User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 16

  1. #1
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Reviews of Type Books: Read First Post

    What this thread is for:
    Post your reviews of Type books in this thread. We'll add a navigation link of titles to the Table of Contents in this post so people can easily find reviews of particular books.

    What should be included in a review:
    • General data:
      • Title (preferably in the Title field of the post)
      • Author/s or Editor/s
      • ISBN (if possible), or other similar information
    • The actual review:
      • An overview of the book, what purpose it serves (i.e., strengths and weaknesses / usefulness)
      • Any critical comments/discussion


    What else do I need to do to post a review?
    • Please spell-check your review before posting. We're not providing editorial support.
    • Send a PM to Fortunato, Geoff, or Rivercrow (or all three of us, no particular order) with a link to your review.
      Sending that PM will make it easier for us to maintain the Table of Contents in this post.


    Disclaimers:
    Only obvious book reviews will be added to the Table of Contents. Associated commentary will not be linked here. If we're unclear, we will use our best judgment. Because we are volunteering to do this value-add service, updates will happen when we have time.

    The Type Book Review Table of Contents
    Baron, Renee: What Type Am I? Discover Who You Really Are, reviewed by Rivercrow
    Baron, Renee and Elizabeth Wagele: The Enneagram Made Easy, reviewed by Rivercrow
    Thompson, Leanor: Typology--Personality Type--The Owner's Manual, reviewed by BlueWing
    Last edited by rivercrow; 05-24-2007 at 03:59 PM.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  2. #2
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Critical Exposition of Leanor Thompson's Typology--Personality Type--The Owner's Manual.

    Category:Psychology/Self-Help

    I call it 'critical exposition' and not just 'book review' because this is not just about Thompson's writings, it is mostly about how I see typology through her scholarly apparatus. But despite this, I certainly can promise readers who are not familiar with the book or the subject by and large an understanding of the document at hand and well-founded acquaintanceship with Leanor Thompson as a writer of psychology as well as an excursion to the many tangents and implications of the subjects explored in this book by the end of this post, so please--don't let 'critical exposition' scare you away from reading this.


    The basic purport of this book was that human temperament exists and it was discovered by an eminent Swiss psychologist C.G Jung, as well as that temperament is immanent within our nature and distinct from personality.

    Accordingly, we all have a temperament that is innate and immutable and it is very fundamental to our nature, and it is up to us to discover it. By having accomplished this, our level of self-awareness will increase significantly. Leanor Thompson purports that this is rendered possible through studying typology. This book is not adequate as an introductory course to Jungian typology and presupposes acquaintance with his system beforehand. It is better to look at Thompson as a scholar who tries to help a general intelligent person better understand Jung's typology.

    In a way this book can be perceived as both, an overview of MBTI as well as a book on MBTI, as it gives one a clear-cut notion of what the system is like on the basic level as well as purports to make original contribution. Both it has done successfully.

    Very early in the book Leanor Thompson asserts that empirical studies have provided evidence for the existence of temperament as distinct from personality, and that we have sufficient reason to believe that this temperament is innate. The basic premise of this purport is that some of us have a high internal brain stimulation and others of us low. Hence the former are introverts because they can get stimulated on their own and the latter need to seek stimulation on the outside. Despite the biologically founded case for introversion/extroversion discrepancy, Thompson holds to the conventional Jungian definitions of the terms: Introvert-Perceives environment as it relates to them, Extrovert-Perceives environment in terms of how he or she relates to it. As for the Judging/Perceiving dichotomy, the following goes. Some of us are left-brained and others of us are right-brained. One of the main attributes of being left-brained is being a 'sequential and a conceptual thinker', and one of the main attributes of being right-brained is being an experiential learner who has difficulty tackling it one thing at a time and tends to approach all subjects simultaneously. The left-brainers, as not many shall be surprised--are judgers, as they tend to have a need to stay organized, and the unstructured right-brainers are perceivers.


    She has not cited any biological evidence of T/F and S/N being immanent within type, yet it is clear that she believes that those exist within us all and are impossible to be changed. When we believe that we may be both, or that our type has changed--it is probably the case that it is just that our understanding of ourselves has been shacky and the only thing that has changed is our self-perception and not our temperament.

    She offers the following examples for why many of us may be confused about what our temperament is.

    ETPs (as we see their tertiary function is feeling) who are pressured by society to soften their approach to people, may easily mistake themselves for feelers.

    INJs who are opportunistic and chose to become more adaptable for the sake of living out their vision may mistake themselves for perceivers. (We also attribute this to their superior function being a perceiving one.)

    ENPs who marry other ENPs who also take on more sensate responsibilities may believe that their sensing is higher than it really is or maybe even suspect that they could be on the borderline of N/S.

    (The same could be said for INTPs who marry other INTPs who think that they are on the borderline of T/F, much of this could apply to the N/S dichotomy too as one of the two will likely deal with the S responsibilities in the family.)

    *Notes in the parantheses are mine.


    Thompson carries on with her biological case for E/I...

    Introverts are naturally designed to make themselves comfortable seeking inner peace and working well in an environment that encourages quite reflection, and for this reason, because they spend a lot of time with their thoughts are more likely to collect a lot of information before making decisions, even if their superior function is a judging function.

    Extroverts were made more for action rather than reflection and put a very high premium on external circumstances even if they have no relevance to their thoughts.

    (In a very far cry from this, one could utter that the External Locus of control goes along better with Extroverts and Internal with introverts. As we see that introverts are more likely to count on themselves to get what they want, whilst Extroverts on their external environment. And when things go wrong, introverts are more intrapunitive and extroverts more extrapunitive.)


    An Extroverted Part of the brain requires an external goal, or object..E.G to stay focused on,and if it is not available the mind of the Extroverted will doubtlessly become exhausted.

