User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 60

  1. #21
    Carerra Lu IZthe411's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    This is the kind of self-referential definition that I take issue with. Anything I perceive or sense has to come from outside of me. If I 'sense' something within my mind, then I'm not sensing at all...
    Victor is correct: MBTI is to the 20th & 21st centuries what astrology was to the 19th.
    Clarification- you are definitely using senses to start the process. I agree. I also agree that memory plays into both, as they are perceptive functions. Si works within familiar references and usually stops there, where with Ni familiar references is a starting point only and usually works with something else that may not be immediately apparent.

  2. #22
    Consulting Detective Mr. Sherlock Holmes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    JiNe
    Enneagram
    5W4
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    As I always say (to add to what others have said), the function order is not about strength. The strongest function is likely dominant, but you can't then assume other functions then must tall into a hard order in relation to it.
    (And I believe Daria is an ISTJ, or if nothing else, an INTJ, so whatever Fi you are seeing would be tertiary. Since they're introverted, and logical, they might look like an "introverted Thinker", but going by Interaction Styles, she seems too "directive" (consistently cynical, etc) to be an NP).
    I won't argue with you, but I will say that I do not trust directive styles as a reliable method of typing at all. I prefer to go by functions, the basis on which whomever made them tried to fit directive styles with IMO varying success. And Daria is anything but Te.
    JiNe
    Ti | Fi | Ne | Si | Te | Ni | Fe | Se
    Enneagram: 5w4 sx/sp

    "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

    "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

  3. #23
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    I'm going to ramble somewhat aimlessly....

    When I think of MBTI & Jungian theory in a more "serious" manner, I think of cognitive processes as a psychological orientations; not behavioral patterns, not skill sets, not interests, not lifestyles, not world views, etc. At best, these are clues to a possible mindset, and many do fall neatly into a category (I fit pretty well into NF & INFP in general), but some do not, or they defy too specific details (there I do not fit as well). Thomson's answer to Eric B here is very interesting. She discusses archetypal roles vs. actual cognitive preference.
    http://www.personalitypathways.com/thomson/type3-2.html

    Unfortunately, in the attempt to indicate someone's mindset, MBTI has created these dichotomies, and the either/or aspect leaves some feeling alienated. Keirsey's work seems to have further muddied the divide between roles & mind sets. These seem to suggest that a type is defined by that list of observable behavior, as opposed to the intangible thought processes you detect in the form of personality. I really think it's hard to measure such processes through those means because of that.

    I'm rather a fan of Jung more than any recent author, despite many creating very interesting theories, and it's probably because his definition of a Fi-dom suits me very well. Technically, I could say my MBTI type is INTP, because I test that more than half the time, but my Jungian type is definitely Fi. I don't feel the compromise an MBTI test makes me feel when I have to choose between a T & F answer.... Instead, I see a whole mindset I can relate to, one which is not overly restrictive or which dictates what I am capable of.

    However, I've also been questioning function order lately, particularly Beebe's model. I find it too rigid. I can't imagine every individual developing along such strict lines. I also don't see the functions as narrow as they appear in these models. I think if we took a broader view of the functions, then we would not need to claim a person is using Fe when making decisions that promote interpersonal harmony (or whatever). Such a decision could be made with any J function; it would be taking different roads to the same destination. I tend to see "opposing" functions very differently....I imagine it could be more natural for me, as Fi-dom, to use Ti than Te, simply because the orientation is preferred. Te seems the more opposed function to Fi, and irks me far more when I encounter it in others. A model which took that angle might suit me better.

    I do appreciate that MBTI focuses on defining personality based on the dom & aux functions - the primary ways of judging & perceiving. Outside of what I think is not a great system to indicate type, this concept makes sense to me. Your top two functions are what color your personality, and we see this everyday in people. Once you're aware of types, you can spot them rather easily, and this is enough evidence to convince me the labels are largely accurate in explaining a major aspect of personality.

