User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 53

  1. #41
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    Athenian, your post is a good post given the premise that pre-given MBTI function order templates are okay.
    Yes. But this is not unreasonable since the function order templates are what make MBTI.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  2. #42
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Yes. But this is not unreasonable since the function order templates are what make MBTI.
    On the other hand, it's possible that everyone else has been using, and wants to use, a system other than MBTI, which would make my complaints irrelevant.

    If they could just decide whether they wanted to use Keirsey, or MBTI, or Berens, or what ever else they can think of, rather than trying to combine it all in one whole... things would be simpler.

  3. #43
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    That's true. We would want some system that would elicit the inspiration brought to us by MBTI, but something that would have the correctedness of OCEAN.

    Perhaps we're in the process of trying to synthesize a system of our own?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  4. #44
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Here are some things that we need to do away with if we are to accurately type people:

    3. Liberal allocation of the shadow functions.
    If a claimed INFJ seems more like an ISTP, people will just cite tertiary Ti and inferior Se as the culprits. If an claimed INTP seems more like an ISFJ, people will just cite tertiary Si and inferior Fe as the culprits. Sigh... the shadow does NOT work that way. A person's basic behavior while not under stress, would not be more like that of their shadow, at least not until they're older and they've consciously tried hard to integrate it. I can tolerate a provision for allowing the shadow traits to come up once in a while when it's not part of the typical pattern, but you can't use that to dismiss a huge, major pattern in their personality!

    4. The T/F gender socialization card.
    I can buy it only in very limited circumstances. Sure, this might explain away a few superficial traits, or maybe even major ones if the person had a VERY harsh upbringing that emphasized gender roles and was forced against their preference repeatedly. I don't think this is as common as people are imagining, though. The reality is that this card is effectively used to make it such that a woman can show far more F preferences and still be called T, while a man can show far more T preferences and still be called F. They're basically lowering the standards in an attempt to make the distribution of T and F more equal. But in reality, it doesn't work that way. The standards should not be lowered, because there are T women and F men who have CLEAR preferences, and often without even going too far outside of gender roles. Accept that this function sometimes shows a gender bias and move on... don't try to artificially "repair" that bias with this card, please? You're only making it harder for women that are only slightly expressed Fs, or men that are only slightly expressed Ts, to determine their type.

    6. "Weak" letters that don't fit the type pattern.
    One's dominant function should never be "weak." One can have a weak auxiliary, but the dominant function should always be fairly strong, or that means you're a different type. I would think this would be obvious, considering that the dominant function is supposed to represent the consciousness and the self-image.I can accept a weak I/E, because that just means you have a strong auxiliary. I can also accept a weak auxiliary indicated by a weak letter associated with it. But I do not buy the whole concept of a weak dominant, or a weak J/P. J/P has less to do with behavior in terms of organization/punctuality/neatness, and more to do with functions. The difference between J/P types is a completely different functional order, and you should be able to tell which one you have, unless you're completely mistyped.

    8. Assumption that functions can be individually developed.
    This doesn't work. When one has Fe, they have Ti. They can't go out and develop Te. Sure, they can emulate Te behaviors and learn to communicate effectively with Te users, but that's not developing Te. They may be learning skills traditionally associated with Te, but their motivations for learning them will likely be related their dominant or auxiliary. Fe would want to learn Te skills in order to get along with Te users, for instance. Ni might want to learn Te skills in order to more effectively shape their environment into what they would like to see. Give me just about any skill or concern, and I can give you each function's possible motivation for having it.
    The problem we are left with, with disregarding all these clues, is that a lot more people than there already are, are left as XXXX. If one doesn't fit the pattern of their given type, but doesn't fit the other 15 patterns even more, then what is there left to do? Would you rather that most of us be XXXX?

    I am seeing this way too often on the forum where someone who clearly looks more INTx than any of the other types, is said to not be that type because of an S or F function at an unusual 'strength.' The problem is, if that person decides to identify as an S or F type, then a whole lot more functions are atypical in strength. The N and T functions being in the dominant and auxillary should be a big red flag.

    This is what happens when there are 16 boxes for nearly 7 billion people.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Kenneth Almighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Here ye, here ye! I demand thoust be stickieth!

    (You can use my jizz if you want)

  6. #46
    Senior Member burymecloser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    514

    Default

    ^It's "hear ye".


    And "hear, hear!" God, I hate it when people write "here, here." What the fuck do they think that means?
    i just want to be a sweetheart

  7. #47
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    It seems that the poor typing on this forum goes beyond MBTI

  8. #48
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Typing wrong isn't the problem, typing everything is the problem.

    Things are too complex to entirely fit inside a box we assign.

  9. #49
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by guesswho View Post
    Things are too complex to entirely fit inside a box we assign.
    Well now isn't that the most creative thing I've heard all day.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuchIrony View Post
    Jung made no mention of J/P as an MBTI letter. It was added later on. The real purpose of J/P is to help designate whether the dominant function is a judging (T or F) one or a perceiving (S or N) one. People tack on qualities to J/P like neat vs. messy or punctual vs. always late that miss the point of what the J/P designation was originally intended for.
    Not really. ISTP is P with a dom judging...INTJ is a J with a dom perception. It basically means either an internal perception(can be seen as a judging function) or an extraverted judging function is more prevelant. Ji is an internal deciding function and Pe is more of a pulling in data, while Pi is more of a data is already present. So Pe can be highly non social, but perceptive which is not "externally judgy".

    J is not tied to T/F nor is P tied to S/N. It actually does best define personality, but not qualities. "Qualities" already have "judgmental" notation around the meaning. A J is more likely to care about being "percieved" as neat or orderly while a P is more likely to not care whether they are "percieved" as neat or messy. But its still a preference and certain situations like trying to impress or push away a single person or group CAN cause someont to act outside of there default personality.

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI type based on this cognitive spread
    By SteinitzGamgbit in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-20-2015, 05:38 PM
  2. Why do some people on this forum seem to dislike MBTI?
    By sofmarhof in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 11-19-2015, 08:43 PM
  3. Replies: 57
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 07:35 PM
  4. Which people on this forum are the hardest to type?
    By Such Irony in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-24-2011, 10:43 AM
  5. Communication types on this forum.
    By Athenian200 in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-12-2008, 06:26 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