User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 68

  1. #31
    Yeah, I can fly. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stellar renegade View Post
    It just sounds like abstract logic to me.
    It's the Lenore Thomson wiki, so it's all abstract mystical bullshit. There are better Ti definitions out there, but the nuts-and-bolts definition of it is that Ti tries to come up with its own definition of everything, tries to make personal sense of the world according to its own logical framework. Te by comparison relies on observable facts and evidence -- for Te, if something is not proven to exist, it doesn't exist.

    In any case, I find Keirseyan typology to be vaguely annoying not for its own merits, but because everyone uses it interchangeably to MBTI. Being one type in Keirsey doesn't mean that type matches your actual cognitive profile -- which means you might be a different type in MBTI. I'm an Inventor on Keirsey, but my actual MBTI type is most likely ESTJ, or ENFP.

    Quote Originally Posted by stellar renegade View Post
    Rationals (NTs) tear things apart to understand and exploit them.
    NTPs tear things apart to understand them. NTJs do to exploit them.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Teacher (Idyllic), ESE-IEI (Si-ESFj), SLue|I|, Sanguine-Melancholy
    Sage, True Neutral (Chaotic Good), Type III Anti-Hero
    Inventive > Artistic > Leisurely > Dramatic
    7w6 > 4w3 > 9w8, weakside sp/so

    Dark Worker (Sacrificing)
    Freewheeling Designer

    Hayekian Asshole


  2. #32
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by angelhair45 View Post
    Interesting. I'm an NF, but I definitely relate to the NT classification the most. I am a sorter to the extreme as much as it bothers me sometimes. I can go on for days about differences between things.
    Agreed.

    I related to Keirsey's NT much more than Keirsey's NF, especially as a child. It's become more even over time, but still...

  3. #33
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stellar renegade View Post
    It just sounds like abstract logic to me.

    I think the crux of the matter is that in order to be really good at strategy or abstract logic, you need to be able to differentiate between concepts. But in order to be really good at diplomacy and abstract emotional processing, you need to be able to integrate concepts and approach things in a much more holistic fashion.

    Rationals (NTs) tear things apart to understand and exploit them.
    Idealists (NFs) bring things together to heal and produce cooperation.
    OK, that's a good explanation that clarifies this.
    Like in my example, I did try to integrate the theories, but only after breaking them down to their basic components (the "factors" of the "matrices"), to understand them, and then correlating those, and then putting it all back together into one underlying system essentially used under different names.

    The NF apparently starts out bringing things together, and it's a totally different process for a totally different reason.

    This is what I figured.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    NTPs tear things apart to understand them. NTJs do to exploit them.
    That would seem to figure as well.
    So I guess likewise,
    NFP's bring things together to heal and NFJ's bring things together to produce cooperation.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  4. #34
    PEST that STEPs on PETS stellar renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    It's the Lenore Thomson wiki, so it's all abstract mystical bullshit. There are better Ti definitions out there, but the nuts-and-bolts definition of it is that Ti tries to come up with its own definition of everything, tries to make personal sense of the world according to its own logical framework. Te by comparison relies on observable facts and evidence -- for Te, if something is not proven to exist, it doesn't exist.
    That does make more sense, although I'm still not inclined towards the functions because it seems like they're trying to talk about something internal that's supposed to be perceived. Not sure how well I jive with that or not. Unless it's actually centered in the brain or something.

    I think your definition of Ti can just be given for the behavior of a thinking/probing type.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    In any case, I find Keirseyan typology to be vaguely annoying not for its own merits, but because everyone uses it interchangeably to MBTI. Being one type in Keirsey doesn't mean that type matches your actual cognitive profile -- which means you might be a different type in MBTI. I'm an Inventor on Keirsey, but my actual MBTI type is most likely ESTJ, or ENFP.
    That's true. I consider that to be because MBTI is so confusing that half the people who use it don't even know what their type is. I've always felt like Keirsey wrote the best descriptions from the beginning even before I drank the kool-aid. He uses an integrated, holistic approach where you can just see the picture of what a person's like using ordinary terms. It's much more realistic and practical in my opinion. Therefore it's harder to get confused, and people don't get near as mixed-up on their type in my experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    NTPs tear things apart to understand them. NTJs do to exploit them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    So I guess likewise,
    NFP's bring things together to heal and NFJ's bring things together to produce cooperation.
    I think those make sense.
    -stellar renegade
    coo-oo-ooool this madness down,
    stop it right on tiiiiime!