    However, when you get into tertiary and inferior functions, it just seems like a lot of guesswork & speculation at best. It seems very questionable to be typing people based on them also; what forms the "visible" personality will be the main two functions, IMO. Lately, when people speak of their tertiary this & that, I cringe because it seems so unlikely that it's really a major force in their personality. It also begins to associate skills with functions. Instead of considering that maybe their F mindset actually made a logical deduction, they have to delegate it to their tert or inferior T, as if functions are gears you shift in & out of instead of a whole frame of mind. I'll paraphrase Peacebaby (I think it was her), who said once that you can't unbake a cake, and sometimes function order seems to try to do that. You can "taste" a person and determine their main type, chocolate or strawberry , but you can't really know the lesser components based on the final product alone. I feel clear I use F & N functions, and my dominant is Fi, but beyond that it's really a grab bag as to how the other functions play out in my mindset.

    I personally don't see Si as my tertiary in the way they want to define it; I can start ascribing behaviors to functions, but that's really a misuse of the theory.

    When I think of MBTI in a more playful sense, then I am comfortable using phrases like "Fi-Si loop", which I just see as shorthand for a common mental rut INFPs get stuck in. How that mental rut actually relates to the functions is not the point; it's just a phrase unique to a community that expresses in terms of Jungian theory . What I mean to say is, I'm no MBTI gestapo who has a problem with that type of casual discussion, which tends to serve its own purpose.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  4. #24
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    The function preference orders presented by MBTI are not the only orders people have. Plenty of people fall outside the realm of the 16 types. The system itself was meant to be a rough tool to be applicable to most people. While the dichotomies of the functions are sound, the dichotomies of MBTI are not because they claim to typify more than what their foundation has to offer.

    Here's a lady who has analyzed MBTI as well and has managed to expose some holes in it. She is a self-proclaimed INTP, but like you, she has strong emotions at times.

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxgPQjBZe98"]A[/YOUTUBE]

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWzLBqpWmyo"]B[/YOUTUBE]

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1YqwW3LIMQ"]C[/YOUTUBE]

  5. #25
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Keirsey's approach doesn't help me, for sure. It's like he's coming from some extremely remote view in his observations of behavior. Like he didn't actually talk to people or something. The minute you get up close, it falls apart. You'll find that there are tons of rationals who exhibit a lot "artisan" like behavior or interests, or artisans who are idealists, rather than hedonistic, etc.. In fact, there may be rationals who trump artisans at what they do, and artisans who do admirable things that would inspire an idealist to emulate them. Further, there are rationals who are more holistic or literary in their investigations, and don't have some overblown, "scientific" air about them. Johnny Rotten might be INTP, for all I know. Not all of them are trying to be Darwin or Einstein. It's not like "Ti" would be promoted in some overt, formal way all of the time. And hell, as far as scientists go, Darwin may have been an ISTP actually. Maybe not, but my point is.. Are they really all riding around on jetskis and making cabinets? Give me a break.

  6. #26
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    There's an ancient old german fairytale about the small caterpillar Nimmersatt, who always liked to eat more and more. He found a new kind of leaf, thought of it as totally awesome, only ate the leaf until he was so overfed that he thought those leaves are boring and found a new kind of leaf he found totally awesome. In the end, Nimmersatt ( which means sth. like "never full" ), exploded.

    I know thi's a kinda stupid relation, but I think it says a bit about the mental attitude one needs to have when approaching certain things. I've seen it often now on this forum that people came saying mbti is totally awesome and the solution to all of life's problems and then a few times later they got stuck in the many contradictions the theory has and they get disappointed. I then personally have to ask myself what did they expect ? That one theory like that could explain life that is full of contradictions in the first place ?!

    I think mbti has a dangerous character to look like a natural law from science, one shouldnt be blinded by that tho. Cause in other words it's just one of a billion attempts to understand the human nature. And it is as flawed as any other model out there.

