User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 37

  1. #1
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default Problems of Typology

    This thread is intended as both an introductory course to typology and an inquiry into the field. Or in other words, I am here to answer the most basic questions on the subject and to explore further ideas which hopefully will lead to discoveries in the field.

    I invite all to participate in this discussion for the purposes above.

    The essay below will hopefully provide us with sufficient inspiration. I do not request for all to read the piece in entirety, and accordingly shall compartmentalize ideas into a number of categories, so you may read selectively at your own discretion.

    When it is all said and done, the following is intended to serve as a workshop to deal with the following matters and more.

    A.Basic questions concerning typology, for beginners entering this community to get better acquainted with the subject. This thread should be a good place to start.
    B. Intermediate and above level students of the field can turn their inquiry over to here.
    C.Help with your type.
    D.Connections of typology to other intellectual fields. Carl Jung studied philosophy as a step in his inquiry into human nature. Most of my work in this field employed the same method (as readers of my profiles must know by now), namely approaching matters of type through the perspective of philosophy of mind rather than behaviorism. Typology could be equally interfused with psychology, sociology, anthrpology, etc, any field that is concerned with the nature of mind and the nature of persons. As this inquiry shall hopefully evince, intellectual and practical applications of typology are multifarious. However, it is my hope that Jung's quest for meaning in life will be furthered by the instruments he has bequeathed to us, and this present inquiry and exegesis of typology shall greatly contribute to our quest for meaning in life. I believe this is both possible and desirable and shall support this claim with the argument that Jungian typology evinces invaluable insights in human mind and human nature on a broader account.





    I.What is a type

    "The fact that children often exhibit a typical attitude quite unmistakable even in their earliest years forces us to assume that it cannot be the struggle for existence in the ordinary sense that determines a particular attitude. It might be objected, cogently enough, that even the infant at the breast has to perform an unconscious act of psychological adaptation, in that the mother's influence leads to specific reactions in the child. This argument, while supported by incontenstable evidence, becomes rather flimsy in face of the equally incontestable fact that two children of the same mother may exhibit contrary attitudes at an early age, though no change in the mother's attitude can be demonstrated. Although nothing would induce me to underrate the incalculable importance of parental influence, this familiar experience compels me to conclude that the decisive factor must be looked for in the disposition of the child. Ultimately, it must be the individual disposition which decides whether the child will belong to this or that type despite the constancy of external conditions.

    This, is the most important question of typology since this field by definition is the study of types. We have no reliable way of thinking clearly about the present matter if we are unsure of the fundament of our edifice. If we were to ask our most well-known propagandist, David Keirsey, he without a doubt would tell us that type is a person who tests under these or those 4 letter categories. Yet, again the question to follow is, where do those 4 categories derive. If we take the typical Meyerrs Briggs test, I answer several questions reminiscent of the following ' Do you prefer to make decisions logically or personall?', 'At funerals do you cry', 'Do you believe in love at first sight?'.Etc.

    Without a doubt, if I were to answer those, the test would indicate a Thinking preferrence. For the sake of the thought experiment, lets suppose that I had a mid-life crisis, or a tragedy which has forced me to function in a way uncommon to the way I usually tend to. Had I taken the test on that occassion, I would be labelled a feeler? In this case, could there truly be 'anything solid' to type.

    To answer my own question, I shall ask what exactly compels one to cry at funerals or believe in love? Intuitively, it becomes obvious to any sober and reasonable person that there is a psychological predisposition that leads us to behave in those certain fashions. All of us, should we be given right circumstances would exhibit such behaviors, as they require a merely adequate emotional climate. Such behaviors are associated with a display of a Feeling function, and any psychologist shall attest that all humans have emotions. This shows that all of us to some extent are Feelers, or we have a certain quantity of the essence of Feeling immanent within us. This is not to emphasize the function of Feeling per se, this was but a random example. The same could be said for how we all are to some extent thinkers, as we all confront situations in life which insist on impersonal problem solving. Situations in life that insist on attunement with facts, concrete tasks, and memories, which is proof that all of us contain the essence of sensation. As well as situations in life where abstract thought and entertainment of visions and ideas are highly vouched for proves that all of us are Intuitors to some extent.