    Badass Promoter ESTPs:
    [sigpic][/sigpic]

  5. #35
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Keirsey's types wouldn't even exist without the cognitive theories that preceded it. He's extrapolating from all of that and/or working with it closely. While I appreciate it (and it helps me differentiate myself from the SP temperment, for example), it can oversimplify matters too. MBTI is worth investing your time in as well, and it's only going to enrich your understanding or appreciation of the Keirseyan model. It's not all that different. To think there's really no such thing as "Ti" is like saying there's no such thing as a "liver" or a "lung", even though you acknowledge there are humans. I mean, if you acknowledge that Keirsey's INTP is an actual type, then you can't possibly dismiss the idea of Ti.

  6. #36
    Yeah, I can fly. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stellar renegade View Post
    That's true. I consider that to be because MBTI is so confusing that half the people who use it don't even know what their type is. I've always felt like Keirsey wrote the best descriptions from the beginning even before I drank the kool-aid. He uses an integrated, holistic approach where you can just see the picture of what a person's like using ordinary terms. It's much more realistic and practical in my opinion. Therefore it's harder to get confused, and people don't get near as mixed-up on their type in my experience.
    I tend not to like that it's too shallow, but it still is more useful. On MBTI, the problem with function theory is more the fact that Jung's original descriptions were so mystical and vague, that they were left open to a thousand different interpretations.

    Based on keirsey though, I am a definite ENTP. You're right about that much, it's easier to be certain of your type there.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Teacher (Idyllic), ESE-IEI (Si-ESFj), SLue|I|, Sanguine-Melancholy
    Sage, True Neutral (Chaotic Good), Type III Anti-Hero
    Inventive > Artistic > Leisurely > Dramatic
    7w6 > 4w3 > 9w8, weakside sp/so

    Dark Worker (Sacrificing)
    Freewheeling Designer

    Hayekian Asshole


  7. #37
    Senior Member angelhair45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFp
    Posts
    312

    Default

    Lenore Thomson may come across as abstract and mystical, but I find way more BS in this sorting method than I find in her work . I haven't read Kiersey's books yet, but Lenore Thomson's book is solid.

    So this sorting method seems like bunk to me. I think this method over simplifies it and doesn't really tell much at all. I looked up Kiersey's definition of ENTP and ENFP to see if it differed from my personal definition, but it did not. According to his definitions I certainly am an ENFP, there is no way I'm an ENTP. Unless I defy definition, and then what would be the point? Therefore I'm thinking the sorting method thing is not a valid means to verify type.
    http://bohemianextrovert.wordpress.com/
    Please excuse the long drawn out ramble above.
    I have to hear what I've said before I know what I think.

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

  8. #38
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    I find Lenore Thompson's work to be far more illuminating than Keirsey.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  9. #39
    PEST that STEPs on PETS stellar renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Keirsey's types wouldn't even exist without the cognitive theories that preceded it. He's extrapolating from all of that and/or working with it closely.
    It sounds like you are vastly uninformed about KTT, which is okay because at first I was, too.

    Keirsey bases his ideas off of temperament studies throughout history, especially alot of theories in the early 20th century on human behavior. They all formulated the same basic four temperaments but added a new aspect at each turn. Myers also divided up her types into four groupings like we find here.

    Eventually he abandoned the four letter typing system to focus on other traits (temperament, utilitarian vs. cooperative, roles, expressive vs. attentive). So he never based anything on cognitive theories which he believes are bunk because we can't think about our thoughts.

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    While I appreciate it (and it helps me differentiate myself from the SP temperment, for example), it can oversimplify matters too. MBTI is worth investing your time in as well, and it's only going to enrich your understanding or appreciation of the Keirseyan model.
    Believe me, I used to be obsessed with it back in the day and researched it as much as possible, along with coming up with my own thoughts on it. I even checked out Jung's book that included Psychological Types.

    The problem came when I started changing alot. I figured I was just changing type, and then I wanted to make a better, more complex quiz based on the functions. But then those "functions" started to become indistinguishable. I couldn't really even understand where one left off and the other began. I started asking questions like, "What's the difference between thinking and feeling?" Eventually I just stopped thinking about personality theory altogether.

    Fast-forward a few years, to more than a year ago when I was getting ready to move up here to Seattle and wanted to immerse myself into information about my type so I could have that extra boost. I didn't really find anything until I realized I could join Keirsey's message board which was more interactive to me. His son posts there and to my relief he was saying things like, "We all have emotions," and that his father makes distinctions more along the lines of soft-hearted versus tough-minded, which was the original distinction that Jung based his typology on but took to a mystical extreme.

