Type tutorial: the Super Short version

[Eric B]

MBTI Type: The Super Short version

How does anyone like this new condensed version of my pages on type?
I always try to make them short as possible, but as I add more information I discover, they get bigger. I know some people have read them and enjoyed, but for a lot of people, it is information overload.

Well, I had joined the NYC chapter of Association for Psychological Type. They accept submissions from any member for their newsletter, and I figured that could be another place I could share my ideas and perspectives. But there was a 250 word limit, so I really had to squeeze them all down. One was published already, and it will take time before the others are. I had been thinking that these would make for good readable portions that give enough info to get a basic understanding. So since they recently told me that submissions remain the property of the authors, so I got the idea of putting them together into a shorter version of Temperament Part 2: The MBTI's 16 types and Cognitive Functions which would hopefully be more digestible to everyone.

It follows the same basic outline, starting with basic type (one article), and then going into archetype (which I proposed in three parts as it could not be squeezed into 250), and then, the MBTI-FIRO correlation (which was the one published, and since that topic needed more information, I re-expanded it a bit).

Only 15KB! Any new info I'll add to the other pages, since this oe is for the basic concepts!
I guess it's better to start small, thend then if the reader wants more, the links to the more advanced stuff are there.

So does this help anyone who has not understood my concepts?

I also put my tutorial on the archetypes up on its own page:

Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type (Beebe model)

 

[wolfy]

I like how you pointed out they were perspectives and it did give me some clarity on Fi. And I like the layout. I like your use of an advance organizer. I will give it another read later.

 

[Eric B]

The "perspective" term I got from Sim. Yeah; that really cleared things up.

Fi was one that was particularly thrown around in terms of behaviors; pretty common and universal ones at that ("valuing", likes and dislikes, etc., and this based in part unfortunately on Berens and Nardi's attempts to simplify the functions) leading many to struggle between FP and TP.

 

[wolfy]

The "perspective" term I got from Sim. Yeah; that really cleared things up.

Fi was one that was particularly thrown around in terms of behaviors; pretty common and universal ones at that ("valuing", likes and dislikes, etc., and this based in part unfortunately on Berens and Nardi's attempts to simplify the functions) leading many to struggle between FP and TP.

Yeah, I've had a lot of confusion over FP or TP.

 

[proteanmix]

Why do you switch between "Life must be..." and "The environment must be..." when explaining function perspectives? Is that important or just how you phrased it?

One seems to be more immediate and situational ("The environment must be/contain") and the other ("Life must be") seems more broad.

That's as far as I've read. I'll prolly have more questions after I read it all.

 

[Eric B]

I was trying to convey the difference between the internal and external perspectives. The environment is external, of course, and "life" was meant to convey the "universal" aspect of internal judgment, where the "...to me" part of it was the personal aspect.

 

[wolfy]

There is a typo on people in the Ni description. Phlegmatic sanguine works for me as an isfp. In Lenore Thompson's book she talks about isfp using Ti as an alternative, I can see that in myself in situations that call for it. What do you think of that theory?

 

[Eric B]

I don't go into that in the new short version. That is more advanced
So that is in the longer version.

Yes, that is an alternative method of degradation. The right brain alternative, where we keep our dominant orientation, and rational or irrational processing, but switch the actual function when the normally preferred function doesn't solve the problem.

It does not contradict Beebe's model, as that is about specific archetypes. The Crow's Nests are a totally different order of archetype, basically, that likely sirface under different circumstances.