How do you sort The Temperaments for your purposes?

[King sns]

Man, I wanted to quote so many people, but the dumb multiquote isn’t working for me.

Anyway. I guess I would say I usually type “NJ”, “NP”, “SP”, and “SJ”

Though my usual typing method is to work backwards. When I'm around someone, the tendency is to type the whole picture using dichotomies. (Since, honestly, I can't say what's going on in their head. I can only say what I see.)"This person is an ESTP"... (Next time) "No, they're an ESTJ". I am able to change it as time goes on. Then as I get to know people, I can start to get their functions down better. Usually the person's type changes drastically over a short period of knowing them and then I start to narrow things down better. "Maybe not an ESTJ, but an SJ for sure." Often times, I find that the 4 two letter pairings above are typed correctly the first time.

As a side note, Elfboy's comment about not relating by changing the N/S is right for me, too. (This is not to say that I don't relate to them on other levels or like them), but usually after getting to know an ENFP I feel completely and totally different from them in thought processing, Ne is very foreign to me. Seems like Fi and Te may even present a little differently in combination with the Ne as opposed to the Se. (Just a thought/ guessing. ) In fact, I feel that I think more similarly to an ENTJ. (Same functions, different order.) Or perhaps a better way to put it is that I behave more like an ENFP, but think more like an ENTJ. It's not really related to the OP, just wanted to comment.

(And as a side side side side note- since I haven’t had my coffee yet and can’t seem to get my mind straight this morning.)

My typing skills aren’t actually all that bad. In my last semester of nursing school they made us split up in to groups in the class, (there was about 50 people in the class.) 50 people that I had been mentally trying to type for the last two years. We split off into 4 groups, orange, gold, green, and blue (SP’s, SJ’s, NT’s, and NF’s), respectively. I was surprised to find out that my guesses weren’t that far off! Of course a class of nurses are likely to be made up of mostly SJ’s, followed by NF’s, (which was true.) It was nice to be able to test my typing skills. Though somehow I scored gold on the test and ended up with a big group of SJ’s and was bummed out because they were taking the group activities way too serious and it was really uptight the whole time. Either way, what was hilarious was when the whole thing kind of started to turn into the forum. (The instructor asking gold’s if oranges annoyed them sometimes…”Because as a gold, I get anxious when things aren’t structured.” LoL!)

 

[Eric B]

I favor both Keirsey's groups (the conative temperaments NT, NF, SJ, SP), as well as Berens' Interaction Styles (the affective temperaments, EST/ENJ, IST/INJ, ESF/ENP, ISF/INP) because I found that the map right onto part of the system I was familiar with:
http://www.pastoral-counseling-center.org/Temperament-Area-Of-Inclusion.htm (Interaction Styles)
http://www.pastoral-counseling-center.org/Temperament-Area-Of-Control.htm (Keirseyan temperaments)
(You'll see 17 groups in both areas, but there are really just five temperaments, the rest are variations, and of the five, Supine and Phlegmatic can be treated as one for the sake of matching four temperaments or Interaction Styles).

Still, I see the value of other letter groupings. The sociability temperaments (E/I + J/P) are said to be the first letters that develop in a child (Personality Page), and are coterminous with the Interaction Styles for N's.

The "Normative Temperaments": T/F + J/P, I learned about from this page http://www.rogerbissell.com/achillestendencies/atachilles.html (this guy also believes that more of the different "symmetrical" letter combinations should be paid attention to. He's not into the "asymmetrical" Keirsey and Berens groupings).
It really helped me understand both the judging functions, as well as put together my own correlation (especially the whole "TJ's are most directive, FP's are the most friendly, and TP's and FJ's are inbetween", which you can see figures prominently in this recent topic: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/mbti-tm-other-personality-matrices/46096-enigmatic-types.html Iwa, I was wondering what you think of that premise)

You also have the perceiving attitudes or "Cognitive Temperaments": S/N + J/P (SJ, SP, NJ and NP)
And of course, Myer's original preferred function combinations (ST, NT, SF, and NF)

Another grouping I don't see discussed by anyone else, but I occasionally mention, is what I call the "social image" groups (E/I + T/F): ET, IT, EF, IF. They are probably the most easily detected when we see others in social settings. These also figure in the "Enigmatic Types" thread, and are coterminous with the Interaction Styles for the S's.

That's what I like about the system. so many ways to break it down, and it all yields some sort of meaning.

 

[iwakar]

That's what I like about the system. so many ways to break it down, and it all yields some sort of meaning.

Yeeeesssss! I am headed out the door btw, so I'll take a look at your links and give you feedback later!

 

[Queen Kat]

ET, EF, IT and IF. In that case I'd at least know my place.

 

[iwakar]

Also, what is the name for a 16-sided figure? We need a 3D transparent MBTI soccer ball to see all possibilities with interior linear connections.