    An Introverted Part of the brain insists on processing internal data, and needs something on the inside to focus on, and hence if over-stimulated by external environment, the introvert will get drained because he was forced to far out of his comfort zone. (Generally one should be able to mitigate between the two, and after all this is a preferrence, we are naturally just more comfortable with one than the other, it doesnt mean that those two modes of functioning are mutually exclusive. It is human nature to easily be worn out by anything that we find slightly uncomfortable, and the more uncomfortable we are with it, the more likely we are to find the experience tiring. I suggest, however, that the key to being a sound person is fiding a sense of balance and there is no way around finding the E/I balance, so it is both possible and imperative that we get comfortable operating in the mode that is less natural to ourselves.)

    (Also, since Introverts, Thompson asserts, need to stay focused on their own thoughts more, she claims that Introverts tend to view the world in terms of their ideas and their perception, or in short they trust their insights over the ideas of others or what is already in the world. The case in point of this would be the way Introverted Intuition works. It seperates your imagination from ideas already propounded by others and go well on gas of its own without being disturbed that the current vision may have little to do with the way the world appears outside of our heads.)

    Thompson comments the following on the J/P Split...

    Left side of the brain(J)

    Idea Oriented
    General and Abstract
    Uses Words and numbers
    Seeks exact conclusions
    Reductive and Analytic
    Symbolic(superfluous,considering that she already mentioned 'uses words and numbers')
    Proceeds one step at a time
    Little appreciation of tone
    Specializes in language skills(again, supefluous, another allusion to symbols)
    Controls speech

    Right side of the Brain (P)

    Event Oriented
    Concrete and Specific
    Uses Patterns or pictures
    Content with approximate evolving solutions
    Synthesizing and insightful
    imaginal
    unaware of time limits
    perceives all at once
    specializes in musical and artistic skills
    controls spatially related events


    The following functions belong to the first category

    Extraverted Thinking
    Extraverted Feeling
    Introverted Sensing
    Introverted Intuition

    The following functions belong to the second category
    Introverted Thinking
    Introverted Feeling
    Extraverted Intuition
    Extraverted Sensing


    *More notes on Thompson's discoveries...

    Js do better in school because conventional educational system clearly seperates the observer and the observed and takes a symbolical approach to ideas. Ps gain knowledge by experiencing ideas, by becoming one with the observed. SJs are good at memorizing facts because they literally believe that words have ideas stored in them, and the more words they know the more they know. NJs also go along with this. There was one very eminent 20th century INFJ philosopher--Ludwig Wittgenstein who believed that reality depends on words for its existence. This is why Js tend to believe in certain knowledges and Ps, dont-they are language oriented thinkers and believe that ideas can be perceived as finite and closed entities and that they are entirely immanent within symbols. Ps are more image oriented than idea oriented and don't believe that ideas can be clearly defined or that they are finite or even less they are commensurable to anything that we understand, or that there is such a thing as closure anyways. She put it perfectly, Ps are image oriented and Js idea and symbol oriented. This is why ENTP philosophers always loved chaos theory, and the greatest skeptic himself, David Hume, was, I think an ENTP. He was so skeptical not because he was a strong Thinker, but because of his radical P qualities that did not believe in coherent ideas that could be immanet within anything that we consider solid knowledge. Another good allegory for the way Ps think is Hume's concept of the self--a bundle of perception, just small part of the bigger picture of nature. In short Ps perceive everything at the same time and do not seek closure and think in terms of pictures and patters and not symbols and this is why they tend not to believe in the existence of finite entities, like absolute knowledge packed within a symbol, a physical self that has a beginning and an end. They, like Hume tend to think that they are part of the big picture that is happening at the same time and we are all moving along for the ride. (Another excellent depiction of how Extroverted Intuition thinks---you, or your ideas are not clearly defined, neither is what is on the outside, you may not even have a coherent, existing self, you are just part of what is out there existing and always moving along. Also, Einstein's discovery of relativity where time does not exist in the ultimate reality may be another way to look at how Extroverted Intuition thinks. It perceives everything at the same time, as if the universe is infinite)


    NPs respond the best to metaphors and analogies and are the masters of analogies.

    SPs tend to be impatient with theory and need concrete, raw experiences to learn something and this is why they hardly ever are successful in school. Unlike the NPs, who can imagine themselves within the experience while pursuing their intellectual task, and some may not even need practical applications to their ideas (INTPs), yet SPs need to feel themselves being physically in the process.

    NJs, on the other hand, perceive abstract theories as direct pipelines to the truth and can easily imagine how they symbolize what inevitably must be there. This is why INJs almost effortlessly perceive what is written in the textbook and can easily accept an abstract idea as a notion they currently perceive as the truth, whereas Ps would have qualms about that as they can not accept the existence of such a finite entity or a coherent notion of the truth that has a beginning and an end, and wouldn't be able to absorb such a notion right off the bat.

    Studies that 'prove' that Extroverts are happier ask survey questions like.. rate 1-5...'I am fun to be with'... 'People like me' ' I dont spend a lot of time alone'... ' I am the life of the party'..' I am influential and affluent'... Whereas contented introverts would have a rich inner life and plenty of time to do satisfying internal meditations.

    Most problems abound in our functional order when we fail to have the E/I balance and our first faculty becomes preponderous over the second, and this can almost always be rectified by developing our auxiliary function.

    When our first function becomes preponderous over the second, we may end up with very little access to it, and be forced into the third because it is on the same level as the first. (E/E, I/I... E.G Ti-Si). Generally the third function is even less developed than the third and does not have a voice of its so it will probably convince you of whatever your superior function wants you to believe.


    Now I proceed to the weakest part of Thompson's Typology. The crow's nest functions.

    I will first make her case out to be as strong as possible and only later attempt criticism.

    Here is an example that she gives to explain these 'crow's nest functions'--the crow's nest are in bold

    INFP
    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Introverted Thinking
    Extroverted Sensation
    Introverted Intuition
    Extraverted Feeling
    Introverted Sensing
    Extraverted Thinking


    At first one shall ask, how is Introverted Thinking so hight up there? Isn't INFP the type with inferior Thinking? But nonetheless, they can do well to analyze phenomena around them and when they analyze it, they resemble INTPs, they do especially well analyzing matters that are personal.