    In this essay I shall argue that the behaviorist approach which is reminiscent of Keirsey's typology is inadequate. As a token to that school of thought, one may argue that a Thinker is one who displays more Thinking behaviors than that of Feeling, Sensation and Intuition. This idea rings plausible, however, in order for us to definitely state such a conclusion about the individual we must thoroughly observe his lifestyle and biography. We are not in the position to accomplish this due to the limitation of our faculties. But even if we were able to do so, our question for what a type is would be answered only indirectly. A behaviorist would still be at a loss to explain what drives the said individual to display more Thinking behaviors than those associated with other functions?

    The most obvious answer our imagination can conjure is that there is an unconscious predilection in our essence that makes us gravitate towards behaviors associated with Thinking. However, we must not discount the chasm between our unconscious tendencies and the action itself, as it is our psychological state that propels us to action. Or in other words, our unconscious tendencies first lead us to reason in an impersonal fashion, and only at the opportunity presented by the external world could we have a chance to demonstrate such a mindset. On this account, we could boldly declare that the behaviorist is not aware of the essence of type itself, but only of the external manifestation thereof.

    From the path of a behaviorist, we shall ask, what if it is the case that a person was born with a strong Thinking tendency, yet his external environment forced him to behave like a Feeler, would not such a person by the behaviorist method be labelled as a Feeler because he demonstrates more behaviors associated with Feeling? Imagine an ENTJ female sailor of the 15th century Shipwrecked in the Arabian waters. If she were to be observed in the Middle Eastern society of the time, no doubt she would exhibit more behaviors associated with Feeling rather than Thinking. Yet, manifestly this would go against her core and she would shake the facade off of herself at the first available opportunity. Yet, the behaviorist, once more, would be compelled to regard this character as a Feeler. This shows that such a method is to be rejected as superficial at best.

    Hence, here, I shall lay down for what I understand for type to be. Now, let it be made clear that this is no dogma. This is intended as an open-ended discussion, I invite all to challenge even the most basic and axiomatic propositions of my system such as this.

    A type is an inherent unconscious predilection towards certain habits of mind which to an external observer manifest as either Thinking, Feeling, Intuition or Sensation. The type in itself is amorphous and indescribable because it inheres within the nature of mind incommensurable to anything we may observe in the external world and intelligibly depict in the terms of our language. However, to make matters bearable, we can have some access to this phenomenon by embracing the approach of philosophy of mind and not behaviorism, as the latter stultifies us in the shallow waters. Instead of saying a Thinker is one who behaves logically and tells others to supress emotion, we should say that a Thinker is one who unconsciously gravitates towards the impersonal.

    Essentially, the type that we have the strongest predilection towards we tend to use naturally and freely. The type that is the opposite of the previous, shall be the one that we will likely incur most difficulty utilizing.

    II.Functions


    Hence, we have the four categories of thought. Thinking, Sensation, Intuition and Feeling, or unconscious predilections which tend to form thoughts in those four fashions. All of which could equally be categorized either into the Extroverted sector or the Introverted. This is the most salient functional demarcation with which I propose we start our inquiry into functions.


    A. Extroversion and Introversion


    "The attitude types, as I have repeatedly emphasized in the preceding chapters, are distinguished by their attitude to the object. The introvert's attitude is an abstracting one; at bottom, he is always intent on withdrawing libido from the object, as though he had to prevent the object from gaining power over him. The extravert, on the contrary, has a positive relation to the object. He affirms its importance to such an extent that his subjective attitude is constantly related to and oriented by the object. The object can never have enough value for him, and its importance must always be increased. The two types are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. Everyone knows those reserved, inscrutable, rather shy people who form the strongest possible contrast to the open, sociable, jovial, or at least friendly and approachable characters who are on good terms with everybody, or quarrel with everybody, but always relate to them in some way and in turn are affected by them.”

