• 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.

Too much focus on introversion/extroversion of functions

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
The title pretty much says it all.

Seems that everyone has this idea that the introverted and extroverted version of each function are SOOOO different.

But really, most of the time you can't even tell the difference. It's easy to label an instance of cognition N, S, T, or F (because they're totally clearly defined and don't overlap). There's no room for grey area. But with Ti vs. Te, for example, how the hell can you tell the difference if you just observe one instance?

What I mean is this. Say someone says "2 + 2 = 4" and someone else responds "oh, that's true." Well, that's clearly an instance of the responder using Thinking. How would you know whether that person is using their internal standard to come to that conclusion or the external standard? You literally cannot possibly know.

One way to distinguish is to observe the Thinking user over time and watch whether they make more conclusions relevant to the current situation or to themselves. But the only way to see that is for them to make a conclusion that CLEARLY favors relevance in one direction. And honestly, most instances of Thinking aren't clearly in one direction like that.

I really want people to think of the functions as just N, S, T, and F. Introversion and extroversion of those functions are only important to discuss when they're descriptively useful of a behavior. I'd say most of the time, at least when discussing a relatively short scope of behavior, they're not that relevant.

I see people get way too wrapped up in these differences...the problem is that distinguishing between I/E is soooo much more susceptible to confirmation bias. I hear stuff like -- "Oh, he actually was being Fi to care about other people in that situation because it's relevant to his psychological state" or "oh, that was Te because he acted out his truth conclusion or said it out loud" or whatever. It's just nonsense. Unfalsifiable hypotheses.

The cool thing about MBTI is that you can use it a bunch of different ways. But it's up to the users of the system to figure out how deep to go in each situation. And it seems like many of y'all forget that MBTI is only as "true" as it's descriptive validity. It's not as character-defining as the common belief on this site seems to imply.

/rant
 

Quinlan

Intriguing....
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
9w1
So my wife (ESFJ) and I (ISFP) are the same type in this instance? FSNT?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Yeah after re-reading that post I knew people were going to misunderstand me.

If your goal is to fully type someone with all four letters, then you must choose which direction is preferred for each function...but the goal of MBTI shouldn't be JUST to type someone.

The goal of MBTI should be to describe behaviors with efficient terminology. I'm just saying that a lot of people think they HAVE to define whether a function is introverted or extroverted just to assert something about it.

It's fine to just call a behavior F instead of Fe or Fi. Because F can be quite descriptively useful. Sometimes people get so stuck in trying to choose between Fe and Fi (or whatever function) that they allow the MBTI system to convolute their thoughts instead of clarifying them.


So yes, in certain descriptive conversation situations, your wife and you can be described similarly, or as in the same category. Each conversation has a different scope, so its up to everyone to figure out how deep they want to go into MBTI to efficiently discuss their ideas. My point is that there seems to be a lot of failure in that area. People delve too deep into MBTI in situations where it's not useful and instead just confuse.s everything. This happens much more with I/E directions than other parts of the system which I think are much more simple and useful to talk about a lot of the time.
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
Yeah...I don't use the functions of MBTI much because of that. Socionics is really for introverted vs. extroverted functions, and even then it's still similar. I'd prefer to keep MBTI more on a letter basis myself.

I already said that on another thread you had I think...so this is just for other posters I guess...
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I have the opposite complaint.... so much focus on the 4 letter dichotomies lends to stereotyping and often is a result of poor understanding of the functions. Often on tests, I score INTP because the "F" questions sound like Fe and not Fi. Between Fe & Ti I relate more to Ti, because I use introverted judging (Ji) and I think that would be more readily apparent than pinpointing whether it's a Thinking or Feeling function, until you got to know me more & then it would probably become evident that I use Fi. I'm talking about in-person impressions also, as far as demeanor and expressing oneself goes.

I think MBTI created the 4 letter system (using J/P as patterns to determine function orientation) in order type other people and put Jung's theory in laymen's terms, but it also oversimplified everything. There's pros and cons to making it so simple, with one of the cons being it can make some people test the wrong type.
 

