User Tag List

First 456

Results 51 to 60 of 60

  1. #51
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    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.
    Beebe's model is really not as "rigid/strict/narrow" as it seems. I even had a couple of brief e-mail discussions with him, and I found that he allowed for the same fluidity in the functions, as what Lenore had said. Like that the ego can "scoop" any of the functions out of their archetypal "carriers" any time as neede. So that the functions should not be "conflated" with the archetype. (A mistake most of us tend to make when first learning about the archetypes).

    A lot of the misunderstandings stem from various "interpreters" trying to simplify the concepts.
    As for the tertiary and inferior (or any of the lower archetypes), we don't type based on those, but they can be used as further evidence supporting a type we think is best.
    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

  2. #52
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robopop View Post
    Being Ti means you evaluate information(perceived by Ne or Se) according to your internally derived impersonal principles. Which gets to my point about why I think Ti contradicts Fi, Ti tries as much as possible to get rid of personal bias/personal values/feelings when coming to it's deductive conclusions, in this way it goes extremely well with Fe because Fe also will put aside the individual's personal feelings in support of the communal feelings/ethics it feels connected to.
    Impersonal logic is only useful in a limited set of circumstances. In such circumstances, Ti is the appropriate 'function' to use. The mistake many (young/immature) Ti-doms make is to try to force personal decisions into an impersonal framework. That just leads to either poor decision-making or an infinite loop - no decision-making. Fe might act like a crutch in such circumstances - just do what every else is doing/wants you to do (or indeed, rebel against what everyone else is doing - inferior expression does not resemble healthy expression). Your point about Ti and Fe "going extremely well together" lacks support. Each represents the other's principle blindspot. I could argue that Ti and Fi go well together because they have a shared affinity for the inner voice and the path less-travelled - thus they are not in conflict, ideologically speaking.
    Ti-doms who develop Fi have another string to their bow. They can switch between the impersonal and the personal paradigm, but one will always be preferred. Ti critiques Fi-based reasoning. Fi humanizes Ti-logic. They are complementary, not contradictory.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  3. #53

    Default

    And then you have the whole problem of socionics to consider. In socionics the function order is different so where does that leave things? I spend way too much time overanalysing too and it's getting anoying. I want my life back! Someone will say something and my mind can't help but bring it back to types. It's killing my spontenaity.

  4. #54
    Senior Member Robopop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Impersonal logic is only useful in a limited set of circumstances. In such circumstances, Ti is the appropriate 'function' to use. The mistake many (young/immature) Ti-doms make is to try to force personal decisions into an impersonal framework. That just leads to either poor decision-making or an infinite loop - no decision-making. Fe might act like a crutch in such circumstances - just do what every else is doing/wants you to do (or indeed, rebel against what everyone else is doing - inferior expression does not resemble healthy expression). Your point about Ti and Fe "going extremely well together" lacks support. Each represents the other's principle blindspot. I could argue that Ti and Fi go well together because they have a shared affinity for the inner voice and the path less-travelled - thus they are not in conflict, ideologically speaking.
    Ti-doms who develop Fi have another string to their bow. They can switch between the impersonal and the personal paradigm, but one will always be preferred. Ti critiques Fi-based reasoning. Fi humanizes Ti-logic. They are complementary, not contradictory.
    If I can ask
    1. Do you think people generally use all 8 cognitive functions and do you think the top two functions are what define a type(TiNe INTP)?

    2.Do you think people have a definite Ji function, Pe funtion, Pi function, and Je function(4 definite functions) or is any of the functions up for grabs after the top two?

    3.Do you think people can regularly and consciously switch cognitive functions at will(like do you think a Ti dom can temporarily became Fi dominant)?

    4. Do you think some functional combinations can mimic other cognitive functions(like Se+Ti mimicking Te)?

    5. When considering cognitive functions, do you consider what people do(specific actions, like organizing a desk, checking a list, solving a math problem) or do you consider why people do what they do, do you think about their core motivations?

