User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 59

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    I really feel that function theory is ultimately better, though.
    I think Keirsey was intentionally using strong stereotyping to make it easier for the layman to see the differences between the types. His caricatures are concrete examples of how he believe functions would likely manifest themselves in a person.

    Ignoring the labels, do you feel that any of the 16 Keirsey types match your personality?

  2. #32
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I think Keirsey was intentionally using strong stereotyping to make it easier for the layman to see the differences between the types. His caricatures are concrete examples of how he believe functions would likely manifest themselves in a person.

    Ignoring the labels, do you feel that any of the 16 Keirsey types match your personality?
    Yes I mentioned in my last post toward the end that I can see myself in ENFP, ESFP and ISFP. Did you not read my last post? Read it again.

  3. #33
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Hey I just found this on another site, and I think this is a really, really good alternative that is similar to Keirsey. It takes Keirsey's ideas but remains more general that trying to be too stereotypical and specific.

    However, it links personality to possible personality disorders, but interestingly in my case I thought it made a bunch of sense. There's probably a thread for this already in the quiz section.

    PTypes

    I found the Exuberant type a very good fit for me, after I scored highest in the Hedonist temperament (second highest in Idealist).

    The following ten traits and characteristics are typical of the Exuberant personality type.

    Mood swings. Those of the Exuberant temperament tend to experience a greater range of emotion than those of any other type. They are very emotionally reactive.

    Artistic inclinations. The Exuberant type is the most inclined of all the types to be involved with the fine arts, music, or literature (Keirsey, 204). They take an artistic approach to all aspects of their lives.

    Independent work. Like "the majority of poets, novelists, composers, and to a lesser extent, of painters and sculptors," those of the Exuberant type "are bound to spend a great deal of their time alone (Storr, ix)."


    Relationships secondary. Those of the Exuberant temperament "are quite likely to choose relationships which will further their work rather than relationships which are intrinsically rewarding, and their spouses may well find that marital relations take second place (Storr, 107)."

    Great productivity. Persons of the Exuberant type are highly disciplined, gifted with superior powers of concentration, and capable of producing great quantities of high quality work; they also enjoy frequent periods of recreation and inactivity.

    Disinhibition. They are hedonistic and impulsive; "they live Epicurean lives in the here and now, and as gracefully as possible (Keirsey, 204)."

    Keen perceptions. The Exuberant temperament is especially attuned to color, line, texture, shading - touch, motion, seeing, and hearing in harmony. The senses of Exuberant individuals seem more keenly tuned than those of others (Keirsey, 205).

    Kindness (Keirsey, 205). Although those of the Exuberant type may adopt an aggressive, tough exterior, they are remarkably gentle, kind, and generous.

    Extroversion and introversion. The interpersonal conduct of those of the Exuberant type alternates between the greatest extremes of sociability and social reticence.

    Love of nature. In many individuals of the Exuberant type there "may be found an instinctive longing for the natural, the pastoral, the bucolic. They are quite at home in the wilds, and nature seems to welcome them (Keirsey, 206)."
    Everything except "relationships secondary" is true for me, and even that was true when I was very young. I absolutely could not really be committed to a relationship until I was about 23 years old, and I feared marriage horribly. Getting married and having babies was a not a priority for me at a young age, exploring the world, doing my own thing, and being creative was. I don't think I put my significant other second at my age now, though, I think I grew out of that. I'm still pretty selective though about who I get involved with, I guess. I'm still not sure if I want kids or not, too.

    It also indicates that the Exuberant type may be prone to mood disorders and/or high neuroticism.

  4. #34
    Lay the coin on my tongue SilkRoad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,939

    Default

    ^ Interesting...just took that test and my type was "undetermined." I had 13 each on Idealist and Traditionalist, and 2 each on Rationalist and Hedonist.

    Pretty unsurprising really. It does fit with the "ISFJ-flavoured INFJ" thing I have going. I suppose if I took the test at another type it could tip slightly to either the Idealist or Traditionalist side.

    I'd like to come back to this thread later, btw...
    Female
    INFJ
    Enneagram 6w5 sp/sx


    I DOORSLAMMING

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    One thing I do find interesting about Keirsey is that I am still an FP there even without taking cognitive functions into consideration. It was only through reading his book that I realized I'm just as much of a Keirsey FP as an Fi type.