    What I want to say with this is that one shouldnt only look if a system like mbti is flawed, one should look aswell if the guy studieng the system may no be flawed too. Cause if you went so deep down the rabbit hole that you start mole digging for logical indiscrepancies in the system, you may have already overshot the limits in which the system still applies. The easiest example for this is a person that is a primary T-dom, from whom is expected that he fits a certain stereotypical pattern, like he is not allowed to be friendly with people or to have good people skills. If he does tho and why shouldnt he, even according to mbti he has F, you will automatically start thinking of him that he may be a different type. And this is when type theory gets ultimatively blurry, cause when it is about preference, some people change their personal preferences according to the task at hand and could be given just a very general and faint signature in mbti. So it's ultimatly hard to type them at all.

    The most threatening element mbti has for me is putting up this stereotypes. In other words, it justifies for nerds that it is ok to be nerds, instead of encouraging them to become more social. And I think this holds no educational value.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  7. #27
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    Cause if you went so deep down the rabbit hole that you start mole digging for logical discrepancies in the system, you may have already overshot the limits in which the system still applies.
    I think this hits a key point for me: trying to make MBTI serve more purpose than it is capable of, including defining personality beyond its own bounds. I like MBTI (and Jungian theory & personality theory in general) for what it is & am not ready to get over my obsession any time soon , but it's important to keep in perspective what it actually defines, what is actually meant to be used for, and how that even relates to real people.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  8. #28
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    There's an ancient old german fairytale about the small caterpillar Nimmersatt, who always liked to eat more and more. He found a new kind of leaf, thought of it as totally awesome, only ate the leaf until he was so overfed that he thought those leaves are boring and found a new kind of leaf he found totally awesome. In the end, Nimmersatt ( which means sth. like "never full" ), exploded..
    Heh. I was going to use another mythical/fairytale reference earlier.. About Jason and the Argonauts, and the song of the sirens. I kind of thought it'd be too much, but the point I was going to make to Sherlock is that sometimes it's best to pull away if you hit a wall with a system like this (at least for a time). If it keeps driving you crazy, you need an Orpheus.. something with a more enticing song that will distract you from whatever the sirens are driving you mad about. Whatever that may be.

  9. #29
    Consulting Detective Mr. Sherlock Holmes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    JiNe
    Enneagram
    5W4
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Thank you all for your responses. Grr... I don't like it when something I've been studying for a long time turns out to be so flawed and incomprehensive. For the longest time it seemed a near perfect system, but the deeper you get, the bigger the holes look. And you're right, I need something more interesting to focus on. I'm going to Uni next year and currently I am looking to go into game programming and design. I'm not even entirely sure I will enjoy it, since I can't really decide what I feel passionate about at the moment, but hopefully, it will be something else to get myself lost in.
    JiNe
    Ti | Fi | Ne | Si | Te | Ni | Fe | Se
    Enneagram: 5w4 sx/sp

    "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

    "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

  10. #30
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Here's a lady who has analyzed MBTI as well and has managed to expose some holes in it. She is a self-proclaimed INTP, but like you, she has strong emotions at times
    Personally, I never doubted that T's have emotions. It's definitely more complicated than that. All I have to do simply go outside and speak to TJs and TPs and will find the idea that they lack emotion disproven fairly quickly. People without emotions are autistic or in some cases, on lithium. What I've been puzzled on is not emotion, but the nature of Ti and Fi convictions. "Values" vs "Principles", and the differences on where they originate from. As for emotions, the funny thing is that ESTPs, for example, who apparently don't have Fi, can voice anger, impatience, or enthusiasm for something that can almost be construed for "feeling" to an outside observer. It's how they're reasoning that makes them Ti though. And the energy is just Se. While some ISTJs, who have Fi, come off even more stoic and less vocal about things. I have two ISTJ family members who probably should get a medal for it. Then there are ISFPs who are pleasant and soft spoken and ESTJs who can fly off the handle quickly.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-11-2016, 10:37 PM
  2. The MBTI types of MLB stars.
    By ferunandesu in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-05-2008, 04:53 PM
  3. What's the MBTI of..
    By Alfa Prime in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-06-2007, 08:59 PM
  4. Tone of the MBTI forum...
    By Athenian200 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-30-2007, 02:24 PM
  5. What is the point of the MBTI?
    By Dufresne in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 04:37 AM

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