    And why is Extroverted Sensing so high up? Well, if we could look at how their Extroverted Intuition works, we will see that it functions much like Extroverted Sensing and when dealing with the concrete and the physical, INFPs with a good I/E balance, who are comfortable with their externally focused side can do well with those objects. So they must have Extroverted Sensing.

    And why is Introverted Intuition below Extroverted Sensing, isnt the INFP more Intuitive than Sensation-based? Yet, but we've established that Se follows as an entailment of Ne, and therefore beats out the Ni.

    And why is Extroverted Feeling so low, shouldnt this be the property of the INFP's first function? No, because Introverted Thinking, as a shadow of Fi beart it out to it.

    Many of these explanations, I find untenable.

    First of all, it makes little sense to say that Introverted Thinking should be this high up. It is a property of the last function of the INFP. No doubt the INFP functions like an Introverted Thinker in many ways, but it does not mean that the actual Introverted Thinking is there. It is really the shadow of Introverted Feeling. Fi resembles Ti when doing analysis, especially that of impersonal nature. In the same way the Se is not really there, it is merely a shadow of Ne. And doubtlessly Introverted Intuition would not be behind Extroverted Sensing. Only behind Extroverted Intuition.

    Here is the order that the functions should flow in.

    When Feeling develops, both sides grow simultaneously, just one goes faster than the other.

    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Extroverted Feeling
    Introverted Intuition
    *Shadow of Introverted Feeling (Looks like Ti)
    *Shadow of Extroverted Intuition (Looks like Se)
    Introverted Sensing
    Extroverted Sensing
    Extroverted Thinking
    Introverted Thinking



    Thompson spends a large part of the book on explaining how particular functions work and this is where she gives exegesis to all 16 types.

    The 'Left-brained' functions tend to perceive one thing at a time and are sequential, and tend to look at not everything that is there, but at just what they need, and what is consistent. This is why Ni and Si are not concerned with having a vision of the whole world, just a personal vision, a vision of what we need to do, and knowledge of thereof subjects. The down-side of this, however, is that even NJs, may have a difficult time picking up on what is not said and working with unfamiliar ideas right off the bat as their left-brained nature may deem them unnecessary and leave the NJ without the motivation to pursue them. This is also why all Js, even NJs need a set environment to work around their routine in. Introverted Perceiving functions (Si/Ni) are primarily concerned not with knowing about everything that may be, but with just knowing what needs to be known to the individual according to a set agenda. They also have difficulty adapting because they expect for the world to line up with their symbolic conception of it, and information needs to be processed first in order to be placed into symbols ( or on more concrete basis, into their plans and visions), hence no wonder the Ni vision is oftenly divorced from reality. From this we could also infer that the reason why SJs are often seriously bruised by verbal insults and people behaving properly is because they tend to see words and direct actions as clear-cut representations of reality that could never be doubted. Whereas Ps do not believe in such clear-cut notions of reality and tend to think that everything can be doubted. And philosophers with Introverted Intuition are more easily disturbed by the criticisms of their ideas because they believe that their ideas are literally fundamental to their vision as those ideas are comprised of words only, and when they are attacked, they are almost directly and literally being bruised. Since having a vision is fundamental to their thought, they deem it imperative to have one underlying set of structures that guides everything that they think about. Hence for this reason, unlike the NPs (and even ENTPs who may not need a system at all, David Hume, Bertrand Russell, Machiavelli, Voltaire and John Dewey are case in point) who weave large webs of ideas, have a one solid theory on which everything is based on. And very oftenly end up having just one fundament to all of their philosophizing whereas NPs have various which are often switched. Hence, for this reason we could say that the INFJ Schopenhauer was a one book man, whereas the rest of his writings were merely supplemental material to the World as Will and Representation. Much of the same could be said about the INTJ Kant, whose three Critiques comprised the one big system that his thought hinged on, and the rest stemmed from there. Also, since Js take their perceptions of how the world is for granted, they should, just like SJs be as easily offended by erratic behavior, but they do not, because unlike the Introverted Sensors who expect immediate concrete results in their assessments, Nis are slower to judge because they spend more time looking for far-reaching symbols. But after they have found them, their reaction will be just as, if not more intense than that of the SJs, and unlike the NPs, they clearly will perceive for it to be a reality. This is why SPs tend to believe in drinking or drugging away their problems, they do not take their perceptions of the world for granted (much like one could say that since Introverted functions speak of what the individual needs, hence Ni/Si are about our knowledge, and Se/Ne about just knowledge out there that has no relationship to us, hence the SP may think that there is something wrong with their excessive drinking, yet treat it as an idea just out there, not something that has to be taken care of immediately). And hence for this reason, I intuit, ENTPs report the lowest level of stress because they can easily detach from their problems and use their Intuition to work out an ingenious solution, and only reattach when they are ready with their plan. ISFJs and INFJ the highest because they are always attached to their perceptions of how the world works, and INFJs are ahead of the ISFJ in the regard that they are probably more shocked by what they have perceived as hurtful while putting forth their far-reaching assessments of the situation. So in short, ISFJs feel immediate pain from their negative perceptions of the world that they take for granted, INFJs do not, not untill they find their far-reaching signs, but they will experience them to the full after they have done so.


    *The last paragraph is not necessarily what Leanor Thompson would say on the subject. Those ideas are just my interpretation of the big picture through her typological apparatus. Though I should just one more criticism to Thompson's typology. She identifies Ni and Si as J functions because those types have Te/Fe on the outside. Ni and Si dont decide anything on their own, they appear Jish or left-brained only because a left-brained function interacts with the world and orders them to perceive one thing at a time.

    Ti/Fi technically are judging (left-brained) functions, but Ne/Se are the ones dealing with the world and they(unlike Fe/Te) incept everything at the same time, so Ti/Fi have to analyze it all right away.

    So the reality of it is much more common-sensical.

    Left-Brained
    Fe
    Te
    Ti
    Fi

    Right-Brained
    Se
    Ne
    Ni
    Si

    Introverted functions act like the opposite of their hemisphere because all directions come from the outside, Ni is ordered by the Fe/Te what information to process and Ti/Fi is ordered by the Ne/Se how much information to analyze at the same time.