    The extrovert orients primarily by the data of the external world. His thoughts and feelings are subordinate to what is externally observable. Empiricism is the school of thought most in tune with this mindset. Theorizing is only sound to the extent it is confirmed by objectively verifiable data. As Jung further elaborates

    “If a man thinks, feels, acts, and actually lives in a way that is directly correlated with the objective conditions and their demands, he is extraverted. His life makes it perfectly clear that it is the object and not this subjective view that plays the determining role in his consciousness. Naturally he has subjective views too, but their determining value is less than that of objective conditions. Consequently, he never expects to find any absolute factors in his own inner life, since the only ones he knows are outside himself. Like ,Epimetheus, his inner life is subordinate to external necessity, though not without a struggle; but it is always the objective determinant that winds in the end. His whole consciousness looks outward, because the essential and decisive determination always comes from outside. ”


    Thus to exemplify this matter, the Extrovert interacts with the external environment directly, whilst the Introvert interacts directly with his internal perceptions of what he has observed. To exemplify this matter, if the Introvert and the Extrovert are both informed of a flood in the city, the Extrovert would be more inclined to imagine the situation the way it has been described to him, or exactly the way he has seen or in any way experienced the news. Yet the Introvert would filter the news through his own perceptions. He would ask, is this account truly sound? Could X be the cause of Y as the informer stated. Moreover, if I saw X happen, could it have been the case that I have misheard, or I was not seeing clearly, or that it was an illusion? The deciding factor for the introvert would derive from his own thoughts. Yet the extrovert is externally compelled to choose whatever action he may. He typically would run on autopilot, simply do what the external factors compel him to. Of course, this would be the case if the character in question is a pure Extroverted type. In human nature there are no such An Extrovert is simply one who has more tendencies towards Extroversion than to Introversion, he has access to both, just more natural to the former than to the latter. Accordingly, in his case it would mean that it would be more natural to act in a fashion prescribed by external factors than by his own mind. The danger of any type is over-emphasizing faculties that we are most comfortable with and neglecting those that we are less comfortable with. For the Extrovert, the most comfortable will be the faculty of Extroversion, and the one that could likely be neglected is the faculty of Introversion. Introversion is primarily concerned with the subjective factor.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  2. #2
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    “This is the extravert’s danger: he gets sucked into objects and completely loses himself in them. The resultant functional disorders, nervous or physical, have a compensatory value, as they force him into an involuntary self-restraint. Should the symptoms be functional, their peculiar character may express his psychological situation in symbolic form; for instance, a singer whose fame has risen to dangerous heights that tempt him to expend too much energy suddenly finds he cannot sing high notes because of some nervous inhibition. Or a man of modest beginnings who rapidly reaches a social position of great influence with wide prospects is suddenly afflicted with all the symptoms of mountain sickness. Again, a man about to marry a woman of doubtful character whom he adores and vastly overestimates is seized with a nervous spasm of the oesphagus and has to restrict himself to two cups of milk a day, each of which takes him three to four hours to consume. All visits to the adored are effectively stopped, and he has no choice but to devote himself to the nourishments of his body. Or a man who can no longer carry the weight of the huge business he has built up is afflicted with nervous attacks of thirst and speedily falls victim to hysterical alcoholism.” Psychological types P.336

    Accordingly, this shows that the Extroverts focus is on the object or activity. When the subject is neglected, not only does he neglect his ideas, but also his body as the body is in closer affinity with the internal rather than with the external aspect of his life. It should be noted at this point that Extroversion is a type, as I defined the term in the previous section. Or it is an unconscious tendency. It is basically a thought that prescribes interaction with the external world, and because of the nature of such an idea, it becomes subservient to prescriptions of the external entities. If, the inner essence of extroversion is not properly nourished, it will begin to efface itself. This renders the nature of the Extroverted type peculiar. To recapitulate, Extroversion is an internal essence which supports itself externally. If external contact is cut off, suffocation thereof shall begin, much like an Introvert may feel suffocated in a crowded room. Yet if one Extroverts too much, he will no longer be able to Extrovert at all, as his inner faculties will shut down on him. As a general note on Extroverted attitudes, I cannot stress any more intensely that this attitude is primarily concerned with action. This is anathema to type in itself. It applies to all four attitudes of Extroversion; Extroverted Thinking, Extroverted Feeling, Extroverted Sensation and Extroverted Intuition. When neurosis occurs, the Extroverted Thinker ceases to Think altogether, he becomes a mere puppet of the agenda imposed upon him. Extroverted Feeler looses all that is human to him and becomes an embodiment of the lifeless etiquette imposed upon him by the social circle. Extroverted Intuitionist becomes a mere slave of the whirlwind of grand plans and activities he is enmeshed in, almost wholly devoid of original insight and innovation that his mind was fecund with under normal circumstances. Extroverted Sensor looses the thirst for sensorial aesthetics and adventure, and also falls slave to activities prescribed by his external environment.