Amethyst

¡MI TORTA!
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
2,191
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
What happened to the ambiverts? Why can't I be an ANTP?
But then everyone would probably call themselves an ambivert and make up their own things, seems chaotic.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I have the opposite complaint.... so much focus on the 4 letter dichotomies lends to stereotyping and often is a result of poor understanding of the functions. Often on tests, I score INTP because the "F" questions sound like Fe and not Fi. Between Fe & Ti I relate more to Ti, because I use introverted judging (Ji) and I think that would be more readily apparent than pinpointing whether it's a Thinking or Feeling function, until you got to know me more & then it would probably become evident that I use Fi. I'm talking about in-person impressions also, as far as demeanor and expressing oneself goes.

I think MBTI created the 4 letter system (using J/P as patterns to determine function orientation) in order type other people and put Jung's theory in laymen's terms, but it also oversimplified everything. There's pros and cons to making it so simple, with one of the cons being it can make some people test the wrong type.

Well I have that complaint too.

But I think you misunderstand me. Differentiating between Thinking and Feeling (the functions) is super easy. Deciding whether someone prefers one over the other is a whole different question. There is no grey area between Thinking and Feeling. There is only grey area about what a person's preference is.

The problem is, there IS grey area in differentiating between the functions Fi and Fe, for example. That's why I think, when we're JUST talking about functions, we shouldn't really think of Fe and Fi as different. They're only different mentalities a Feeling user could have.

This has been confounded beyond belief, so I don't even know if my point is coming through.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well I have that complaint too.

But I think you misunderstand me. Differentiating between Thinking and Feeling (the functions) is super easy. Deciding whether someone prefers one over the other is a whole different question. There is no grey area between Thinking and Feeling. There is only grey area about what a person's preference is.

The problem is, there IS grey area in differentiating between the functions Fi and Fe, for example. That's why I think, when we're JUST talking about functions, we shouldn't really think of Fe and Fi as different. They're only different mentalities a Feeling user could have.

This has been confounded beyond belief, so I don't even know if my point is coming through.

IDK, maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I still don't agree with this. If there is overlap in Fe & Fi being both F, I see the same for Ti & Fi, because they are both Ji. In which case, combining Fi & Fe as F is just one way people choose to categorize the functions.

There are ways in which behavior and expressions of Fe & Fi overlap, but I'd argue the same for other function comparisons/contrasts. I can see many ways that Te and Fe are similar as far as how they work and how they appear. It's hard to pinpoint the exact thought process behind what people do/say, period.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
IDK, maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I still don't agree with this. If there is overlap in Fe & Fi being both F, I see the same for Ti & Fi, because they are both Ji. In which case, combining Fi & Fe as F is just one way people choose to categorize the functions.

There are ways in which behavior and expressions of Fe & Fi overlap, but I'd argue the same for other function comparisons/contrasts. I can see many ways that Te and Fe are similar as far as how they work and how they appear. It's hard to pinpoint the exact thought process behind what people do/say, period.

T and F do not overlap whatsoever. If it's a value-label, it's F, if it's a truth-label it's T. I'm not saying it's easy to tell which is which in all situations, especially because you need all four functions to DO anything. But you can always break it down and figure out which parts are which, at least in terms of N, S, T, and F. You cannot do this consistently with Fi vs. Fe, though. It just isn't the same kind of conclusion to make.

If you can distinguish truth-labels from value-labels, you can distinguish T and F. But introversion and extroversion of a specific function can have multiple consistent analyses -- for example, saying "that's bad" out loud could easily be an instance of either Feeling function (Fe or Fi). But it MUST be F and not T. There is no way to call that T. (unless you want to be wrong)
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
There is overlap in Fi/Fe for me because my own personal values do, in fact, care about people and the world as a whole. What would be the point of values or idealistic tendencies that were all centered on myself or things that had no consequence to others? What I can't be is as emotionally involved or relevant or drop my guard in some of the ways that Fe can. Not to mention it's exhausting. There's a different flavor to it somehow. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding it. I see the bridge between Ti as well, because there is a need for clarity in my principles, and a sense of universalism. I guess I just don't come about them or investigate in the same way as Ti.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Exactly. If you're watching an INFP for a while, they'll definitely do some things that seem Fi and some that seem Fe. (More that seem Fi, I would think :))