    Leanor Thompson spent the last 250 pages of her book giving exegesis to the 8 functions and 16 types. This section starts at the point where we have just arrived. I do not deem it necessary to give an account for that as it contains no original views of Thompson on typology, so I will put a period to my exposition here.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #3
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Renee Baron: What Type Am I? Discover Who You Really Are

    What Type Am I? Discover Who You Really Are
    Renee Baron
    1998
    ISBN 0-965-68489-X
    171 pp

    If you're looking for a good, basic, friendly introduction to MBTI with grounding in Keirsey's Temperament Theory, this is a good place to start. She even includes a brief intro to traditional Type dynamics and Enneagram in the appendix.

    I say "friendly" and mean it. The book's cartoons illustrate the concepts she's describing and lighten up the text. I suspect the design of the book might make it more accessible to a wider audience. SJs will find things presented factually and directly; SPs should find the pacing quick, useful, and flexible; NTs will have enough toeholds and patterns to dig in (it is an introductory text, after all); and NFs should find inspiration for possibilities and interpersonal relations. I'm not sure what the reading level is, but I think it should be accessible to anyone in high school.

    The book begins with a short overview of Type and its history. Some applications of Type are presented, but very lightly and respectfully. It then launches into a basic self-validation and moves to the Types arranged by Keirsey's Temperament. Each of these sections includes "How to get along with" and "Suggestions for" sections. For example, the E:I chapter includes "How to get along with Extraverts" and "Suggestions for Extraverts" and variations for Introverts. Type and Temperament chapters have similar breakdowns, along with more specific suggestions for Type development, career suggestions, and relationships. I can't find any Type-biased language. The usual stereotypes are humorously presented and are identified as such, with explanation of why these stereotypes emerge.

    For instance, the ESFP chapter includes the following:
    Typical Occupations: Animal groomer or trainer...designer...police officer

    ESFPs in Relationships: "Are easygoing and accepting of themselves and others. ... Prefer action to contemplation; may find it difficult to sit still or be alone."

    Suggestions for ESFPs: "Do not ignore troubling situations in hope that they will go away. Realize that positive thinking won't solve every problem. Allow negative feelings to emerge and get into the 'dirt' when necessary."
    ...
    "Resist the urge to drop what you've started when a more interesting situation arises."
    The book's conclusion offers general suggestions for applying Type theory to relationships such as parenting and teambuilding.

    I'm generally pleased with the back matter. The appendices on Type development and Enneagram are brief but well presented. Earlier, Baron had co-written books on Enneagram, and she does refer to these other texts. (I intend to review these shortly.) The front matter is well worth reading, too, as she tells her story of how Type became useful and important to her.

    I'd recommend What Type Are You? to anyone needing a quick introduction to Type or to a practitioner looking for additional ways to illustrate or explain concepts of Type.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  4. #4
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Renee Baron and Elizabeth Wagele: The Enneagram Made Easy

    The Enneagram Made Easy
    Renee Baron and Elizabeth Wagele
    1994
    ISBN 0-06-251026-6
    161 pp

    Baron and Wagele's The Enneagram Made Easy introduces the concepts and application of Enneagram typology. The text is accompanied with cartoons that illustrate concepts, identify chapters, and provide memes for each Type's suggested affirmations.

    I especially like the emphasis of Enneagram as a tool for enhancing personal growth and identifying personal obstacles. I think it's easy for newcomers to Enneagram to use the Types as excuses for behavior rather than as markers for growth areas. I'm very pleased with the balance of narrative and list sections, which breaks up the pace of the text and improves readability. The book should be accessible for anyone in or beyond high school.

    The book opens with an overview of the history and terminology of Enneagram and suggestions on Type self-selection. In my experience, the terminology of Enneagram (wings and stress:secure movements) can be confusing. The authors also clarify the centers of Enneagram (Heart/Head/Gut) both verbally and visually. I feel a good understanding of the centers is vital to understanding individual types as well as stress:secure movements.

    In subsequent chapters, each Type is presented with balanced descriptions, a personality inventory for self-selection, and sections on getting along with or being each Type. The effect of the wings and stress:secure movements of each type are very simply and evenly stated; both negative and positive effects are neutrally presented. As a Five, I did not find the language to be Type-biased. The authors offer practical suggestions for development and exercises. I like these features; they underscore the use of the tool for growth, both intra- and interpersonally. Additional flavors of Types are suggested as well ("Extroverted Twos are sometimes found in the limelight as actresses, actors, and motivational speakers.")

    The book concludes with a brief look at how Jungian/MBTI Types and Enneagram fit together. I really like that the authors take great care to emphasize that these are not 1:1 correlations. The book takes each Enneagram Type through all of the eight MBTI preferences. For instance:
    Extroverted Fours are sociable and expressive....
    Introverted Fours are more serious, reserved, and withdrawn.
    Sensate Fours express themselves through action and live more in the here and now.
    iNtuitive Fours are insightful, idealistic, and more interested in the world of imagination than in everyday reality.
    ...
    The predominant features of Fours are Introversion and Feeling.
    I'd recommend The Enneagram Made Easy to anyone looking for an introductory text on the topic. I much prefer it to the Riso/Hudson and Palmer books for simplicity and readability.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Here is an example that she gives to explain these 'crow's nest functions'--the crow's nest are in bold

    INFP
    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Introverted Thinking
    Extroverted Sensation
    Introverted Intuition
    Extraverted Feeling
    Introverted Sensing
    Extraverted Thinking


    At first one shall ask, how is Introverted Thinking so hight up there? Isn't INFP the type with inferior Thinking? But nonetheless, they can do well to analyze phenomena around them and when they analyze it, they resemble INTPs, they do especially well analyzing matters that are personal.

    [...]

    First of all, it makes little sense to say that Introverted Thinking should be this high up. It is a property of the last function of the INFP. No doubt the INFP functions like an Introverted Thinker in many ways, but it does not mean that the actual Introverted Thinking is there. It is really the shadow of Introverted Feeling. Fi resembles Ti when doing analysis, especially that of impersonal nature. In the same way the Se is not really there, it is merely a shadow of Ne. And doubtlessly Introverted Intuition would not be behind Extroverted Sensing. Only behind Extroverted Intuition.

