User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Solecism

  1. #11
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    Your loopholes refers to personalities which are beyond the descriptions of the MBTI. The XXXX was one example. A person to whom the polarities does not matter - does it make him less of a person, does it mean he does not have a personality?

    That was how you derived the 50% chance of an XXXX, wasn't it? Either a personality can be described by the MBTI. Or not at all. But it does not mean he does not exist. Loopholes due to limitations.
    Is that approach too much all or none? Let's do away with what personality means theoretically for a moment. Personality is simply descriptors that describe a person's general tendencies. I meant that for personality traits. MBTI gives you 4 traits... 4 traits might not adequately describe a person. It doesn't necessarily mean though that one of those traits might not fit the person.

    And the probability is really irrelevent. Numbers are only meaningful in relation to the question at hand. Or rather, the numbers only mean something when you answer the question in a specific way. The boundaries of the XXXX problem has not been formally defined. You get out of it what you've put in. Put in a hand-wavy question... get a hand-wavy answer.

  2. #12
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    lastrailway.

    In the search for the answer you come to data that is outside of the limitations of the question.
    Yes.

    This is the subject of the thread.

  3. #13
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    Limitations. Wildcat, you're coming from this from the XXXX thread, I believe?

    The MBTI can only describe personalities if they exist within the 4 dichotomies it defines.

    Hence the question is a set ground, and as far as answers (personalities), can fit within the frame of the MBTI polarities, we will be included. This means we're subject to the framework of the question.

    Your loopholes refers to personalities which are beyond the descriptions of the MBTI. The XXXX was one example. A person to whom the polarities does not matter - does it make him less of a person, does it mean he does not have a personality?

    That was how you derived the 50% chance of an XXXX, wasn't it? Either a personality can be described by the MBTI. Or not at all. But it does not mean he does not exist. Loopholes due to limitations.
    Yes. Indirectly.

    I have used the word "loophole" to describe an MBTI type.
    I have no objection to the assumption that there exists 16 loopholes.

    In the beginning, when I began the search more than twenty years ago, I did not know a thing about the Jung typology. I used numbers which form geometric patterns. I began with a vertical and a horizontal continuum. Deriving from these I fixed the IP/EJ and the EP/IJ continuum.

    I came across the N/S continuum and what I called the R/D.. (R for Reflection (=Ti) and D for Demonstration of Feeling (=Fe). My mistake was to fix them with the position. The Te/Fi I nailed down diagonally opposite.
    Then it was easy to derive the others, and to find their fixed positions.

    Because I had fixed all of the positions I could derive only 8 loopholes within the multiple X continuum. If I had not fixed all of the positions I could have had all the 16 loopholes.

    Are they fixed? Fifty per cent is fixed. Not 100 per cent as I thought.

    I lost fifty percent of the loopholes but I did not ignore the multiple X continuum. The creators of the MBTI had all the 16 loopholes but they did not get the multiple X continuum.

    You can understand my interest when I came across the MBTI in the summer of 2005. I saw what I should have seen twenty years ago.

    The loopholes personalities can be described by the MBTI.
    The others, as you say: Not at all by any definition of exactness.

    Half and half.

  4. #14
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    So what you mean is that the types indicate tendencies, and may not reflect exactly how people are, because it's only a rough measurement/estimate?
    The types are not a rough measurement. I find them exact.
    There is more to the system than the 16 types.

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