• 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.

Variations within Types

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
What variations do you notice in specific types? Socionics has sub-types for whether someone shows a stronger development of their dominant or their auxiliary. However, for this thread I'm not necessarily looking for sub-types in this sense. Type manifests differently in individuals, but there does seem to be patterns. Much of this probably has to do with functional development, but other theories could explain further differences. For instance, many people use the Enneagram to further distinguish within type. What are your personal observations? Or what theories on this have you come across?
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
What variations do you notice in specific types? Socionics has sub-types for whether someone shows a stronger development of their dominant or their auxiliary. However, for this thread I'm not necessarily looking for sub-types in this sense. Type manifests differently in individuals, but there does seem to be patterns. Much of this probably has to do with functional development, but other theories could explain further differences. For instance, many people use the Enneagram to further distinguish within type. What are your personal observations? Or what theories on this have you come across?

In terms of how MBTI relates to Ennegram.

INTP:5-9
INTJ:1-5
INFP-4-9
ENFP-7-9
ENTP-7-9
INFJ-1-4
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
I don't know much about enneagrams to comment on that. What I do notice in various INTJs is the varying degrees of J vs P preference. A few of them are quite blunt and inflexible when it comes to doing things with other people... going with the flow. However there are others, while they have doubts about something, they are willing to try. I am unsure whether this relates to functional development or just more to do with gender.

As for INFJs, the people I know IRL that could possibly be INFJs are quite different from me in many ways... thus I'm not sure if I can sub-group them.
 

rivercrow

shoshaku jushaku
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,555
MBTI Type
type
Spoto suggests a few different variants: simple, complex, and aberrant.

Yes, if you follow type development theory, then you will have different stages roughly corresponding to stage of life. This whole theory can be pitched, threatened, or augmented if you prefer temperament theories (not just Keirsey's, but all the pairings).

I'd not recommend using Enneagram to "tune" type. It's a different way of looking at the person, not at the MBTI type preference.

Rowan Bayne’s book _Ideas and Evidence_ collects some of the different theories (like Spoto's), but the book isn't near me at the moment. Maybe someone else will oblige with details.

Cheers! Welcome to the forum. :D
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
Spoto suggests a few different variants: simple, complex, and aberrant.

Yes, if you follow type development theory, then you will have different stages roughly corresponding to stage of life. This whole theory can be pitched, threatened, or augmented if you prefer temperament theories (not just Keirsey's, but all the pairings).

I'd not recommend using Enneagram to "tune" type. It's a different way of looking at the person, not at the MBTI type preference.

Rowan Bayne’s book _Ideas and Evidence_ collects some of the different theories (like Spoto's), but the book isn't near me at the moment. Maybe someone else will oblige with details.

Cheers! Welcome to the forum. :D

I have Bayne's book and Spoto's book, but I haven't looked at them recently. I remember Spoto's variants, but I don't remember what he said about them. I'll look them over again.

I'm not overly interested in Enneagram partly because I don't know it very well. I only mentioned it because its popular and many have looked at its connection with typology. I've heard someone say that MBTT is about fundamental personality and Enneagram is about motivations/coping strategies.

And, yeah, I'm interested in type development, but this is more variation in people at different times than variations between people. It could be variations between people the way that people don't all develop the same way or at the same speed.

I 've noticed many INTPs and INFJs on this forum. I'm familiar with differences between INFPs, but I'd like to hear others observations about other specific types. I'm less sure of INFJs, but there seems to be definite kinds of INTPs. INTJs I'm also less certain of. Any thoughts anyone?
 

Littlelostnf

New member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
645
MBTI Type
ENFJ
In terms of how MBTI relates to Ennegram.

INTP:5-9
INTJ:1-5
INFP-4-9
ENFP-7-9
ENTP-7-9
INFJ-1-4

Ummm no ENFJ? What the heck :steam: ...do people always just conveniently forget we're N's...nevermind it's not like I don't know anyway.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
What variations do you notice in specific types? Socionics has sub-types for whether someone shows a stronger development of their dominant or their auxiliary. However, for this thread I'm not necessarily looking for sub-types in this sense. Type manifests differently in individuals, but there does seem to be patterns. Much of this probably has to do with functional development, but other theories could explain further differences. For instance, many people use the Enneagram to further distinguish within type. What are your personal observations? Or what theories on this have you come across?

For myself, I have taken to heart the changes that MBTI are undergoing and researched quite a few other models. Of the ones I've looked at, I believe that the FFM model is the most complete model. As a result, I now use it as my baseline...

MBTI has recently adopted a similar view, going as far as adding the 5th trait for research (neuroticism/reactiveness/whateverispoliticallycorrect). It also has subdivided it's main traits, although I don't agree with the need to keep it so symmetrical, with 6 traits each.

I've come to realize that unlike the functional approach, people have four (five) independent dominant traits, made up of many sub-traits (4-6 in FFM, 6 in MBTI). This offers huge variation since the sub traits, while they tend to bunch together, are susceptible to environmental differences. A good example is how MBTI believes empathy and critical thought are mutually exclusive traits, whereas FFM has a blend of what would make up those two (it blends into 'need to express' and 'seeks engagement').

I don't know if that answers the question, but I don't see variants in type anymore, since that assumes type is accurate. I see variations in people, which requires a more robust model to measure and understand them.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Some random thoughts about "subtypes"... this kind of fits in to ptgatsby's idea of a spectrum model of temperaments...

Idea on type modelling... what does subtypes mean in typology? Instead of trying to divide people up into subgroups per type... would it be more accurate to say depending on what point they're at in function development... they lean towards one ideal "type" more than another?