    Here is the order that the functions should flow in.

    When Feeling develops, both sides grow simultaneously, just one goes faster than the other.

    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Extroverted Feeling
    Introverted Intuition
    *Shadow of Introverted Feeling (Looks like Ti)
    *Shadow of Extroverted Intuition (Looks like Se)
    Introverted Sensing
    Extroverted Sensing
    Extroverted Thinking
    Introverted Thinking
    I didn't have time to read your entire post (sorry), but I read the INFP part. Anyway, I was delighted to see that Thompson had organized the functions that way for INFPs. That's much closer to the order that I socred in the function order test than the usually expected Fi-Ne-Si-Te-Fe-Ni-Se-Ti.

    (My order was Ne/Fi, Ti/Ni, Si, Te/Fe, Se.)

    "No doubt the INFP functions like an Introverted Thinker in many ways, but it does not mean that the actual Introverted Thinking is there."

    Why not? When I function like an Introverted Feeler, the actual Fi is there. So, when I function like an Introverted Thinker, why isn't the "actual" Ti there?

    Note that I feel that it comes naturally for me to function like a Ti-- it doesn't feel like a mask (like being too extraverted, for example, sometimes feels).

    "It is really the shadow of Introverted Feeling. Fi resembles Ti when doing analysis, especially that of impersonal nature."

    So. In your opinion, what is the actual difference between Ti and the Ti-like shadow of Fi?

    If the Ti-like shadow of Fi and Ti are identical, why should they be separated? What's the point? If the Ti-like shadow of Fi resembles Ti more than Fi, why not just call it Ti?

    Because "but INFP can't Ti"? :steam:

    No, seriously.

  6. #6
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Critical Exposition of Leanor Thompson's Typology--Personality Type--The Owner's Manual.

    Category:Psychology/Self-Help

    I call it 'critical exposition' and not just 'book review' because this is not just about Thompson's writings, it is mostly about how I see typology through her scholarly apparatus. But despite this, I certainly can promise readers who are not familiar with the book or the subject by and large an understanding of the document at hand and well-founded acquaintanceship with Leanor Thompson as a writer of psychology as well as an excursion to the many tangents and implications of the subjects explored in this book by the end of this post, so please--don't let 'critical exposition' scare you away from reading this.


    The basic purport of this book was that human temperament exists and it was discovered by an eminent Swiss psychologist C.G Jung, as well as that temperament is immanent within our nature and distinct from personality.

    Accordingly, we all have a temperament that is innate and immutable and it is very fundamental to our nature, and it is up to us to discover it. By having accomplished this, our level of self-awareness will increase significantly. Leanor Thompson purports that this is rendered possible through studying typology. This book is not adequate as an introductory course to Jungian typology and presupposes acquaintance with his system beforehand. It is better to look at Thompson as a scholar who tries to help a general intelligent person better understand Jung's typology.

    In a way this book can be perceived as both, an overview of MBTI as well as a book on MBTI, as it gives one a clear-cut notion of what the system is like on the basic level as well as purports to make original contribution. Both it has done successfully.

    Very early in the book Leanor Thompson asserts that empirical studies have provided evidence for the existence of temperament as distinct from personality, and that we have sufficient reason to believe that this temperament is innate. The basic premise of this purport is that some of us have a high internal brain stimulation and others of us low. Hence the former are introverts because they can get stimulated on their own and the latter need to seek stimulation on the outside. Despite the biologically founded case for introversion/extroversion discrepancy, Thompson holds to the conventional Jungian definitions of the terms: Introvert-Perceives environment as it relates to them, Extrovert-Perceives environment in terms of how he or she relates to it. As for the Judging/Perceiving dichotomy, the following goes. Some of us are left-brained and others of us are right-brained. One of the main attributes of being left-brained is being a 'sequential and a conceptual thinker', and one of the main attributes of being right-brained is being an experiential learner who has difficulty tackling it one thing at a time and tends to approach all subjects simultaneously. The left-brainers, as not many shall be surprised--are judgers, as they tend to have a need to stay organized, and the unstructured right-brainers are perceivers.


    She has not cited any biological evidence of T/F and S/N being immanent within type, yet it is clear that she believes that those exist within us all and are impossible to be changed. When we believe that we may be both, or that our type has changed--it is probably the case that it is just that our understanding of ourselves has been shacky and the only thing that has changed is our self-perception and not our temperament.

    She offers the following examples for why many of us may be confused about what our temperament is.

    ETPs (as we see their tertiary function is feeling) who are pressured by society to soften their approach to people, may easily mistake themselves for feelers.

    INJs who are opportunistic and chose to become more adaptable for the sake of living out their vision may mistake themselves for perceivers. (We also attribute this to their superior function being a perceiving one.)

    ENPs who marry other ENPs who also take on more sensate responsibilities may believe that their sensing is higher than it really is or maybe even suspect that they could be on the borderline of N/S.

    (The same could be said for INTPs who marry other INTPs who think that they are on the borderline of T/F, much of this could apply to the N/S dichotomy too as one of the two will likely deal with the S responsibilities in the family.)

    *Notes in the parantheses are mine.


    Thompson carries on with her biological case for E/I...

    Introverts are naturally designed to make themselves comfortable seeking inner peace and working well in an environment that encourages quite reflection, and for this reason, because they spend a lot of time with their thoughts are more likely to collect a lot of information before making decisions, even if their superior function is a judging function.

    Extroverts were made more for action rather than reflection and put a very high premium on external circumstances even if they have no relevance to their thoughts.

    (In a very far cry from this, one could utter that the External Locus of control goes along better with Extroverts and Internal with introverts. As we see that introverts are more likely to count on themselves to get what they want, whilst Extroverts on their external environment. And when things go wrong, introverts are more intrapunitive and extroverts more extrapunitive.)