/nerd

 

[Such Irony]

ST / NT / SF / NF

Members of these groups tend to have similar interests and skill sets.

 

[Kasper]

NT, NF, SJ & SP works easiest for me, I relate most to INTPs so any grouping that separates extroverts from introverts doesn't work, and when it comes to NFs in many ways I relate better to NFJs than NFPs with the Fe-Ti similarities, so NP groupings don't work. The next best option for me would be TP, FP, TJ, FJ.

 

[Xenon]

How I sort types for my "purposes" depends on what my purposes are at the moment. I think a case could be made for any two or three-letter combination. You could talk about the similarities among all the INxx types, or commonalities among the xSTx types, or sort by dominant judging process or dominant perceiving process, or whatever. It depends what characteristics you're talking about.

It's interesting to see the types sorted in alternative ways. For example, there's a book called 'The Eight Colors of Fitness' that organizes the types according to how they prefer to approach exercise. The author found that T/F is least relevant there, and that dominant perceiving process (Si, Se, Ni or Ne) was by far most important. I/E preference was in between. So her eight colors are the sixteen types, with types that differ only on T/F grouped together under one color. (ESJs, ESPs, ISJs, etc.) When she does presentations she condenses these into four groups and talks only of NPs, NJs, SJs and SPs. I haven't read her book, but I read an interview with her here and I really relate to the stuff she said about Ne users. And this is in spite of the fact that I'm very introverted and don't normally identify much with ENxPs.

 

[Orangey]

lol i dunno, as an Se user you should have been able to see this part: "Se is really different from Si, while Ni and Ne are quite alike, so T/F makes bigger difference on N types."

or do i need to write a book about it that explains that sentence in more detail so that you understand what it says?

lol i dunno, as a Ti user you should have been able to recognize your own tautological reasoning and baseless assertions. The problem with the bolded is not that I failed to understand it, but simply that it's an assertion in need of justification that you clearly, for whatever reason, want to pass-off as self-evident.

or do i need to write a book that explains how not to argue like a twelve year-old on the internet?

 

[King sns]

I thought that this was a thread about sorting temperaments for your purposes? Never knew there was a right or wrong way to do anything for one's personal purposes.

 

[Orangey]

Orangey, I admit that I find the EJ IP IJ EP sorting easier in terms of spotting which groups people belong to when I'm out and about in the real world, because although I don't know their inner workings, it's not hard to identify visible behavior in real life. On a place like this forum that way becomes a lot tougher.

Eh, I think typing people on the forum is a farce anyway.

And of course, Myer's original preferred function combinations (ST, NT, SF, and NF)

Another grouping I don't see discussed by anyone else, but I occasionally mention, is what I call the "social image" groups (E/I + T/F): ET, IT, EF, IF. They are probably the most easily detected when we see others in social settings. These also figure in the "Enigmatic Types" thread, and are coterminous with the Interaction Styles for the S's.

Aha, I like both of these.

Never knew there was a right or wrong way to do anything for one's personal purposes.

Really? So anything I do is okay as long as it's for my own personal purposes? I wonder how well that little ditty will fly in court...

 

[SilkRoad]

This has all been very interesting... I'm inclined to think that, as a few others said, the IJ/IP/EJ/EP sets are probably the easiest and most useful at least for external factors.

 

[Thalassa]

That's interesting.

I forgot to add that some people have expressed a preference for NJ, NP, SJ, SP.

I think NJ, NP, SJ, SP makes equally as much sense as FP, FJ, TP, TJ. I think groups need to be formed for similarity of functions, not for random "interaction styles."

 

[INTP]

lol i dunno, as a Ti user you should have been able to recognize your own tautological reasoning and baseless assertions. The problem with the bolded is not that I failed to understand it, but simply that it's an assertion in need of justification that you clearly, for whatever reason, want to pass-off as self-evident.

or do i need to write a book that explains how not to argue like a twelve year-old on the internet?

but its obvious if you understand what Si, Se, Ni and Ne means and if you understand the meaning for words 'similar' and 'different'. Se and Si are different, Ni and Ne are similar. what more do you need lol? if you need definitions for Si, Se, Ni and Ne, try google.

 

[Robopop]

I like the EP, EJ, IP, and IJ grouping the best as the types share the same cognitive function structure(Ji Pe Pi Je for IP) and I think they will have alot of lifestyle similarities.