    The Introvert encounters a very different problem, he has a dangerous tendency to be lost within his inner being and neglect the external environment. Just like the Extrovert has the danger of merging with the object to the point of completely effacing the inner being, the Introvert can easily shut off the External world. In such a case, all external activity would be deemed undesirable. Nothing but pure cognitive force would be tolerated. As Jung put it “The whole world-creating force of the subjective factor becomes concentrated in the ego, producing a boundless power-complex and a fatuous egocentricity. Every psychology which reduces the essence of man to the unconscious power drive springs from this kind of disposition. Many of Nietzsche’s lapses in taste, for example, are due to this subjectivization of consciousness.”

    Accordingly, we know that Introversion tends to orient by the self, the world is assessed in terms of how it squares with the internal agenda. When neurosis takes hold for the introvert, the simplest thinking that the introvert tends to excel at would be impossible, as there would not be any information (which could only be collected from the external world, which the introvert has thoroughly shut off). Hence, the Introvert would not be able to stand by his own principles. He would simply fall slave to the subject just like the Extrovert to the object. The Introverted Thinker will simply stick to thoughts he has arrived at earlier, much before he has become neurotic. The Introverted Intuitionist, to before established visions. Introverted Sensing is the most distinct example of this phenomenon, as this type tends to dwell in the past the most. Introverted Feeler frozen in the view of the relationships, values and sentiments they have established before occurrence of neurosis. What all of these types have in common is nostalgia for the past due to inability to make their future as in neurosis, they are unable to adequately interact with the external world. Accordingly, in neurosis, their thoughts become unintelligible and will be reduced to that simple inner force that not even they know that Nietzsche’s ‘lapses in taste’ have exemplified. In cases of extreme neurosis, nothing at all matters but the inner life for the introvert, we would be hardly hyperbolic to claim that they turn solipsistic, or in other words, nothing but their inner being exists. This often leads to radical egocentricity where all thinking and feeling falls slave to their introversion. It will all be but means to the end of appeasing the fancies of their unconscious mind. This will be done in a fashion much analogous to how an Extrovert often prostrates himself to the external agenda, stopping at nothing to get the right accolades and right standing with the external world, the introvert will be egocentric to the point where he will not be willing to do anything at all that even slightly disagrees with his thoroughly arbitrary and irrational demands of the inner being. In the end he not only looses out in the external world due to his passivity and laziness, but the situation also turns unfavorable to him in the inner world as well, because he will not be able to bring order to the inner life properly due to neglect of his thoughts and Feelings. Neglect of thoughts and Feelings, to make more clear, happens in the situation where the character’s judgment falls slave and prey to his introversion. There he will not even want to be left alone to think, he will simply want to be left alone for the sake of being left alone to languish indolently. In cases of sound functioning, the introvert could riposte to the charge of the Extrovert on the account of uselessness, as he could well maintain that he is simply ‘busy on the inside’, yet in the cases of neurosis, he is well deserving of the charge, as he is nearly as indolent internally as he is externally.

    B. Thinking and Feeling

    Thinking and Feeling are both decision making faculties. The former strives to purge itself of the interpersonal element to make as clear of impersonal decisions as possible. In order to attain the clarity of thought, the Thinker wishes to be devoid of all notions that may cloud his judgment. Subject and interpersonal sentiments are most pestiferous to him. Hence, what he sees is but an intellectual formula for him to carry out his thought processes. Feeler on the other hand wishes to stay true to his interpersonal values and sentiments, finds thinking tyrannous and imposing. As cited in my INFP profile, Kierkegaard’s rebellion against Hegelian systemization is the case in point.