    My Keirsey/MBTI scores are also the exact same: xNFP.

    However, things go terribly wrong when we start looking at temperaments, where I seem to fit more in the SP temperament.

    But then it helped me to examine Se/Ni vs. Ne/Si.

    As far as Keirsey's individual type descriptions, I would be most likely to go with ENFP, ESFP, or ISFP...except that both ExFPs sound too extroverted and ISFP sounds just a little too quiet. I'm not a Keirsey INFP, and neither NFJ type sounds like me AT ALL.

    So it's a mixed bag. I really feel that function theory is ultimately better, though. I would hate, for example, to test xNFP on some public career exam and be "placed" in a career like personnel or similar. I'm less diplomatic and non-confrontational than one would hope, no matter my consistent dichotomy scoring. If I had to be placed anywhere I'd rather be placed in the SFP professions (which is what Keirsey ultimately is: a career sorter).
    Like I said: mixed bag, but too faulty in the long run.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    Like I said, the best thing I got from Keirsey was ...wow...I don't relate to these NF temperament descriptions as much as I thought I would. I was surprised at how much more I related to SP, wasn't really expecting that at all.

    But then it made sense in my mind comparing myself to some of the NF women on this site and elsewhere. Like..yeah...I know NFs who ARE like this.

    Why am I the outlying freak?

    Is it because I actually have Se?

    So in that sense it was good for me. Also, the entertainment value cannot be denied...I love fiction and folk tales and archetypal stuff which is why I loved astrology when I was a teenager.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    Getting married and having babies was a not a priority for me at a young age, exploring the world, doing my own thing, and being creative was.
    This sounds so N. Especially mentioning younger ages. My tertiary was kicking off in teens, but not to the extent that I would ever say the things of Si were a "priority" (Clearly the language of a preferred function!) It was just an increasing sense of nostalgia that backed up an Ne perspective which would shape the things I prioritized.

    If you're basing Se on Keirsey's SP temperament, and you're here in this thread saying how Keirsey's theory or use of some of the concepts is so faulty, then I would not go by his temperament descriptions. (Especially since you know "SP" to him does not equal any "Se").

    Again; I think what you're being thrown off by is the Interaction Style, or "Sanguine in Inclusion" traits (plus being Phlegmatic Sanguine in Control, you would be inbetween Sanguine-SP and Supine-NF).

    Berens is a more perfected version of Keirsey's theory, reuniting it with the cognitive functions, and also adding the Interaction Styles. (Keirsey has also adopted the Interaction Styles. I hope to order the newest book this week to see how he applies them). But it seems if you want to find the best type using all the models, then Berens' resources would be much better suited. Her system was specifically designed for that, where Keirsey's was not; he focuses on these narrow temperament categories, with the 16 types as "variants" of them, and the functions outright rejected. That's why it will not match up for you. For some it might, but as we see, you're very "inbetween".
    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
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    This sounds so N. Especially mentioning younger ages. My tertiary was kicking off in teens, but not to the extent that I would ever say I was "into" the things of Si. It was just an increasing sense of nostalgia that backed up an Ne perspective which would shape thing things I was "into".

    If you're basing S on Keirsey's SP temperament, and you're here in this thread saying how Keirsey's theory or use of some of the concepts is so faulty, then I would not go by his temperament descriptions.

    Again; I think what you're being thrown off by is the Interaction Style, or "Sanguine in Inclusion" traits (plus being Phlegmatic Sanguine in Control, you would be inbetween Sanguine-SP and Supine-NF).

    Berens is a more perfected version of Keirsey's theory, reuniting it with the cognitive functions, and also adding the Interaction Styles. (Keirsey has also adopted the Interaction Styles. I hope to order the newest book this week to see how he applies them). But it seems if you want to find the best type using all the models, then Berens' resources would be much better suited. That was specifically designed for that, where Keirsey's was not; he focuses on these narrow temperament categories, with the 16 types as "variants" of them, and the functions outright rejected. That's why it will not match up for you. For some it might, but as we see, you're very "inbetween".
    Yeah well that PTypes ISFP description fits me PERFECTLY. And I was Hedonist almost double what I was Idealist.