    An Extroverted Part of the brain requires an external goal, or object..E.G to stay focused on,and if it is not available the mind of the Extroverted will doubtlessly become exhausted.

    An Introverted Part of the brain insists on processing internal data, and needs something on the inside to focus on, and hence if over-stimulated by external environment, the introvert will get drained because he was forced to far out of his comfort zone. (Generally one should be able to mitigate between the two, and after all this is a preferrence, we are naturally just more comfortable with one than the other, it doesnt mean that those two modes of functioning are mutually exclusive. It is human nature to easily be worn out by anything that we find slightly uncomfortable, and the more uncomfortable we are with it, the more likely we are to find the experience tiring. I suggest, however, that the key to being a sound person is fiding a sense of balance and there is no way around finding the E/I balance, so it is both possible and imperative that we get comfortable operating in the mode that is less natural to ourselves.)

    (Also, since Introverts, Thompson asserts, need to stay focused on their own thoughts more, she claims that Introverts tend to view the world in terms of their ideas and their perception, or in short they trust their insights over the ideas of others or what is already in the world. The case in point of this would be the way Introverted Intuition works. It seperates your imagination from ideas already propounded by others and go well on gas of its own without being disturbed that the current vision may have little to do with the way the world appears outside of our heads.)

    Thompson comments the following on the J/P Split...

    Left side of the brain(J)

    Idea Oriented
    General and Abstract
    Uses Words and numbers
    Seeks exact conclusions
    Reductive and Analytic
    Symbolic(superfluous,considering that she already mentioned 'uses words and numbers')
    Proceeds one step at a time
    Little appreciation of tone
    Specializes in language skills(again, supefluous, another allusion to symbols)
    Controls speech

    Right side of the Brain (P)

    Event Oriented
    Concrete and Specific
    Uses Patterns or pictures
    Content with approximate evolving solutions
    Synthesizing and insightful
    imaginal
    unaware of time limits
    perceives all at once
    specializes in musical and artistic skills
    controls spatially related events


    The following functions belong to the first category

    Extraverted Thinking
    Extraverted Feeling
    Introverted Sensing
    Introverted Intuition

    The following functions belong to the second category
    Introverted Thinking
    Introverted Feeling
    Extraverted Intuition
    Extraverted Sensing


    *More notes on Thompson's discoveries...

    Js do better in school because conventional educational system clearly seperates the observer and the observed and takes a symbolical approach to ideas. Ps gain knowledge by experiencing ideas, by becoming one with the observed. SJs are good at memorizing facts because they literally believe that words have ideas stored in them, and the more words they know the more they know. NJs also go along with this. There was one very eminent 20th century INFJ philosopher--Ludwig Wittgenstein who believed that reality depends on words for its existence. This is why Js tend to believe in certain knowledges and Ps, dont-they are language oriented thinkers and believe that ideas can be perceived as finite and closed entities and that they are entirely immanent within symbols. Ps are more image oriented than idea oriented and don't believe that ideas can be clearly defined or that they are finite or even less they are commensurable to anything that we understand, or that there is such a thing as closure anyways. She put it perfectly, Ps are image oriented and Js idea and symbol oriented. This is why ENTP philosophers always loved chaos theory, and the greatest skeptic himself, David Hume, was, I think an ENTP. He was so skeptical not because he was a strong Thinker, but because of his radical P qualities that did not believe in coherent ideas that could be immanet within anything that we consider solid knowledge. Another good allegory for the way Ps think is Hume's concept of the self--a bundle of perception, just small part of the bigger picture of nature. In short Ps perceive everything at the same time and do not seek closure and think in terms of pictures and patters and not symbols and this is why they tend not to believe in the existence of finite entities, like absolute knowledge packed within a symbol, a physical self that has a beginning and an end. They, like Hume tend to think that they are part of the big picture that is happening at the same time and we are all moving along for the ride. (Another excellent depiction of how Extroverted Intuition thinks---you, or your ideas are not clearly defined, neither is what is on the outside, you may not even have a coherent, existing self, you are just part of what is out there existing and always moving along. Also, Einstein's discovery of relativity where time does not exist in the ultimate reality may be another way to look at how Extroverted Intuition thinks. It perceives everything at the same time, as if the universe is infinite)


    NPs respond the best to metaphors and analogies and are the masters of analogies.

    SPs tend to be impatient with theory and need concrete, raw experiences to learn something and this is why they hardly ever are successful in school. Unlike the NPs, who can imagine themselves within the experience while pursuing their intellectual task, and some may not even need practical applications to their ideas (INTPs), yet SPs need to feel themselves being physically in the process.

    NJs, on the other hand, perceive abstract theories as direct pipelines to the truth and can easily imagine how they symbolize what inevitably must be there. This is why INJs almost effortlessly perceive what is written in the textbook and can easily accept an abstract idea as a notion they currently perceive as the truth, whereas Ps would have qualms about that as they can not accept the existence of such a finite entity or a coherent notion of the truth that has a beginning and an end, and wouldn't be able to absorb such a notion right off the bat.

    Studies that 'prove' that Extroverts are happier ask survey questions like.. rate 1-5...'I am fun to be with'... 'People like me' ' I dont spend a lot of time alone'... ' I am the life of the party'..' I am influential and affluent'... Whereas contented introverts would have a rich inner life and plenty of time to do satisfying internal meditations.

    Most problems abound in our functional order when we fail to have the E/I balance and our first faculty becomes preponderous over the second, and this can almost always be rectified by developing our auxiliary function.

    When our first function becomes preponderous over the second, we may end up with very little access to it, and be forced into the third because it is on the same level as the first. (E/E, I/I... E.G Ti-Si). Generally the third function is even less developed than the third and does not have a voice of its so it will probably convince you of whatever your superior function wants you to believe.


    Now I proceed to the weakest part of Thompson's Typology. The crow's nest functions.

    I will first make her case out to be as strong as possible and only later attempt criticism.