    Extroverted Thinking is primarily concerned with establishing a formula that corresponds with the external agenda and observations. Extroverted Feeling is primarily concerned with establishing a Feeling based agenda to confirm traditional values. Both Extroverted Judging functions are more concerned with implementation of thoughts and Feelings rather than with thoughts and Feelings on their own account. Both of these functions aim at maintaining status quo by all means necessary, as their introversion (or thoughts or feelings in their own right) are only means to the end of ensuring proper action. What is proper action is already decided by the agenda imposed upon them by their authorities. St.Thomas Aquinas’s endeavor to prove the existence of God, in which he believed in before his inquiry is the case in point for such a phenomenon. It is indeed no coincidence that when one debates the Extroverted Thinker or Extroverted Feeler, one gets the impression that his discussion partner has already decided on the conclusion of his ideas before thinking them through. Extroverted Thinking and Extroverted Feeling operate by conventional benchmarks and their thoughts and Feelings are guided in such a fashion accordingly. For this reason they may have difficulty adapting to thought experiments where improvisation and investigative research is necessary. The two Extroverted Judging faculties tend to excel at grammar and standard linguistics as they easily adapt external convention. The Extroverted Thinker would excel at elementary logic and mathematics as he easily adapts to the external convention, will easily learn the symbols and operational conditions. Yet when ideas become more theoretical and he will be forced to invent his own methods of thought, he shall slam shut. The Extroverted Judger’s personal interests are intermeshed with that of the external environment, as Jung says, the greatest threat to the extrovert is getting lost in the object. In this case simply being absorbed by the External agenda to the point where he cannot tell the difference between his own judgment and that imposed on him by others. Organized religion is a startling phenomenon of this. In the case of the Extroverted Thinker, he could not tell the difference between his ideas and those that he needs to pay lip service to in order to gain political ascendancy. In the case of an Extroverted Feeler, he may not be able to tell the difference between his personal sentiments and those that he needs to display in order to be thought of as congenial by others.

    Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling are concerned with thoughts and Feelings in their own right. They require no external agenda for legitimation. Whilst Extroverted Thinking and Extroverted Feeling run the danger of being too focused on implementation of ideas to the point where they neglect to think or feel at all, the Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling are in danger of getting absorbed in their thoughts to the point where they loose all relevance to reality. Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling greatly excel at exploration of theoretical notions. Aristotle exemplifies the former and Shakespeare the latter. The former is concerned with theoretical thinking, and the latter with theoretical feeling. The former seeks to understand the world from an impersonal perspective, yet the latter from the interpersonal. The former is most focused on science and philosophy, but the latter on arts and the human element. These two types, as contrasted to their extroverted counterparts are least inclined to accept the external convention and tend to concoct their own ways for how tasks are to be carried out. This is a great bonus on the theoretical level of ideas, as it is the case that the Introverted Thinkers have made greatest breakthroughs in theoretical mathematics, sciences and philosophy, and Introverted Feelers in literature. Yet the two types may experience extreme difficulties in learning the basic procedures of the enterprises they are about to enter as doing so they would need to learn the elementary ways of handling procedures. In their ignorance of the subject, they may still concoct their own way of doing things, yet this will likely be inadequate, and their ways will continue to be inadequate until they have attained sound knowledge of the subject. Yet, in order to do this they may have to rely on the Extroverted Judgment operations as a stepping stone. This could only be possible if doing so could be shown to be consistent with their judgment. In the case of the Introverted Thinker, it must be thoroughly explained with sound reasoning why the external convention is to be accepted. For the Introverted Feeler, as contrasted with the Extroverted Feeler, it is not enough to say that it only feels humane, or everyone else feels so, or it is the rule, it needs to be shown that the given notion truly is profoundly humane.

    C.Sensation and Intuition

    Sensation is primarily concerned with merely incepting the concrete objects. Intuition is concerned with deriving ideas from the concrete objects. The two are intimately intertwined. All sensation can give us is but a smell of a tree for instance, but in order for us to make any mental note of what has been observed, we must turn to intuition. Intuition in its own right is concerned with imagination only, yet it simply would have no fuel to run on without the concrete information collected by sensation. The intuitionist may protest on the account that intuition only needs abstract information to run on, but even this is highly unpersuasive. In order for the intuitionist to access a physics theory, which is incontestably a highly abstract matter, he must incept it through his senses first and foremost. He must hear someone explain it to him, or see it (read about it.)