    The reason I ask some of these questions is because many people studying a subject such as this have many different interpretations of the ideas Carl Jung presented. From my understanding, the cognitive functions are complete "mindsets" people have, not some skill and ability they can automatically use when the situation calls for it. The reason I think Ti contradicts Fi is because one says you should consider your internal evaluations(Ji) in terms of impersonal, objective principles and the other says one should treat internal evaluations in terms of your deeply held personal values/feelings. I find it somewhat strange to have two Ji functions in the same person. From what I understand, you can't just mentally switch your entire mindset/worldview that easily, for this reason I actually think Ti and Fe are two parts of the same overall attitude(I think(Ti), we feel(Fe)), the same with Ne and Si, Se and Ni, Te and Fi. One attitude is focused on the internal aspect(let's say Ti) and the other attitude is focused on the external(Fe), one focuses it's content on impersonal evaluations(Ti) and the other on personal evaluations(Fe) without getting in each other's way. From what I understand, people have 1 thinking function, 1 feeling function, 1 sensing function, and 1 intuition function.

    For instance INTP, an INTP takes a depth-based approach(introversion) to impersonal evaluation(T), a more expansive, broad-based approach(extroversion) to intuition(N). From here, it might get tricky for some people, the tertiary and inferior, the INTP has to have a sensing and feeling function(a Pi and Je function to balance Ji and Pe), again, this is from my understanding, the INTP can't have Se because it contradicts Ne, Fi contradicts both Fe and Ti. For instance, TJs and FPs might agree more on external impersonal criteria(Te), while an Ti-Fe user might have a harder time coming to agreement with Te because Ti bases it's evaluations on internally derived impersonal logic. Ti might see Te as "sloopy reasoning" because Ti takes a more depth-based, qualitive approach to impersonal reasoning. Te is most concerned about broad application, what can this do to achieve an externally based goal/standard(Je), in this way Ti could be considered to be similar to Fi because they are both more concerned with a more "individualistic" approach to their evaluations. For instance, a INTP and INFP can appear extremely similar on the surface(Ne) and can share a wealth of interests together(both are very abstract-oriented), but they can come into heavy conflict if their internal judgment functions disagree on the content of their evaluation methods(impersonal logic or personal values/ethics).

    It should really be Te-Fi and Fe-Ti together(Ne-Si and Se-Ni) like with an INFP, Fi handles the personal, subjective realm and Te handles the impersonal, objective realm, granted, they would be alot more focused on the personal, humanistic side of things, but if they really did have Ti, Ti would want to do away with that criteria when making internal evaluations(Ji), Te handles the INFP's impersonal evaluations but from an external context(although they may not be as focused in that area because they are F dominant. I find this method easier when understanding jungian typology. Is it right, proven for everybody, I don't know, but it works for me now, this is not a precise, scientific subject where there's one proven, qualified standard, there's alot of different functional models. Each of us are making some basic assumptions other people might not agree with, it really depends on how you are defining these terms.
    Reserved Calm Unstructured Egocentric Inquisitive Clown

    Johari Nohari

  5. #55
    Consulting Detective Mr. Sherlock Holmes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    JiNe
    Enneagram
    5W4
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robopop View Post
    The thing is, emotions are a physiological response, being a Ti dom does not mean you can't care for other people, feel deeply/intensely, see beauty in the world, ect. Being Ti means you evaluate information(perceived by Ne or Se) according to your internally derived impersonal principles. Which gets to my point about why I think Ti contradicts Fi, Ti tries as much as possible to get rid of personal bias/personal values/feelings when coming to it's deductive conclusions, in this way it goes extremely well with Fe because Fe also will put aside the individual's personal feelings in support of the communal feelings/ethics it feels connected to.
    If an Ti dominant can do everything emotional and moralistic and the only difference between Ti and Fi emotion/valuewise is the fact that the values and decisions of an Fi dom are irrational, it would be pretty crap to be an Fi dom. But I'm not saying Ti doms are totally unemotional either. In fact, this is why I am saying that they probably would tend to use a lot of Fi and vice versa. I don't think Ti and Fe complement each other at all. Fe takes morals, emotional attitudes and values from the group they relate to and not from the self. Wouldn't Ti look at this and say "Hang on. Why am I doing this? These values and attitudes maynot make sense, they may be shallow, superficial or even downright ridiculous if you think about it." and in this way, it is beginning to feel VERY much like Fi, but it is still rationalizing something. Why would a Ti user want their values dominated by someone else? In at least a lot of cases, it seems the only time an INTP complies is because they don't want to have to deal with hassle, not out of any actual desire to.

