User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 12

  1. #1
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default Is This Science?

    evolving the eight functions

    The four archetypes of shadow — Opposing Personality, Senex/Witch, Trickster, and Demonic Personality — and the function - attitudes they carried for me — introverted intuition, extraverted thinking, introverted feeling, extraverted sensation — were all what a psychologist would call ego-dys-tonic. That is, they were incompatible with my conscious ego or sense of ‘I-ness’— what I normally own as part of ‘me’ and ‘my’ values. Nevertheless, they were part of my total functioning as a person, uncomfortable as it made me to recognise the fact.
    In this way, using myself as an example, and my years of Jungian analysis as a laboratory, I eventually came to identify eight discrete archetypes guiding the way the eight function-attitudes are expressed within a single, individual psyche.
    Of course he identified eight archetypes, if that's the conclusion he wanted. Interesting page, but I wonder how scientific his methodology is?
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #2
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    No, it's purely abstract, and based largely on his own self-experience. Like much of typology is.
    The only hope for scientific credibility would seem to lie in the brain studies. You can't observe a function like a visible thing, though they are supposed to be translators of the cognitive traffic between the limbic system and the cortex. Someone posted a report with scans showing the areas of the brain the Big Five factors supposedly use (which is the system with the most "scientific" respect right now). I would say solidifying type's connections to that system (which I have been arguing, is slightly different from the statistical correlations that have been done; I think different type factors are more directly connected to FFM than three of the MBTI dichotomies used) would help. Also, if the whole right/left brain theory of the function attitudes could be verified.

    Still, there's probably no way to scientifically map the complexes (that's what the archetypes become when personalized) to the functions. The archetypes are basically "emotionally freighted images" that we translate into those complexes through the related functions, and while we might be able to see the brain activity, there would be no way to verify the archetypal images being translated. The most you could do is test a bunch of people in various situations, to see if they have the same complexes.
    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

  3. #3
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    I guess that's true assuming some kind of brain scan is the only possible scientific method of affirming the existence of functions. If the whole thing relies on collective unconscious theory then there is no scientific validity much less verification. If archetypes are presumed to exist as Platonic ideas then this is religion and not science.

    Introspection is too personal to be science, using himself as a "laboratory" is an interesting experiment but we don't know if the results are true or false. And how do we know the functions are universal? Do they apply to people in the Far East? Do they apply to his next door neighbor? How does he know there aren't 9 functions instead of 8?

    Why don't the ennea-type 3's get a function in Riso's theory?
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  4. #4
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    Of course he identified eight archetypes, if that's the conclusion he wanted. Interesting page, but I wonder how scientific his methodology is?
    Well, that specific question hinges on this one: Is it verifiable? Science as a field does have a definition, and it includes studies needing to be replicable/verifiable independent of the researcher.

    I guess that's true assuming some kind of brain scan is the only possible scientific method of affirming the existence of functions. If the whole thing relies on collective unconscious theory then there is no scientific validity much less verification. If archetypes are presumed to exist as Platonic ideas then this is religion and not science.

    Introspection is too personal to be science, using himself as a "laboratory" is an interesting experiment but we don't know if the results are true or false. And how do we know the functions are universal? Do they apply to people in the Far East? Do they apply to his next door neighbor? How does he know there aren't 9 functions instead of 8?
    You got it, those are all problems with this type of field. And the cultural divide can be large, where we mistake a cultural cue for a standard aspect of a universal "type". (As a minor example, for awhile people would assume that MBTI SJs "looked" a certain way...i.e., traditional 1950's American social structure and values... but as the culture changes, SJs now can look different.) We can't even get outside of our own cultural biases easily, and certaintly not without conferring with people from other cultures.

    Why don't the ennea-type 3's get a function in Riso's theory?
    Presumably because:
    1. There are only eight Jungian functions (which now is a problem in correlating one system to another -- it might not hook up evenly).
    2. Enneagram Threes seem to be less driven by a function and more driven by success... and the Three changes in whatever ways allows the image of success to be created. (Did I get that right?)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #5
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Well, that specific question hinges on this one: Is it verifiable? Science as a field does have a definition, and it includes studies needing to be replicable/verifiable independent of the researcher.



    You got it, those are all problems with this type of field. And the cultural divide can be large, where we mistake a cultural cue for a standard aspect of a universal "type". (As a minor example, for awhile people would assume that MBTI SJs "looked" a certain way...i.e., traditional 1950's American social structure and values... but as the culture changes, SJs now can look different.) We can't even get outside of our own cultural biases easily, and certaintly not without conferring with people from other cultures.
    The ISFPs certainly look different. All of the baby boomer ISFPs that I've met have been hippyish. The x-generation ISFPs have blended in with some other countercultural manifestation.

    I would say this guy is an ISFP


    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Presumably because:
    1. There are only eight Jungian functions (which now is a problem in correlating one system to another -- it might not hook up evenly).
    2. Enneagram Threes seem to be less driven by a function and more driven by success... and the Three changes in whatever ways allows the image of success to be created. (Did I get that right?)
    If you're talking about the archetype of the 3, which is really just a static description in a book, then there is apparently no Jungian function to represent it. But if you're talking about people who score as type 3 (and who are seriously underrepresented on this forum), then you're saying that 3s are people who do not use cognitive methods. Is that correct? Or perhaps they don't have souls?
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #6
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    If you're talking about the archetype of the 3, which is really just a static description in a book, then there is apparently no Jungian function to represent it. But if you're talking about people who score as type 3 (and who are seriously underrepresented on this forum), then you're saying that 3s are people who do not use cognitive methods. Is that correct? Or perhaps they don't have souls?
    I wouldn't be surprised to find out Tom Cruise was just a manic soulless golem who perfected the money shot of running really fast in a movie.