    Extroverted Sensation and Extroverted Intuition see the External environment as existing in its own right and independent on their own perceptions thereof. Their sense of self is easily confused with that of the external environment. For more information on Extroverted perception, I advise the reader to review the first section of my ENTP and ENFP profiles. Yet, strictly for the sake of this discussion it needs to be noted that Extroverted perception is predominantly concerned with the environment, as the term perception implies. Extroversion of this faculty is most focused on the object itself and not the subjective interpretation thereof. Since the attitude to the object is positive the Extroverted perceiver naturally has an upbeat, optimistic and jovial attitude towards the external world. Security is rarely a concern of this type, as the subject (in this case the introverted perception) is most neglected. For this reason Extroverted Perceivers tend to easily engage in what others judge to be rash and irresponsible behavior. Extroverted Sensors tend to engage in unnecessary physical risks, yet Extroverted Intuitionists follow their absurd hunches to ludicrous extremes, often to the point where they loose nearly all credibility. Neglect of the Intuitive faculty for the sensor leads to profoundly negative and disturbing hunches. Such folks frequently find themselves joining a cult, or preparing themselves to the end of the universe without a slightest realization why they are doing this. (This is their security conscious abstract faculty of Introverted Intuition acting out in their unconscious). In the case of the Extroverted Intuitionist, strange concerns regarding physical security may arise, and after long periods of neglect of practical and concrete security oriented matters, he finds himself wholly devoted to such procedures with no understanding why he is doing this. Jung’s examples of the Extrovert neglecting his body is emblematic of neurotic behavior of the Extroverted Intuitive type. Introverted Sensing, which is the shadow of the Extroverted Intuitionist is the function most concerned with the body. Since he neglects this one, and he is out of tune with the general character of his introversion, he is highly likely to neglect his own body.

    Introverted Perceivers are most security conscious of all. They are concerned not with the object or the external environment itself, but with their private assessment of the external environment. Extroverted perception is most interested in interacting with the external environment, yet Introverted perception is most concerned with merely observing. Since the attitude towards the object is negative, as is the case for every introvert, Introverted Perceivers tend to have a fearful, cynical, and sometimes hostile view of the external environment. For more information on this phenomenon, I direct my reader to the first section of the INTJ and INFJ profiles.

    It should be noted here, however, that the Introverted Perception tends to interpreted the world not as it is, but as the world strikes the perception of the observer. ‘Beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ is also emblematic of such a perspective. Extroverted Judgers are well known for projecting their own character qualities onto others, and this is not only because of their directive nature, but also due to the nature of their perception. They earnestly see their environment as it strikes them. Introverted Sensor interprets the external world anthropomorphically, he sees, trains, automobiles, and dogs as either benevolent or malevolent. Yet the Introverted Intuitionist tends to see ideas as either good or evil. As mentioned before, egocentricity is a striking problem for any introvert. In the case of the Introverted Perceiver, he unconsciously would be led to think that the world truly does revolve around him, as the external world does not exist for him. Only his internal projection does. Case in point is Schopenhauer’s philosophy which was thoroughly imbued in its author’s personality. For this matter I direct the reader to a brief review of this thinker’s ideas and biography ( I recommend Schopenhauer in 90 Minutes by Paul Strathern) as no other notion could settle this idea nearly as well. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche are further cases in point. Sensation and Intuition are antithetical to each other because imagination cannot be given free-play when it is forced to focus only on the concrete data. Yet observation of concrete environment is not possible when we have only the realm of intuitive abstractions to observe.

    III. Relations between functions.
    We are accustomed to the notion of a dominant function, secondary , tertiary and inferior. Yet, one is tempted to ask, what about all others. I shall argue, (see critical Exposition of Thomson’s typology for further ramifications of this theory) that all 8 faculties inhere within our psyche. Yet only four are active, the remaining four dormant.

    Axiom 1 : Realm of Introversion and Extroversion do not overlap as they are aimed in different directions.
    Axiom 2: Intuition and Sensation, as well as Thinking and Feeling are antithetical to each other for aforementioned reasons.

    Example:INTP

    Claim 1:The introverted type is stronger than the Extroverted.

    Claim 2:Introverted Thinking is therefore first and Extroverted Intuition 2nd. Introverted Feeling is the direct opposite of Introverted Thinking in realm of Introversion. Extroverted Sensation is the direct opposite of Extroverted Intuition in the realm of Extroversion.