    Fi on the other hand seems to fit in much more neatly. There is, it would seem, some degree of seperation between ones logic and ones feelings. A lot of crossover and gray area, but still some seperation. If Ti is expressed in it's full form with no feeling function, it becomes very nihilistic, the world is purely logical, it has no purpose, no reason to do anything at all. It needs values to give it a reason to exist, a reason to take some sort of action. Ti alone seeks nothing from personal relationships. What are people? Just more data. More atoms. This is of course, the most exxagerated form, but do you see what I mean? There are times when being totally impersonal does not work. Fi, still subjectively, gives the logical framework meaning and goals. It is pleasing then when a goal, fulfilling an Fi value, is achieved. However, if Fi exists in the absence of thinking (and Te tends to be very irrational anyway, relying on what it is told rather than logical analysis) it is uncontrolled, irrational, and can make a horrible mess (Often the plotline of many sitcoms). If a person only acts on how they feel in a situation, without considering the logical basis of their values, this could, in it's strongest form, lead to total extremism.

    So, if a person has developed both functions, they can

    -Be logical
    -Analyse systems to understand them
    -Have values
    -Analyse things to make sure they fit with their values
    -Make sure the values have a rational basis
    -Be able to naturally change from an impersonal analytical and logical approach to a value-drive, emotional approach as the situation demands

    Without trying to be offensive, both Te AND Fe seem a bit shallow to me.
    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."

  6. #56
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Sherlock Holmes View Post
    Without trying to be offensive, both Te AND Fe seem a bit shallow to me.
    well they are, a bit, as far as i understand it. but on the other hand, Fi and Ti are highly impractical because they don't adapt to fit their surroundings - they make demands and refuse to move if those demands are not met, unlike Fe and Te, which utilize what they've got. there would be no integrity of systems without Fi and Ti, but there would be no glue holding systems together without Fe and Te.

    anyway - as for MBTI accuracy - it seems that very frequently when someone rejects a system, it's because they don't see themselves fitting into it. i feel the same way about the enneagram; i do not find it to suit me well and it frustrates me quite constantly. i continue to wonder whether i just don't understand it well enough, or if it's simply not a good system to describe me. though i hear that many others find it very valuable, so i don't really begrudge its existence. if we take as true what mystic tater has pointed out -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater
    The system itself was meant to be a rough tool to be applicable to most people.
    then it seems reasonable to believe that maybe a system which works well for many just might not work out for those on the "diving lines" between types.

  7. #57
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    anyway - as for MBTI accuracy - it seems that very frequently when someone rejects a system, it's because they don't see themselves fitting into it. i feel the same way about the enneagram; i do not find it to suit me well and it frustrates me quite constantly. i continue to wonder whether i just don't understand it well enough, or if it's simply not a good system to describe me. though i hear that many others find it very valuable, so i don't really begrudge its existence. if we take as true what mystic tater has pointed out -
    I echo this.

    In general MBTI has value. From my observations over the years, about 80% of folks seem to nicely fit into one of the sixteen buckets. If they dont fit, typically it was me incorrectly understanding a particular type. Based on the MBTI Step I, about 70% of people retake the test and get the same results. This speaks for it being repeatable. About 2 million people take it each year. This says-even if the underlying theory is garbage-the test itself offers value to the organizations and individuals that use it.

    The people who dont cleanly fit into a bucket are really interesting. This is where looking at the functions was of value to me personally.

    I have given a few step IIs to folks around age 35. In every case they pick the dom/aux function, but as they will exhibit a pull during the verification towards the MBTI letters that make up the tert/iinf function. For instance an ISFP who feels pulled towards N and T just a bit, an ENFP who feels pulled towards T and S (via a need for order-Si), and an INFJ who feels pulled towards T and S (via a joy of highly physical activities-Se). I dunno..this looks potentially confirmatory of the tert/inf function growing in as folks mature or due to external forces.

    So-based upon what I have observed so far-

    I think "types" are nature, but expression of type is heavily influenced by nurture.

    I think there really is one set order of cognitive functions, but that "nurture" can heavily influence the relative development of each function-leading to apparent out of order functional expression.

    I think behavior can be somewhat predicted, but is by no means determined by type/cognitive functions. The power of the system is allowing you to understand your own patterns-thus give you the ability to step out of an instinctual pattern. Other forms of counseling can do the same thing, using different tools.

    I think the emergence of the last four shadow/beebe functions can play a significant and unanticipated impact that may be very difficult to evaluate except on an individual basis. It's real but it is complicated.

    So my approach will be to assume a fairly generic approach based on pretty standard MBTI dogma while talking about theory and speaking in generalities, even to the point of pushing the system until it breaks based upon observations, but when talking to individuals, assume anything is possible and listen for new insights, new observations, new ideas, that if heard and observed often enough break my old models..

