved. I kinda liked that his INTP-ness came out in spite of the scientific endeavor. Makes it more personal, I think, and more relate-able.



    I think he is grouping off motivations, primarily, here.

    Concrete J's (SJ) = Si as first or second function
    Concrete P's (SP) = Se as first or second function
    I see! Thank you for pointing that out.


    Apparently to Keirsey, he saw this as creating more of a separation than the T/F difference. He was looking at "motivations," and concrete J's are more interested in creating the inner map of the world and changing the OUTER world to conform, while concrete P's are more interested in responding to the outer world in the moment -- they change THEMSELVES [i.e., their actions] to accommodate and overcome what is happening in the outer world.
    Very interesting. I can see the identification between the Js and Ps better now. Exposing the Se/Si does seem to make a big influence on over-all behavior.

    Now if we did this with intuitives, what happens?

    Abstract J's (NJ) = Ni as first or second function
    Abstract P's (NP) = Ne as first or second function

    Is there a useful delineation here? Probably there still is... except that N's generally are more "free" like the SPs are, they have flex because they're looking at possibilities. So perhaps they are harder to distinguish until you begin to look at HOW they interact with the world and what they try to change/enact? (This is why T/F perhaps seems more influential with N's.)

    Sorry, I'm losing my train of thought and need to get back to work, but please feel free to take the ball and run with it.
    That makes perfect sense to me. Thank you for your insight!
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  6. #16
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Is there a useful delineation here? Probably there still is... except that N's generally are more "free" like the SPs are, they have flex because they're looking at possibilities. So perhaps they are harder to distinguish until you begin to look at HOW they interact with the world and what they try to change/enact? (This is why T/F perhaps seems more influential with N's.)
    Actually, I think J/P does make an important difference. I think each type of N, NP and NJ, is actually restrained/free in a different way. There are actually ways I've seen that NP's resemble SJ's, and ways they resemble SP's. Those ways are usually reversed with NJ's.

    To me, it seems that J's resemble one another due to surface order, and P's resemble each other due to surface flexibility. But inside, the reasons for it are very different. S/N and I/E both change it.

  7. #17
    Senior Member alcea rosea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ????
    Posts
    3,665

    Default

    I can see good sides in both classifications: Keirsey & MBTI. Traditionalist SJ's (reliable people) have some personality traits that unite the group and so does SP's (experience seeking people). On the other hand SF's can be identified to be a group (happy people) and so SJ's (serious people).

    My description is not very scientifical (is there such a word?), but it's how I see it.

  8. #18
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    Scientifical. lol

    I've viewed SJs/STs as being the forces of order. (read: not humorless)
    I've viewed the SFs/SPs as being the forces of change. (read: not scatterbrained)

    I suppose the J and P *are* the biggest definition. I can see a big difference between say, my mother (ESTJ) and a friend of mine (ESTP), and less marked a difference between my mother and another friend (ESFJ).

    Food for thought, at any rate.
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  9. #19
    Senior Member alcea rosea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ????
    Posts
    3,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    Scientifical. lol .
    I'm so good! I made up a new word.
    You see my bad english? Me foreigner.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alcearos View Post
    I can see good sides in both classifications: Keirsey & MBTI. Traditionalist SJ's (reliable people) have some personality traits that unite the group and so does SP's (experience seeking people). On the other hand SF's can be identified to be a group (happy people) and so SJ's (serious people).
    I have to write my post all over again because it contained several mistakes in addition to the new word.

    So,
    SJ's = reliable peoplem traditionalists
    SP's = experience seeking, Sensing people

    SF = friendly people
    ST = serious in business, reliable, hard working

  10. #20
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    I like making up new words. May I add your fancy word to my lexicon?
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-10-2012, 05:38 AM
  2. Please tell me how it feels like to use your primary functions in everyday life
    By Lightyear in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 09:49 PM
  3. is God sadistic??? Or is it just me?
    By targobelle in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 198
    Last Post: 07-12-2009, 07:32 PM
  4. Forward thinking - and how it relates to type?
    By TenebrousReflection in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-20-2007, 01:06 AM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-24-2007, 07:35 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