User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 45

  1. #31
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    Oh, now I get it.

  2. #32
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    intps hate stating the obvious

    Hitler spoke for Germany.
    Suslov spoke for the Soviet Union.
    The Pope speaks for the Catholics.
    INTPc speaks for the INTPs.

    Ideology is what should be.
    The obvious is what is.

  3. #33
    ⒺⓉⒷ 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
    Interesting...I thought MBTI used the model with the tertiary oriented the same as the dominant (ie. for an INTP - TiNeSiFe, the common view around here).
    So in the MBTI model, the difference between, say, an INTP & ISTP is simply a matter of preferring Ne over Se, which might be quite slight in some people.
    MBTI model is TiNeSiFe, though Myers/Quenk, etc. acknowledged the question of the tertiary orientation.
    It was Jung who orignally said the tertiary was the opposite orientation. Because the way he set the theory up, the ego chooses its dominant function and orientation (attitude), and everything else (undifferentiated) was lumped together in the unconscious.
    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

  4. #34
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    MBTI model is TiNeSiFe, though Myers/Quenk, etc. acknowledged the question of the tertiary orientation.
    It was Jung who orignally said the tertiary was the opposite orientation. Because the way he set the theory up, the ego chooses its dominant function and orientation (attitude), and everything else (undifferentiated) was lumped together in the unconscious.
    MBTI Manual, Third Edition, Page 30, says it is disputed, but that the rest of the manual follows the 1985 edition's convention, placing it in the opposite orientation of the dominate. I could believe it's in transition, though. For example, in March Quenk carefully skirted the issue in passing: "[...] an ENFP (dominant extraverted Intuition, auxiliary introverted Feeling, tertiary Thinking, inferior introverted Sensing) [....]"

  5. #35
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Yeah, that's what they do most of the time (Quenk's books too). Just leave the attitude off of the tertiary.
    Still, it seems in practice, MBTI theorists all accept the dominant attitude.
    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

  6. #36
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Yeah, that's what they do most of the time (Quenk's books too). Just leave the attitude off of the tertiary.
    Still, it seems in practice, MBTI theorists all accept the dominant attitude.
    I can buy that. Does seem in transition... in the 1985 manual was matches the dominate, in 1999 was matches the dominate with saying it was disputed... I reckon in the next version will be opposite of the dominate. Still, clearly there must be some diehards on the traditional side, or they would have updated the manual in 1999.

    It's somewhat heartening to see that observation is leading to an adjustment of theory even when it conflicts Jung.

  7. #37
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    That's not her order. If Si is dominant, Se would be 6th, not 4th, and Ni would be 3rd. The attitude order is always ieieieie. Comparing to Beebe's order, it's 12876534. Shadow 4 reversed and placed in between 1/2 and 3/4. Then there's Socionics, which is similar in 7 and 8 coming after 1 and 2, but the others are rearranged.
    I don't know what that order he was using came from. Maybe Lenore, but he just got the middle four mixed up.
    It's interesting that in Lenore's model the tertiary function might be placed 2nd from last but this does not necessarily mean 2nd from last in preference - it might be behind only the dominant in preference. But I think it's fair to say that in Lenore's model Ne replaces Ni as 'the demon' for Si-doms, but only if Ne is invoked through under-using the auxillary function (i.e. Te or Fe).

    I prefer the flexibility of Lenore's model but think there was inconsistency in her book in terms of how the inferior function manifests. For example, in Ni-doms, inferior Se is said to cause impulsivity and attention-seeking. In Fi-doms, inferior Te is said to cause them to feel 'hemmed-in' by barriers and regulations. I don't see what that has to do with using/mis-using Te, as opposed to merely being aware of/overwhelmed by it's manifestations.

  8. #38
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alternatum View Post
    It's interesting that in Lenore's model the tertiary function might be placed 2nd from last but this does not necessarily mean 2nd from last in preference - it might be behind only the dominant in preference. But I think it's fair to say that in Lenore's model Ne replaces Ni as 'the demon' for Si-doms, but only if Ne is invoked through under-using the auxillary function (i.e. Te or Fe).

    I prefer the flexibility of Lenore's model but think there was inconsistency in her book in terms of how the inferior function manifests. For example, in Ni-doms, inferior Se is said to cause impulsivity and attention-seeking. In Fi-doms, inferior Te is said to cause them to feel 'hemmed-in' by barriers and regulations. I don't see what that has to do with using/mis-using Te, as opposed to merely being aware of/overwhelmed by it's manifestations.
    I prefer the flexibility of her model also, but also the fact that it is non-linear & not so...er, "static" maybe. I think hers is truly be less about function order than role or dynamic of functions. It's not a preference in terms of ranking order, but of how a function manifests in a personality, so that the dom & aux form the personality, and the tertiary & inferior play a more pivotal role, even if consciously preferred less than the middle "lasagna" layers. The layering idea seems a metaphor that reflects reality better to me; things aren't so clearly defined, not so neatly dichotomous.

    What you mention about Fi illustrates this for me....Te plays a more influential role than Ti in the thinking of the Fi-dom by being something like a antagonist or catalyst for the aux function (which truly balances the dom function). I don't really prefer it in the sense that I don't really use it a lot, and it doesn't define me the way Ne + Fi does. I wouldn't say I prefer it to Ti, just that its effects on my thinking are more significant, and more evident to me, so that I am conscious of it as an oppositional force. Ti seems absorbed in a sense by Fi-Ne, which is why the idea of it being some "inner layer" makes sense. The top & the bottom of things are less obscured & are more defining, whereas the middle is a component that gets mixed in with others.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  9. #39
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    those function definitions that allow the 8 function model arent jungian functions, they are some beebean/lenorean/whateverian functions. for example this 8th "demonic" function in beebes model is dom and inferior interacting in jungs terms, clash of the opposites, dialogue between the conscious and unconscious(this doesent happen after inferior(from shadow, shadow also has different meaning in jungs terms that beebean) has been assimilated to consciousness(ego)).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #40
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    those function definitions that allow the 8 function model arent jungian functions, they are some beebean/lenorean/whateverian functions. for example this 8th "demonic" function in beebes model is dom and inferior interacting in jungs terms, clash of the opposites, dialogue between the conscious and unconscious(this doesent happen after inferior(from shadow, shadow also has different meaning in jungs terms that beebean) has been assimilated to consciousness(ego)).
    So are you saying if for example an Si-dom assimilates their inferior function (Ni or Ne though?) to their consciousness/ego then it will not necessarily be 'negative'?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-08-2011, 10:05 AM
  2. gullibility and sweetness, do they go together?
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-18-2009, 03:20 PM
  3. So which function descriptions do you go with?
    By Ilah in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-06-2008, 09:14 AM
  4. Things that make you go "DOH"
    By Totenkindly in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-17-2008, 08:04 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