    Here is an example that she gives to explain these 'crow's nest functions'--the crow's nest are in bold

    INFP
    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Introverted Thinking
    Extroverted Sensation
    Introverted Intuition
    Extraverted Feeling
    Introverted Sensing
    Extraverted Thinking


    At first one shall ask, how is Introverted Thinking so hight up there? Isn't INFP the type with inferior Thinking? But nonetheless, they can do well to analyze phenomena around them and when they analyze it, they resemble INTPs, they do especially well analyzing matters that are personal.

    And why is Extroverted Sensing so high up? Well, if we could look at how their Extroverted Intuition works, we will see that it functions much like Extroverted Sensing and when dealing with the concrete and the physical, INFPs with a good I/E balance, who are comfortable with their externally focused side can do well with those objects. So they must have Extroverted Sensing.

    And why is Introverted Intuition below Extroverted Sensing, isnt the INFP more Intuitive than Sensation-based? Yet, but we've established that Se follows as an entailment of Ne, and therefore beats out the Ni.

    And why is Extroverted Feeling so low, shouldnt this be the property of the INFP's first function? No, because Introverted Thinking, as a shadow of Fi beart it out to it.

    Many of these explanations, I find untenable.

    First of all, it makes little sense to say that Introverted Thinking should be this high up. It is a property of the last function of the INFP. No doubt the INFP functions like an Introverted Thinker in many ways, but it does not mean that the actual Introverted Thinking is there. It is really the shadow of Introverted Feeling. Fi resembles Ti when doing analysis, especially that of impersonal nature. In the same way the Se is not really there, it is merely a shadow of Ne. And doubtlessly Introverted Intuition would not be behind Extroverted Sensing. Only behind Extroverted Intuition.

    Here is the order that the functions should flow in.

    When Feeling develops, both sides grow simultaneously, just one goes faster than the other.

    Introverted Feeling
    Extroverted Intuition
    Extroverted Feeling
    Introverted Intuition
    *Shadow of Introverted Feeling (Looks like Ti)
    *Shadow of Extroverted Intuition (Looks like Se)
    Introverted Sensing
    Extroverted Sensing
    Extroverted Thinking
    Introverted Thinking



    Thompson spends a large part of the book on explaining how particular functions work and this is where she gives exegesis to all 16 types.

    The 'Left-brained' functions tend to perceive one thing at a time and are sequential, and tend to look at not everything that is there, but at just what they need, and what is consistent. This is why Ni and Si are not concerned with having a vision of the whole world, just a personal vision, a vision of what we need to do, and knowledge of thereof subjects. The down-side of this, however, is that even NJs, may have a difficult time picking up on what is not said and working with unfamiliar ideas right off the bat as their left-brained nature may deem them unnecessary and leave the NJ without the motivation to pursue them. This is also why all Js, even NJs need a set environment to work around their routine in. Introverted Perceiving functions (Si/Ni) are primarily concerned not with knowing about everything that may be, but with just knowing what needs to be known to the individual according to a set agenda. They also have difficulty adapting because they expect for the world to line up with their symbolic conception of it, and information needs to be processed first in order to be placed into symbols ( or on more concrete basis, into their plans and visions), hence no wonder the Ni vision is oftenly divorced from reality. From this we could also infer that the reason why SJs are often seriously bruised by verbal insults and people behaving properly is because they tend to see words and direct actions as clear-cut representations of reality that could never be doubted. Whereas Ps do not believe in such clear-cut notions of reality and tend to think that everything can be doubted. And philosophers with Introverted Intuition are more easily disturbed by the criticisms of their ideas because they believe that their ideas are literally fundamental to their vision as those ideas are comprised of words only, and when they are attacked, they are almost directly and literally being bruised. Since having a vision is fundamental to their thought, they deem it imperative to have one underlying set of structures that guides everything that they think about. Hence for this reason, unlike the NPs (and even ENTPs who may not need a system at all, David Hume, Bertrand Russell, Machiavelli, Voltaire and John Dewey are case in point) who weave large webs of ideas, have a one solid theory on which everything is based on. And very oftenly end up having just one fundament to all of their philosophizing whereas NPs have various which are often switched. Hence, for this reason we could say that the INFJ Schopenhauer was a one book man, whereas the rest of his writings were merely supplemental material to the World as Will and Representation. Much of the same could be said about the INTJ Kant, whose three Critiques comprised the one big system that his thought hinged on, and the rest stemmed from there. Also, since Js take their perceptions of how the world is for granted, they should, just like SJs be as easily offended by erratic behavior, but they do not, because unlike the Introverted Sensors who expect immediate concrete results in their assessments, Nis are slower to judge because they spend more time looking for far-reaching symbols. But after they have found them, their reaction will be just as, if not more intense than that of the SJs, and unlike the NPs, they clearly will perceive for it to be a reality. This is why SPs tend to believe in drinking or drugging away their problems, they do not take their perceptions of the world for granted (much like one could say that since Introverted functions speak of what the individual needs, hence Ni/Si are about our knowledge, and Se/Ne about just knowledge out there that has no relationship to us, hence the SP may think that there is something wrong with their excessive drinking, yet treat it as an idea just out there, not something that has to be taken care of immediately). And hence for this reason, I intuit, ENTPs report the lowest level of stress because they can easily detach from their problems and use their Intuition to work out an ingenious solution, and only reattach when they are ready with their plan. ISFJs and INFJ the highest because they are always attached to their perceptions of how the world works, and INFJs are ahead of the ISFJ in the regard that they are probably more shocked by what they have perceived as hurtful while putting forth their far-reaching assessments of the situation. So in short, ISFJs feel immediate pain from their negative perceptions of the world that they take for granted, INFJs do not, not untill they find their far-reaching signs, but they will experience them to the full after they have done so.


    *The last paragraph is not necessarily what Leanor Thompson would say on the subject. Those ideas are just my interpretation of the big picture through her typological apparatus. Though I should just one more criticism to Thompson's typology. She identifies Ni and Si as J functions because those types have Te/Fe on the outside. Ni and Si dont decide anything on their own, they appear Jish or left-brained only because a left-brained function interacts with the world and orders them to perceive one thing at a time.