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    It's not all that different. To think there's really no such thing as "Ti" is like saying there's no such thing as a "liver" or a "lung", even though you acknowledge there are humans.
    The problem is that you can't quantify those things. It becomes a confusing mish-mash. This is because people are integrated beings. A little of this, a little of that. But in order to be an individual at all, all of the ingredients that make up a person have to be inseparable aspects that combine into one thing.

    I mean, how long would you really live if your liver wasn't working very well? Or your lungs? If all of the functions are that important, then nobody could live with their shadow functions so weakened as people claim they are.

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I mean, if you acknowledge that Keirsey's INTP is an actual type, then you can't possibly dismiss the idea of Ti.
    It's not "Keirsey's INTP." Yes, he did adopt the letterings from Myers for a bit but then abandoned them. They're still on the site for cross-reference, though, since so many know about MBTI and are ignorant of KTT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    I tend not to like that it's too shallow, but it still is more useful. On MBTI, the problem with function theory is more the fact that Jung's original descriptions were so mystical and vague, that they were left open to a thousand different interpretations.
    Exactly.

    What do you mean, more shallow? Not that I necessarily take offense, but I'm not sure what you mean. MBTI just seems like a confusing swamp of vague notions that aren't very helpful at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Based on keirsey though, I am a definite ENTP. You're right about that much, it's easier to be certain of your type there.
    Yeah, that's why I use it!

    Maybe an abstract Keirseyite would be better able to help get the idea across. I just accept it because it makes sense and it works.

    Quote Originally Posted by angelhair45 View Post
    Lenore Thomson may come across as abstract and mystical, but I find way more BS in this sorting method than I find in her work . I haven't read Kiersey's books yet, but Lenore Thomson's book is solid.
    Hey, to each his own.

    Quote Originally Posted by angelhair45 View Post
    So this sorting method seems like bunk to me. I think this method over simplifies it and doesn't really tell much at all. I looked up Kiersey's definition of ENTP and ENFP to see if it differed from my personal definition, but it did not. According to his definitions I certainly am an ENFP, there is no way I'm an ENTP. Unless I defy definition, and then what would be the point? Therefore I'm thinking the sorting method thing is not a valid means to verify type.
    Well, I'll believe that you're an ENFP, I was just offering up a quick guess because the only thing I know about you is that you said you like to tear ideas apart and analyze them. That sounds Rational to me, and with all the confusion about type here, who knows?

    I never said that the sorting method should determine type. Far from it. A person's type should be determined by a full view of their entire life and their most consistent habits.
    -stellar renegade
    coo-oo-ooool this madness down,
    stop it right on tiiiiime!


    Badass Promoter ESTPs:
    [sigpic][/sigpic]

  10. #40
    Yeah, I can fly. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stellar renegade View Post
    So he never based anything on cognitive theories which he believes are bunk because we can't think about our thoughts.
    I disagree. Our thoughts exist, we are aware of them happening and what they are, and thus we can dissect them. Or extrapolate from what they result in.

    What do you mean, more shallow? Not that I necessarily take offense, but I'm not sure what you mean. MBTI just seems like a confusing swamp of vague notions that aren't very helpful at all.
    Shallow as in, they only explain basic surface behavior. They aren't precise about what lies underneath that behavior. I do think that Keirsey is very good for casual users, and as I mentioned what pisses me off is the perceived overlap between it an MBTI (I have the same problem with Socionics), but to me as a type enthusiast, it's just... boring (at least taken by itself). So yeah, I'm an Inventor. Now what?

    So it's pretty much the same problem I have with the Big 5: It's too simple, too superficial. I could tell you someone's SLOAN type within a minute of meeting them if I ask the right questions, and I'm actually a bit surprised anyone actually needs to take the test.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Teacher (Idyllic), ESE-IEI (Si-ESFj), SLue|I|, Sanguine-Melancholy
    Sage, True Neutral (Chaotic Good), Type III Anti-Hero
    Inventive > Artistic > Leisurely > Dramatic
    7w6 > 4w3 > 9w8, weakside sp/so

    Dark Worker (Sacrificing)
    Freewheeling Designer

    Hayekian Asshole


Similar Threads

  1. MBTI+: Political personality traits, temperaments, and learning styles
    By Sparkykun in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Yesterday, 09:53 PM
  2. 10 musical artists/groups you're *really* into atm
    By disregard in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: 12-03-2017, 12:47 AM
  3. [MBTItm] Should ISTP and ESFP both be SP Artisians grouped within the same temperament or not?
    By RaptorWizard in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-19-2013, 03:53 AM
  4. Temperaments (Social Styles)
    By sdalek in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-05-2009, 09:30 PM
  5. Minor overlapping tendencies in temperament groups?
    By Athenian200 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-26-2007, 01:42 PM

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