Think of the 16 types as being special points on a sphere... equidistance apart from one another. At different points in time, people can fall anywhere on that sphere based on their current function use. So overtime, you get an averaged "reading"... mean location of the sphere. Based on where that mean lies, you get your temperament "type". However, at any instance in time, a person can lean towards other types close to their focal temperament. E.g. INFJ... Ni Fe Ne Fi Ti Te Se Si... When they are young... developing Fe & Fi... they might have a tendency to lean towards ENFJ or INFP... when they are developing Ti, they can lean towards INTP or ENTP... and use of Ni Te would seem like INTJ.

Therefore MBTI would be merely a theory... we don't fit people to a temperament... we fit the average tendency of people to a temperament.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Some random thoughts about "subtypes"... this kind of fits in to ptgatsby's idea of a spectrum model of temperaments...

Temperament is insulated from scientific inquiry. At best we can test personality. We cant see temperament for itself because it is within our unconscious psyche. At best we could try and shed light onto it by observing the way it manifests itself through personality. We cant conclusively state that it does not exist because we are not in the position to be passing assessments something so far out of our reach.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Temperament is insulated from scientific inquiry. At best we can test personality. We cant see temperament for itself because it is within our unconscious psyche. At best we could try and shed light onto it by observing the way it manifests itself through personality. We cant conclusively state that it does not exist because we are not in the position to be passing assessments something so far out of our reach.

You're assuming such a thing as temperament has to exist! How do we know/provide evidence that we have that? The data in people so far suggests traits lies within a continuum. Unless you can prove people have discrete temperaments, such can only remain as a theory, not truth.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
You're assuming such a thing as temperament has to exist! How do we know/provide evidence that we have that? The data in people so far suggests traits lies within a continuum. Unless you can prove people have discrete temperaments, such can only remain as a theory, not truth.

We can make enough cogent observations in their personalities that could be linked to the way we've supposed temperament to be. Generally all of this about how we cant systemize human personality, or how Jung's typology is not acceptable rarely tends to be supported with good argument. Those are pure suppositions. Or in others words just thoughtless talk of those who harbor nothing but shallow words under their thin foreheads. I'd love to see one day a good argument for this that is devoid of anecdote, unfounded suppositions or wild appeas to authority.

To revolt against systematic thought means to rebel against reason in itself.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
To revolt against systematic thought means to rebel against reason in itself.

I'm not trying to revolt against systematic thinking... I'm just trying to suggest maybe discrete temperaments aren't the best way to describe people... rather a spectrum may be more fitting.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I'm not trying to revolt against systematic thinking... I'm just trying to suggest maybe discrete temperaments aren't the best way to describe people... rather a spectrum may be more fitting.

Temperaments describe nothing other than themselves. People are about personalities and this typology shall have nothing to do with.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Temperaments describe nothing other than themselves. People are about personalities and this typology shall have nothing to do with.

If typology has nothing to do with people, then temperaments is nothing more than a model... *blinks* if one model have flaws with it... you try to come up with a better one.

Edit: Sorry for derailment Marmalade! It wasn't my intention... I'll be quiet now.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
If typology has nothing to do with people, then temperaments is nothing more than a model... *blinks* if one model have flaws with it... you try to come up with a better one.

Of course type is nothing other than a model... what the hell did you think it was?

Personality is slave to its whims..

Models dont have flaws with it, our perceptions of them do. This is where the inconsistencies come from. Not the models in themselves but our perceptions of them. And of course our perceptions of them will be flawed as we can only observe personality and not the impeccable temperament.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
A good model of personality (in terms of MBTI for the moment) is that the person, or subject, is a glass sphere. On the perimeter is the 8 functions and around them associated "bits" commonly incorperated beneath their banner.

Right now imagine one of those 3 dimensional graphs. It looks like there's a whole bunch of red within the sphere. It stretches closer to those things on the perimeter which it has competance and confidence in. That would be a complete model of the subject/ person according to MBTI.

Also it nicely underlines that the more developed the person, the more "complex" their likely to be.

Where's Mac with that Walt Whitman quote? It fits so well but I can't recall it :(

Edit :-
Realising I could be answering a derailment instead of the origional question (sorry).

The variations between types which I've witnessed I see more as people either developing from their type or lacking it. I've seen more than a few people have their own preferential crutches within their type and stubbornly refuse to walk by themselves. I knew an ENFJ who refused to admit the reality infront of her because it meant she had to compromise her values daily. Eventually something happened where she was stripped of power and could do nothing but accept the reality intruding. She did at one point swear she was going to give up and throw herself from a building or some such. Of course once I'd wound her up the same fiery resistance came through and I told her "don't be stupid, I've never seen you give up once. Not ever". Now it's like a new person almost. She's still just a fesity as before but now only when it's needed. She's context sensitive and much more introspective. Where as previously were you to question her she'd immediately get defensive and try to blow you through all obstacles into next week, she now will admit her failings and reflect.

Anyhow basically she's gone from what was described as "dictatorial" (which is a facet of any ExxJ I'd guess) to a more peaceful person. She's balanced her F & T better and is far less EJ than before. I now don't even go deaf whilst on the phone to her which is a major turn around!!

Is that what you were thinking of Marmalade?
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Ummm no ENFJ? What the heck :steam: ...do people always just conveniently forget we're N's...nevermind it's not like I don't know anyway.
No ENTJ either!

ENFJ... :thinking:.. mostly the instinctual? 1, 9 & 8?
 
Top