    I'm saying the 1-1 ratio of cognitive method to Enneagram archetype is too simplistic. Probably most archetypes are some sort of mix of cognitive functions, not primarily centered around just one, and so Three should also be given its own mix if such a correlation is to be attempted. The fabrication is in that assuming that each enneagram type matches up with one and only one JCF, which leaves poor little Three out in the cold.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #7
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised to find out Tom Cruise was just a manic soulless golem who perfected the money shot of running really fast in a movie.

    I'm saying the 1-1 ratio of cognitive method to Enneagram archetype is too simplistic. Probably most archetypes are some sort of mix of cognitive functions, not primarily centered around just one, and so Three should also be given its own mix if such a correlation is to be attempted. The fabrication is in that assuming that each enneagram type matches up with one and only one JCF, which leaves poor little Three out in the cold.
    In other words, the 3 is chameleon-like, therefore it has and expresses no Dominant function. Or perhaps there is just the Dominant function du jour.

    The existence of such people really throws Jungian dogma for a loop.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  8. #8
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    Naama over on Perc added these links to studies on the brain in relation to the MBTI dichotomies (still have to study it myself).
    Quote Originally Posted by Naama; http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/53115-functions-brain.html#post1248237
    its not just left or right brain or anything that simple. there are many brain areas from all over the brains contributing to one function and not only that, there are also differences on delta, theta, alpha, beta 1, beta 2, and beta 3 bandwidths.

    first pdf shows it in pictures, second i just found and dont have time to look deeper, but it seems like a legit study

    http://aptinternational.org/assets/j..._1105_apti.pdf

    http://itech.pjc.edu/pgram/pdfs/PETEMBTIJAN.pdf
    (Is Naama the same as our "INTP"?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    (As a minor example, for awhile people would assume that MBTI SJs "looked" a certain way...i.e., traditional 1950's American social structure and values... but as the culture changes, SJs now can look different.) We can't even get outside of our own cultural biases easily, and certaintly not without conferring with people from other cultures.
    I have noted (having SJ parents who rebelled against the screwed up society they grew up in), that for SJ's, if the traditions/memories were either undesirable, or unrecoverable, they believe in "creating new memories/traditions". To me, with Si as tertiary or "Puer", that left me totally dry. No way; I must relive exactly the way it was, and if it was bad; to relive the good parts without the bad.

    Presumably because:
    1. There are only eight Jungian functions (which now is a problem in correlating one system to another -- it might not hook up evenly).
    2. Enneagram Threes seem to be less driven by a function and more driven by success... and the Three changes in whatever ways allows the image of success to be created. (Did I get that right?)
    The enneagram types looked like dead ringers for the five temperaments, plus "moderate" blends, so the 3 would seem to fit these blends:
    http://www.pastoral-counseling-cente...-inclusion.htm
    http://www.pastoral-counseling-cente...-inclusion.htm
    http://www.pastoral-counseling-cente...ic-control.htm
    http://www.pastoral-counseling-cente...ic-control.htm

    The Inclusion blends would lie between In Charge and Get Things Going (EST/F; ENJ/P), and the Control blends would be between NT and SP. So if this is true, then yes, the type would be all over the place, cognitively.

    The Choleric/Sanguine blends between Inclusion and Control (ExTP's) are also very common 3's, so it really does look like the 3 is simply some sort of Choleric-Sanguine hybrid (with 8 as the purest Choleric, and 7 as the purest Sanguine). Thus, the real correlation is with temperament, not functions. (Some temperaments do seem to more closely fit functions, Like Choleric—8—Te). For the 3, the functions will be determined by exactly which of those possible San/Chlor blends they more closely fall into.
    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. #9
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    It's pseudoscience.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post

    The Choleric/Sanguine blends between Inclusion and Control (ExTP's) are also very common 3's, so it really does look like the 3 is simply some sort of Choleric-Sanguine hybrid (with 8 as the purest Choleric, and 7 as the purest Sanguine). Thus, the real correlation is with temperament, not functions. (Some temperaments do seem to more closely fit functions, Like Choleric—8—Te). For the 3, the functions will be determined by exactly which of those possible San/Chlor blends they more closely fall into.
    The MBTI has temperaments also. Those are Kiersey-Bates SJ - SP - NF - NT. So there is no need to correlate those traditional temperaments to functions such as Te. In the MBTI the Te is associated with J, where there is only one J temperament, the SJ. The SJ temperament is AKA the Guardian. So in the long run you have -

    SJ = choleric
    SP = sanguine
    NF = melancholic
    NT = phlegmatic
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Similar Threads

  1. Is this science? (psychiatry study)
    By Octarine in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 07:20 AM
  2. Why is this so funny?
    By proteanmix in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-25-2007, 11:16 AM
  3. Is this where I go to get fluffed?
    By Oberon in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-06-2007, 09:37 AM
  4. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-05-2007, 03:42 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