  8. #58
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Sherlock Holmes View Post
    I don't think Ti and Fe complement each other at all. Fe takes morals, emotional attitudes and values from the group they relate to and not from the self. Wouldn't Ti look at this and say "Hang on. Why am I doing this? These values and attitudes maynot make sense, they may be shallow, superficial or even downright ridiculous if you think about it." and in this way, it is beginning to feel VERY much like Fi, but it is still rationalizing something. Why would a Ti user want their values dominated by someone else? In at least a lot of cases, it seems the only time an INTP complies is because they don't want to have to deal with hassle, not out of any actual desire to.

    Fi on the other hand seems to fit in much more neatly. There is, it would seem, some degree of seperation between ones logic and ones feelings. A lot of crossover and gray area, but still some seperation. If Ti is expressed in it's full form with no feeling function, it becomes very nihilistic, the world is purely logical, it has no purpose, no reason to do anything at all. It needs values to give it a reason to exist, a reason to take some sort of action. Ti alone seeks nothing from personal relationships. What are people? Just more data. More atoms. This is of course, the most exxagerated form, but do you see what I mean? There are times when being totally impersonal does not work. Fi, still subjectively, gives the logical framework meaning and goals. It is pleasing then when a goal, fulfilling an Fi value, is achieved. However, if Fi exists in the absence of thinking (and Te tends to be very irrational anyway, relying on what it is told rather than logical analysis) it is uncontrolled, irrational, and can make a horrible mess (Often the plotline of many sitcoms). If a person only acts on how they feel in a situation, without considering the logical basis of their values, this could, in it's strongest form, lead to total extremism.

    So, if a person has developed both functions, they can

    -Be logical
    -Analyse systems to understand them
    -Have values
    -Analyse things to make sure they fit with their values
    -Make sure the values have a rational basis
    -Be able to naturally change from an impersonal analytical and logical approach to a value-drive, emotional approach as the situation demands

    Without trying to be offensive, both Te AND Fe seem a bit shallow to me.
    Here's how I explain on my page why Ti and Fe would work in tandem:

    I find joy in internal logic, while ethical issues often come off as very intrusive to the inner world. It's a threat, like I'm afraid it will condemn the logic or try to pull me away from it, or expose my flaws or make me vulnerable or something. (And I then also react to the stimuli by tending to want to pull down the lofty moral stances of others, which I feel in some way threatened by!)
    So then ethical values are simply delegated to the outer world. (And even then, it's shaky!) If I can fit in with others, and/or they accept me, then there; the ethics/integrity/self-worth issue is taken care of. (Let others 'do all the work' for me in that area!)
    But not in the area of logic! Outer world, keep out of that area! Just like ethics feel very intrusive in my inner world, the outer world is very intrusive to my logic. If I feel the need to turn outward to defend, prove or support my inner logic, then I'll call on external stimuli such as external efficiency or other such standards.

    On the other hand, since Fi is the right-brain alternative, and fellow "P" function; it is in some ways more like the dominant Ti perspective. The ego's goal is to maintain its dominant orientation. "J" - ordering of the external environment will always be at odds with the P - introverted judgment ego, whether the judging function is T or F. But I would say it will be selective about when it will allow the value judgment into that area. Likewise, the equally logical Te will also "back up" the dominant, but only when supporting the ego's agenda.

    Again, I don't think so much of functions in terms of things we "use".
    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

  9. #59
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Why take the MBTI so serious?

  10. #60
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Seems I missed this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Robopop
    If I can ask
    1. Do you think people generally use all 8 cognitive functions or do you think the top two functions are what define a type(TiNe INTP)?
    Those aren’t mutually exclusive options. Yes to top two defining type (usually). I don’t think most people develop good conscious use of all eight in the average lifetime.
    2.Do you think people have a definite Ji function, Pe funtion, Pi function, and Je function or is any of the functions up for grabs after the top two?
    Varies (by nurture). But there are patterns consistent with ‘opposing’ functions (like Ti and Fe) tending not to both be strongly developed in the same individual – one is ‘sacrificed’ in service to the other, and retains an infantile quality.
    3.Do you think people can regularly and consciously switch cognitive functions at will(like do you think a Ti dom can temporarily became Fi dominant)?
    No. But a function doesn’t have to become “dominant” in order to be “used”.

    I understand what you are saying about theory, but for me, empirical evidence trumps theory where the two are in disagreement.

    *waits to be called INTJ. Again*
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

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