The trap that I see people falling into, though, is confirmation bias-ing themselves into labeling all uses of Feeling from that person as Fi (because you can always come up with a narrative that could explain how it could be Fi). The problem is, you could probably describe a lot of those behaviors as Fe just as easily. People tend not to call the behaviors Fe, though, because they want MBTI to be all nice and neat. That's the problem I'm trying to articulate here.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
So my wife (ESFJ) and I (ISFP) are the same type in this instance? FSNT?
No, because your dominant orientation is internal, and hers is external. So you may share the same function preference, however, it't the different orientation that makes you different. It also affects the other functions, which for you are reegated to the external world, and for her, the internal world. With the exception of the tertiary defense aligning that function with the the dominant orientation.

This way of looking at it simply associates "attitude" with the ego, rather than with the functions. But it is describing the same effect.
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Exactly. If you're watching an INFP for a while, they'll definitely do some things that seem Fi and some that seem Fe. (More that seem Fi, I would think :))

The trap that I see people falling into, though, is confirmation bias-ing themselves into labeling all uses of Feeling from that person as Fi (because you can always come up with a narrative that could explain how it could be Fi). The problem is, you could probably describe a lot of those behaviors as Fe just as easily. People tend not to call the behaviors Fe, though, because they want MBTI to be all nice and neat. That's the problem I'm trying to articulate here.

Well, it would look Fe from the outside but internally isn't it still Fi making the decision?

Rough example :
Say I love sharks and think killing sharks for food is not a nice thing. I attend a dinner at a friend's house and he is serving shark's fin soup.

If I take a stand and berate him for it, it's Fi?
If I think that it's a courtesy to the host to eat whatever is offered, is it Fe?
If I take a stand and just avoid eating the soup, it's Fi/Fe?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Well, it would look Fe from the outside but internally isn't it still Fi making the decision?

Rough example :
Say I love sharks and think killing sharks for food is not a nice thing. I attend a dinner at a friend's house and he is serving shark's fin soup.

If I take a stand and berate him for it, it's Fi?
If I think that it's a courtesy to the host to eat whatever is offered, is it Fe?
If I take a stand and just avoid eating the soup, it's Fi/Fe?

See all three of those situations could be explained in a narrative of Fi or Fe. That's why I think people should stop trying so hard to make it ONLY one of them. Instead, why not just call it F? Seems much simpler and doesn't lead to all the confusion of trying to distinguish between the two, which doesn't even help in terms of descriptive usefulness anyway.

I'm not saying just call it F in every situation. But if you're looking at a more human-level-interaction that has all the complexities of interpersonal relationships, Fe and Fi may be indistinguishable a lot of the time. So, when you're having a hard time distinguishing, why not just give up and use your energy describing what you mean with words outside of the MBTI language? It would sure as hell be more efficient than sitting there for five minutes trying to justify why that action was introverted or extroverted.

You're right to be confused about whether those things are Fi or Fe. Because it's damn confusing. And it's a part of MBTI analysis I wish people would just give up on and stop wasting time trying to label everything so damn specifically.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
T and F do not overlap whatsoever. If it's a value-label, it's F, if it's a truth-label it's T. I'm not saying it's easy to tell which is which in all situations, especially because you need all four functions to DO anything. But you can always break it down and figure out which parts are which, at least in terms of N, S, T, and F. You cannot do this consistently with Fi vs. Fe, though. It just isn't the same kind of conclusion to make.

If you can distinguish truth-labels from value-labels, you can distinguish T and F. But introversion and extroversion of a specific function can have multiple consistent analyses -- for example, saying "that's bad" out loud could easily be an instance of either Feeling function (Fe or Fi). But it MUST be F and not T. There is no way to call that T. (unless you want to be wrong)

True or False is not the same as truth, Evan. Truth and fairness are what a lot of people value. Truth and fairness should not automatically go to the T side on a test, but they usually do. Context matters.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Well, it would look Fe from the outside but internally isn't it still Fi making the decision?