    Plus, when I do that Ni/Ne test that Vicki Jo has, I come up as Ni. I also have the Se/Ni reading style AND an older INTJ on here who is quite knowledgable says that I seemed ISFP in my video and based on something I said, it seemed like Ni rather than Ne analysis.

    I also seem to have ES(F) crazies according to the original Jungian theory.

    This is definitely not about Keirsey.

    Here's my theory: a lot of people who are laid back ISFJs think they're ISFP, because Si types relate much more strongly to the traditional description of Generic Sensing, and Se types are much more likely to mistype as Ns.

    So therefore I think a lot of INFPs, INFJs, and even ENFPs are really ISFPs and ESFPs, and some INFJs may actually be ISFJ...and they just think they're too smart to be a sensor.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I think Keirsey was intentionally using strong stereotyping to make it easier for the layman to see the differences between the types. His caricatures are concrete examples of how he believe functions would likely manifest themselves in a person.
    So you mean there's a reason NOT to hate him? That maybe Keirsey had a kind of heuristic in mind accompanying those descriptions?
    "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. #38
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    My type is staying, btw.

    I finally found it.

    It's no longer open to suggestion. But thank you for your input, Eric.

  9. #39
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    What I see from most other MBTI authors that differs from Keirsey is that they use behavioral descriptions to illustrate a mindset. They do not use behaviors themselves as ways of categorizing people's personalities.

    What Keirsey describes, IMO, is social roles. There is a vague connection between social roles & psychological types, but he blows it out of proportion, so that they do become cartoonish stereotypes.

    I wrote this in my blog some time ago:

    Quote Originally Posted by me
    I was thinking again about the differences between thought processes & psychological orientation & how that relates to personality (ie. Jungian theory) versus social roles & how thought processes may make one drawn to a certain role so that is becomes synonymous with a personality type (ie. Keirsian theory).

    For example, obviously, not all artists are SPs, not all scientists are NTs, not all humanitarians are NFs, and not all SJs are, er, whatever boring role they're assigned. There are a variety of personalities to be found amongst these different avenues. So why are there these strong associations with type & skills?

    Well, the idea is very simple. If a person prefers a certain thought process then...
    - they may be drawn to areas in life that allow them to use it & be rewarded for it more than other areas
    - because they seek out these areas more, they may develop skills associated with them, and since "practice makes perfect", they may become good at it, or better than average, or at least it becomes their best personal talent.
    ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ADDED NOW:
    - this skill or social role begins to be or has long been associated with a personality like theirs, so they are encouraged to fill it, as it "makes sense" for them to do it in the eyes of society
    - the cycle continues where a person feels drawn to an area where they are appreciated/excel in because their personality is associated with the skill/role
    - the question is: what came first, the chicken or the egg? (the social role drawing the personality by using its strengths or the personality creating the role by being draw to such things naturally?)

    So what really sets people up to fall into their personality's common social role is the existing structure of society. Certain roles allow certain personality types to, well, be themselves. These areas nurture certain forms of thinking more, maybe because they do tend to thrive there, but possibly because its simply what has been expected. From a young age, a person finds themselves most comfortable in the roles that cater to their preferred manner of thinking, and from there, you find people perpetuating these social archetypes, maintaining the link between them and the psychological archetypes.
    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

  10. #40
    You're fired. Lol. Antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    8w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ????
    Posts
    3,437

    Default

    It's fun. It can help me a little bit when it comes to gaining insight into other people's minds. Or somewhat when approaching them.
    Excuse me, but does this smell like chloroform to you?

    Always reserve the right to become smarter at a future point in time, for only a fool limits themselves to all they knew in the past. -Alex

Similar Threads

  1. A Libertarian Builds Low-Cost Private Schools For The Masses
    By asynartetic in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-09-2017, 10:29 PM
  2. The real cause for the mass shooting on America.
    By jixmixfix in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 10-13-2015, 04:38 PM
  3. One for the experts.
    By Xander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-03-2008, 05:29 PM
  4. [MBTItm] A Question For The Domiant Type At This Forum?
    By "?" in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-03-2007, 10:55 AM
  5. [INFJ] sympathy for the despicable
    By Eileen in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 06-02-2007, 06:38 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