    Ti/Fi technically are judging (left-brained) functions, but Ne/Se are the ones dealing with the world and they(unlike Fe/Te) incept everything at the same time, so Ti/Fi have to analyze it all right away.

    So the reality of it is much more common-sensical.

    Left-Brained
    Fe
    Te
    Ti
    Fi

    Right-Brained
    Se
    Ne
    Ni
    Si

    Introverted functions act like the opposite of their hemisphere because all directions come from the outside, Ni is ordered by the Fe/Te what information to process and Ti/Fi is ordered by the Ne/Se how much information to analyze at the same time.



    Leanor Thompson spent the last 250 pages of her book giving exegesis to the 8 functions and 16 types. This section starts at the point where we have just arrived. I do not deem it necessary to give an account for that as it contains no original views of Thompson on typology, so I will put a period to my exposition here.
    Categorically wrong.

    Nonsense.

  7. #7
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaveri View Post
    I didn't have time to read your entire post (sorry), but I read the INFP part. Anyway, I was delighted to see that Thompson had organized the functions that way for INFPs. That's much closer to the order that I socred in the function order test than the usually expected Fi-Ne-Si-Te-Fe-Ni-Se-Ti.

    (My order was Ne/Fi, Ti/Ni, Si, Te/Fe, Se.)

    "No doubt the INFP functions like an Introverted Thinker in many ways, but it does not mean that the actual Introverted Thinking is there."

    Why not? When I function like an Introverted Feeler, the actual Fi is there. So, when I function like an Introverted Thinker, why isn't the "actual" Ti there?

    Note that I feel that it comes naturally for me to function like a Ti-- it doesn't feel like a mask (like being too extraverted, for example, sometimes feels).

    "It is really the shadow of Introverted Feeling. Fi resembles Ti when doing analysis, especially that of impersonal nature."

    So. In your opinion, what is the actual difference between Ti and the Ti-like shadow of Fi?

    If the Ti-like shadow of Fi and Ti are identical, why should they be separated? What's the point? If the Ti-like shadow of Fi resembles Ti more than Fi, why not just call it Ti?

    Because "but INFP can't Ti"? :steam:

    No, seriously.
    Because the T energy can only come from the Te.

    Essentially. We have the four functions stationed in our psyche.. Fi Ne Si Te, the rest are in between and can only exist as shadows..

    When you deal with impersonal matters, you take an Fi approach, as you naturally do to everything. Yet the real T energy has to come from your T station--the Te. So the Te supplies the Fi with analytical energy, and hence the Fi performs better whilst dealing with T oriented matters. When doing the analysis, however, the INFP is much more like the TJs than TPs, as their Thinking function is externally focused. The only reason the INFP seems like it has Ti is because he/she makes solutions internally, with the external function only supporting the Fi. Yet if we seperate the two, we will see that that the Fi and Te are seperate entities and the Te looks like a Ti because of the internal influence of the Fi.

    A more pertinent example of this would be the INFJ. They are much more comfortable with conceptual analysis than organization (Te), and how ENTPs (Ti-Fe), are more comfortable giving emotional support externally rather than devising a private system of ethics, and making assessments based on internal values.

    Essentially, Thompson's assertion that Fi and Ne are both right brained functions seems to be without foundation. Because she has established this, she assumes that the other Introverted Judging function (Ti) and the other Extroverted perceiving function (Se) is also. It would make more sense to say that perceiving functions are right-brained and judging are left-brained. Yet those of us with the Extroverted right-brained function tend to apply judging functions to the right-brained 'world'. And vice versa for the left-brained.

    Moreover if we apply Thompson's model,

    Fi
    Ne
    Ti
    Se

    The INFP

    And the ENFP

    Ne
    Fi
    Se
    Ti

    What we get is that the INFP is more adept with Thinking than the ENFP despite Thinking being the inferior function of the INFP and tertiary of ENFP. That sounds counter-intuitive doesn't it?

    Hence the types that struggle with Thinking arent the ones with the inferior Thinking faculty, but those with a tertiary for some reason? A more plausible resolution to draw from this would be that the dominant Judging function types tend to do better with decision making, as they apply either Thinking or Feeling to nearly all scenarios of life, whilst the dominant perceiving types have more difficulties applying a judging function because it is their secondary. With Thompson's model, Thinking and Feeling seem to be inseparable from one another, as the Ti necessarily follows the Fi. This is antithetical to Jung's initial model that he borrowed from Schopenhauer where Thinking and Feeling are opposites and so are Intellect (N) and Will (Sensation-S). Because we have established that Thinking and Feeling could not be part and parcel of the same essence, I posit that the image of the Fi following the Ti is illusory.

    To recapitulate, you only look like an Introverted Thinker because Introverted Feeling is similar to Introerted Thinking on a superficial level. The facade is the same, as they are both properties of introverted judgment, but their essence is different.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  8. #8

  9. #9
    Senior Member alcea rosea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ????
    Posts
    3,665

    Default MBTI books: Opinions?

    I have thought of buying the some of the following books. Do you know them? Are they any good? :confused:

    1. Building Blocks of Personality Type: A Guide to Using the Eight-Process Model of Personality Type by Leona Haas and John Beebe

    2. Dynamics of Personality Type : Understanding and Applying Jung's Cognitive Processes (Understanding yourself and others series) by Linda V. Berens

    3. Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types in Organizations: Understanding Personality Differences in the Workplace by Linda V Berens, Sue A Cooper, Linda K Ernst, and Charles R Martin

    4. The 16 Personality Types, Descriptions for Self-Discovery by Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi

    5. Understanding Yourself and Others

  10. #10
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    What's your goal here? Just career, or more broad?

    I really liked Please Understand Me II by David Keirsey. He's a good people-watcher and rather thorough.

Similar Threads

  1. Review of new book: 'The Question of Psychological Types'
    By Economica in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-28-2013, 05:14 PM
  2. My Analysis Project(PLEASE PLEASE READ FIRST POST ONLY)
    By esidebill in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 07-13-2011, 08:02 PM
  3. Concertina story (read first post first)
    By TickTock in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-24-2010, 07:06 AM
  4. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-20-2007, 03:18 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