For example:

EPs - The Explorers
These people share extroverted perceiving as their dominant function.
They generally have an positive, optimistic view of the external world
They are the most in-tune with the external world(either in the concrete, here and now or the abstract, conceptual)
They are very action-based(reactive), even more than EJs
may be seen as reckless
Most adaptable
Easily bored, restless, need constant stimulation
risk-taking
loves change, novelty seeking
"All over the place"

IPs - The Individualists
They share dominant introverted judgement
Live and let live types
Probably the most easygoing temperament but have strong, solid internal values, principles
Relaxed, mellow, laid-back demeanor, least concern for controlling external environment, may be seen as lazy(esp INPs)
Low energy
Slowly building up their internal identity and what they think is personally meaningful
Receptive, informative
Fluctuates between longer periods of quiet reflection and shorter periods of stimulating activity
Passive, peaceful
Behind the scences
Secretly perfectionistic
Most undecisive
Nonconformist

IJs - The Stragetists
They share dominant introverted perceiving
Very cautious
Have strong inner visions
Stable, Steady
least externally adaptable
Anxious about sudden change, seems like the opposites of the EPs
Prepared
Likes having a plan of action
Focused
Might have whimsical, unexpected private lives and interests, "wearing" a Je mask
Dependable, very reliable

EJs - The Initiators
They share dominant extroverted jugdement
Proactive, go-getters
Organized
Goal-oriented
Forceful, strong personalities
May be seen as "uptight", "rigid" by other temperaments(esp ETJs)
Likes to follow through
Doers
Directive
Natural leaders
Very decisive

 

[strychnine]

INTP:
Honestly, I think Se and Ne are more similar than Se and Si. (Same for Si and Ni vs. Ni and Ne.) Perhaps I am also just stupid, but I've read these definitions as well, and come to a different conclusion than you did. Your conclusion isn't 'obvious' at all.

Really? So anything I do is okay as long as it's for my own personal purposes? I wonder how well that little ditty will fly in court...

It wouldn't even go to court in the first place. No matter how I decide to group the temperaments, it's not going to affect you. Even if I'm 'wrong' and you're 'right'. Even if my system makes no sense. You will not die or be injured by my 'crime'.

 

[INTP]

I like the EP, EJ, IP, and IJ grouping the best as the types share the same cognitive function structure(Ji Pe Pi Je for IP) and I think they will have alot of lifestyle similarities.

For example:

EPs - The Explorers
These people share extroverted perceiving as their dominant function.
They generally have an positive, optimistic view of the external world
They are the most in-tune with the external world(either in the concrete, here and now or the abstract, conceptual)
They are very action-based(reactive), even more than EJs
may be seen as reckless
Most adaptable
Easily bored, restless, need constant stimulation
risk-taking
loves change, novelty seeking
"All over the place"

IPs - The Individualists
They share dominant introverted judgement
Live and let live types
Probably the most easygoing temperament but have strong, solid internal values, principles
Relaxed, mellow, laid-back demeanor, least concern for controlling external environment, may be seen as lazy(esp INPs)
Low energy
Slowly building up their internal identity and what they think is personally meaningful
Receptive, informative
Fluctuates between longer periods of quiet reflection and shorter periods of stimulating activity
Passive, peaceful
Behind the scences
Secretly perfectionistic
Most undecisive
Nonconformist

IJs - The Stragetists
They share dominant introverted perceiving
Very cautious
Have strong inner visions
Stable, Steady
least externally adaptable
Anxious about sudden change, seems like the opposites of the EPs
Prepared
Likes having a plan of action
Focused
Might have whimsical, unexpected private lives and interests, "wearing" a Je mask
Dependable, very reliable

EJs - The Initiators
They share dominant extroverted jugdement
Proactive, go-getters
Organized
Goal-oriented
Forceful, strong personalities
May be seen as "uptight", "rigid" by other temperaments(esp ETJs)
Likes to follow through
Doers
Directive
Natural leaders
Very decisive

how about for example ENTP with good Si and Ti(low E), that sort of ENTP is more similar to ESFP than INTP with high Ne and Fe(low I)?

in conclusion this pairing works only if you look as extremes -> it fails

 

[INTP]

INTP:
Honestly, I think Se and Ne are more similar than Se and Si. (Same for Si and Ni vs. Ni and Ne.) Perhaps I am also just stupid, but I've read these definitions as well, and come to a different conclusion than you did. Your conclusion isn't 'obvious' at all.

N and S are different enough to put them in different category, are you saying that its not obvious without me saying it?

 

[strychnine]

N and S are different enough to put them in different category, are you saying that its not obvious without me saying it?

N and S are different, that's why there is that MBTI dichotomy. Talking about the actual functions, though, I think the Pe are more similar to one another than either is to Pi.

 

[INTP]

N and S are different, that's why there is that MBTI dichotomy. Talking about the actual functions, though, I think the Pe are more similar to one another than either is to Pi.

big picture vs details, thats the biggest difference between P functions. Ni and Ne both see patterns, look at big picture, combine things(Ne what is perceived and Ni what is judged) etc etc. Si sees the impression of whats happening, Se sees details in objective manner, Se sees objective details, Si sees details on subjective impressions.,Si creates personal impression based on what is judged(that way creating the subjective impression, with Si dom the judgment comes from unconscious most the time, making more room for the actual impression on conscious), Se just taking in what is perceived.