Rough example :
Say I love sharks and think killing sharks for food is not a nice thing. I attend a dinner at a friend's house and he is serving shark's fin soup.

If I take a stand and berate him for it, it's Fi?
If I think that it's a courtesy to the host to eat whatever is offered, is it Fe?
If I take a stand and just avoid eating the soup, it's Fi/Fe?

Fwiw, 3 is more like me... I guess I'm polite about declining things like that. Maybe when I was younger, I might have an issue over something similar and inject some commentary about it. There comes a point that you just shoot yourself in the foot for that kind of stuff though. I suppose the Fe side is telling me to pick my battles right.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
T and F do not overlap whatsoever. If it's a value-label, it's F, if it's a truth-label it's T. I'm not saying it's easy to tell which is which in all situations, especially because you need all four functions to DO anything. But you can always break it down and figure out which parts are which, at least in terms of N, S, T, and F. You cannot do this consistently with Fi vs. Fe, though. It just isn't the same kind of conclusion to make.

If you can distinguish truth-labels from value-labels, you can distinguish T and F. But introversion and extroversion of a specific function can have multiple consistent analyses -- for example, saying "that's bad" out loud could easily be an instance of either Feeling function (Fe or Fi). But it MUST be F and not T. There is no way to call that T. (unless you want to be wrong)

There are many reasons a person may make such a statement aloud that has nothing to do with either of the F functions. :doh:

T and F can overlap when it comes to their orientation - that was my point you conveniently overlooked. It's not simply whether one is value or logic based (drop the inaccurate T=truth crap, UGH). Te & Fe use some kind of external measure for their judgments, which is a LOT to have in common.

Again, what you're saying is only one way to categorize the functions, a way which MBTI already utilizes and which has obvious flaws.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Okay, I was just in the shower and I figured out how to actually articulate my point here.

Something that is Feeling is by definition not Thinking, Sensing, or Intuition.

But something that is based on the internal standard does NOT necessarily oppose something that is based on the external standard or vice versa. So an instance of Fi can literally look the same as an instance of Fe as long as the internal and external standards are compatible. And often, they are compatible.

------------------------

Using your shark fin example, here are Fi and Fe explanations for all three instances:
1. "If I take a stand and berate him for it"
Fe - it's important to make a stand so that opinions may be affected
Fi - it's important to make a stand because I stand up for what I believe

2. "If I think that it's a courtesy to the host to eat whatever is offered"
Fe - it's important to send the message that I am polite
Fi - it's important to me to be polite

3. "If I take a stand and just avoid eating the soup"
Fe - I don't want to affect the environment in a negative way, so I won't eat the soup.
Fi - I don't want to compromise myself, so I won't eat the soup.

My point here is that there is no way to know just by observing those behaviors in someone else whether they are basing their decisions on the internal or external standard. Therefore there is no way to distinguish between Fe and Fi in those situations. Therefore trying to distinguish is just a waste of time and effort. You'd be better served conversation-wise to use other adjectives relevant to the point you want to make. No reason to use the 8 function model here at all. It's just not within the scope of the 8 function model to conclude something like this.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
yeahhh. this has occurred to me especially when taking functional tests. like, Fe and Fi, they're kind of muddled. sometimes you can do something for a Fi reason that looks like Fe, or vice versa. or it's hard to tell which it is. or maybe it's just both.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Another thing, consider that civilization has been going on for thousands of years.. some societies and/or creeds that might have a general "accepted" norm of behavior or whatnot would be recognized as valid on both Fi or Fe levels. So it's not like only Fe is aware of them, and that Fi is constantly trying to reinvent the wheel. Fi isn't saying "Yeah, I am an individualistic jerk to whatever is accepted as a social value." There are departing points, but I don't think it's usually that dramatic.
 
Top