• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

JCF Isn't The Answer

lunalum

Super Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
2,706
MBTI Type
ZNTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
As I stated above, I don't like seeing these dogmatic attitudes about typology. So it's just the dogmatism I'd like to see replaced.

I keep saying the same things over and over again, and they still don't get it.

Here, let me try this ---

Typology is not the Truth...
Typology is not the Truth...
Typology is not the Truth...
Typology is not the Truth...
Typology is not the Truth...
...

Isn't this, as well as your title of this thread, ironic, if you wish to do away with dogmatism? Who are you to say for sure that something is not the answer?
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
Typology is just for fun like astrology. Don't ruin it for all of us!
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Typology is just for fun like astrology. Don't ruin it for all of us!

I think this 'MBTI profile' is accurate:

Jag is a natural skeptic. He needs to be convinced, and needs to see the
evidence, and your logic needs to be sound. Beyond reproach, even. This can
be quite an undertaking, but once won over, Jag will be your staunchest
ally. Jag is phenomenally analytical, meticulous, and painstaking. Jag loves
the research process, is as relentless and tenacious as a bulldog and pretty
much won't stop until he is damn good and ready.

MBTI/astrology. Is there a difference?
That quote was astrology. :wink:
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
I think this 'MBTI profile' is accurate:



MBTI/astrology. Is there a difference?
That quote was astrology. :wink:

haha I got your point the first time around. I was also being facetious with my post.:wink: The "you know me well" was referring to the sense of humor. That was all.lol
 

onemoretime

Dreaming the life
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,455
MBTI Type
3h50
It's rather silly, if you think about it, to rely on objective criteria when trying to understand what is fundamentally subjective.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Isn't this, as well as your title of this thread, ironic, if you wish to do away with dogmatism? Who are you to say for sure that something is not the answer?

I did say close to the top of the thread that it's YOUR answer (speaking to whomever), not mine. Everybody has a right to the subjective truth within themselves, but not to shove their answer down my throat.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
You went from "I don't see it as the Answer" to "that doesn't mean the system is entirely useless." If that summed up my argument, it would be a complete non sequitur. But it's not an argument I made.

I know that what it comes down to here is that my main message is too abstract. I have found that terms such as "non sequitur" simply whoosh. In any attempt to criticize a comment's logic, the commenter simply presses the mental reset button and repeats the same argument.

I don't know why you feel attacked or something, you're not on my plonk list, or even potential plonk list.

Uh, of course it's not an argument you made, it's an argument I made in response to the idea presented in the thread, which implies that people on this board who see some usefulness/validity in Jungian psychological types view it as "The Answer". I don't think most people do; I know I don't, and I'm explaining how I do view it.

I don't feel attacked in the slightest :huh:. If you only wanted people on your "plonk list" to reply to a thread, then maybe a public forum was the wrong place to post it.
 

Forever_Jung

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,644
MBTI Type
ESFJ
I thought that psychological types are just prisms and frameworks to help you examine yourself? I never thought they were my Answer. Has everyone else been building their entire identity around the good word of Keirsey?

Jung himself said that his types were for mere clinical usefulness. He didn't wave a magic wand and proclaim himself a prophet. He didn't even lecture on the types outside the basic introductory stuff, really. Jung didn't give very many shits about his system beyond that.
 

existence

New member
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
352
MBTI Type
ISTJ
The basic assumption of the MBTI is, for example, that "Introverted Sensing with Thinking" means ISTJ. Jung's theory never implied it, and I don't see why he would ever have allowed it.

+1

John Fucgjack, or whatever his name is, also predicted 32 types, once the basic MBTI flaw is removed. And he doesn't hang around these forums.

What is this flaw exactly?
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
+1



What is this flaw exactly?

Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization
"In order to see the difficulty more clearly, look at the 'INFP'. By the rules of the MBTI game, the 'P' designation indicates that the letter in the third place ('F') identifies the individual's dominant function. The INFP, thus, is an 'introverted feeling type'. But the 'P' also tells us that the INFP is typically an individual who 'remains open', and is not interested in seeking 'closure' (as is the J). The question to ask here is, 'Is it legitimate to make all introverted feeling types with auxiliary iNtuition BY DEFINITION non-closure-seeking (P) types?' Cannot an introverted feeling type with auxiliary iNtuition not be a closure-seeking J? If so, how would we go about 'writing' the name of such a type? It cannot be done using the current MBTI nomenclature!"
 

existence

New member
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
352
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization
"In order to see the difficulty more clearly, look at the 'INFP'. By the rules of the MBTI game, the 'P' designation indicates that the letter in the third place ('F') identifies the individual's dominant function. The INFP, thus, is an 'introverted feeling type'. But the 'P' also tells us that the INFP is typically an individual who 'remains open', and is not interested in seeking 'closure' (as is the J). The question to ask here is, 'Is it legitimate to make all introverted feeling types with auxiliary iNtuition BY DEFINITION non-closure-seeking (P) types?' Cannot an introverted feeling type with auxiliary iNtuition not be a closure-seeking J? If so, how would we go about 'writing' the name of such a type? It cannot be done using the current MBTI nomenclature!"

Yup right this is a flawed tenet in MBTI.

So how do we get 32 types, is it FiNe-P, FiNe-J instead of generic INFP? I can see 32 then, lol, not a bad idea hm.

I would be TiSe-J myself. And then I could actually have a type in MBTI...
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yup right this is a flawed tenet in MBTI.

So how do we get 32 types, is it FiNe-P, FiNe-J instead of generic INFP? I can see 32 then, lol, not a bad idea hm.

I would be TiSe-J myself. And then I could actually have a type in MBTI...

You could use that nomenclature, but Fudjack went with inF and iNf.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I have found someone on Facebook who identifies as an Fi-dominant with a preference for Judging. She identifies as a type 4.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You could use that nomenclature, but Fudjack went with inF and iNf.

That wasn't correct. He used that nomenclature at the middle point of his article. But at the end he went with inFj and iNfj. The inFj type doesn't exist in traditional MBTI because of its assumption, made in theory, that the function order determines the P or J at the end. It's the Fi-dominant closure-seeking J.

It's important then to take a functions test to determine the dominant function, but there has to be another test to determine P versus J.
 

Reborn Relic

Damn American Cowboy
Joined
Dec 31, 2015
Messages
555
MBTI Type
INTP
I think the first thing one has to realize is that functions are definitions, not independent things in and of themselves. Given that, there has to be a generally agreed-upon definition to use for each function if anyone ever wants to convince someone of a truth regarding that function. Jung, being the guy that came up with them in the first place, seems like a good source.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think the first thing one has to realize is that functions are definitions, not independent things in and of themselves. Given that, there has to be a generally agreed-upon definition to use for each function if anyone ever wants to convince someone of a truth regarding that function. Jung, being the guy that came up with them in the first place, seems like a good source.

This isn't about functions, it's about J and P as independent variables in the type nomenclature.
 

Tater

New member
Joined
Jul 26, 2014
Messages
2,421
It's a response not terribly creative thinkers use when annoyed.

The first known use was in 1989 by Richard Sexton in the alt.flame newsgroup.

>>Please refrain from posting to talk.bizarre until such time as you
>>cease to be an asshole and become at least one of: bizarre, creative,
>>or entertaining. You are welcome to dump your rotting ordure in rec.humor
>>or some similar group where your fellow mental defectives congregate.

>Make me.

*plonk*

well, this is terribly ironic.
 
Top