    Figure 1

    1)Introverted Thinking
    2)Extroverted Intuition
    7)Extroverted Sensing
    8)Introverted Feeling

    Claim 3: Since Thinking is very strong in the nature of the INTP, Introverted Thinking and Extroverted Thinking must be closely intertwined. Same is to be said for Introverted Intuition and Extroverted Intuition.

    Figure 2

    1)Introverted Thinking
    2) Extroverted Intuition
    3) Extroverted Thinking
    4)Introverted Intuition

    Claim 4: Extroverted Feeling is the direct opposite of Extroverted Thinking in the external realm. Introverted Sensing is the direct opposite of Introverted Intuition.

    Figure 3:

    1)Introverted Thinking
    2)Extroverted Intuition
    3)Extroverted Thinking
    4)Introverted Intuition
    5)Introverted Sensing
    6)Extroverted Feeling
    7)Extroverted Sensing
    8) Introverted Feeling

    What remains puzzling at this point is the fact that Introverted Intuition and Extroverted Thinking, and other functions that I call dormant are not ostensible in the INTP as the active ones. As we clearly shall see, that the ENFP who would have Extroverted Thinking in the 6th position has an easier time organizing the external environment than the INTP who has the same function in the third. Even the INFP with a shadow Te would be more proficient. The case of this phenomenon, I maintain, is that extroverted Thinking is a subtle influence on the INTP. It is maintained through the active function it is associated with, and not directly. Hence, to illustrate this matter further we should notice that the INFP will be motivated to attain good grades or feedback on sound job performance by virtue of the active Te, yet the INTP may be unconsciously led to perform externally by virtue of the Te, yet will be satisfied with his work only when the Introverted Thinking has authorized him to. Hence, the dormant function is not autonomous in its own right, but is merely an assistant of the active function that does have autonomy.

    Again, I remind the reader that these functions are but our conventional notations. These are the labels that we use to depict an internal phenomenon. As things in themselves they do not exist in the psyche, they are abstract notions that we try to intelligibly depict by alluding them to phenomena of concrete world.

    As a concluding statement on relations of functions, we should take note of the Hegelian master-slave dialect. Our dominant function lies at the core of our cognition. The lower the function is in the in hierarchy, the more likely it is to fall subordinate to the demands of the superior faculty, especially if the function in question is dormant. Usually, as Jung maintained, we have two thoroughly developed functions at most. One for decision making and the other for collection of information. Different methods for the same processes are difficult to cultivate because they are antithetical to the dominant methods of doing so and are therefore suppressed.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #3
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    All PMs regarding questions of typology will be answered within 24 hours of arrival.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #4
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    so...

    Se gets information in the form of photons, air molecules, etc. Ne is necessary to differentiate between and organize objects. Se alone would see a classroom as basically sensory gibberish. Ne alone wouldn't have any information to connect -- it basically sees a void. so they have to trade off hundreds of times a second to see the room as a bunch of people sitting in wooden desks listening to a teacher, etc. etc.

    or, would some other function be able to do the work i attributed to Ne? would Se take in some gibberish that Si would make sense of based on the past? or would Ti break down the information into decipherable patterns?

    still, an Ne dom would have to use Se no matter what. so how would Se be an ENxPs #8 function? in fact, most ENxPs i know tend to favor an attitude of extroverted perception in general; it's not one OR the other, it's both -- with an emphasis toward one. i certainly use Se much less frequently than my ENTP ex.

    so your function order formula might work for certain types, but it can't work for Ne doms.

    or, maybe you're going to say that although Se is used often, it's less conscious? that would make sense.



    anyways, the model i have in my mind is quite different. think of an INTP, for example. their preferred function is Ti. some of them might consciously reject Fi's influence. but some of them may just have a strong preference for Ji -- they get information from a Pe, Ti it, then Fi it. (they're extremely I and extremely P, but only moderately T)

    or, say the INTP stays in Ti a ridiculous amount of the time. Ti would want information, any kind of information, to analyze. they like the information they get from Ne, but what if they also used Se a significant amount of the time?

    is that possible?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    98

    Default

    It's interesting that you assume more fundamental differences between an Introvert and an Extravert; commonly, I-E is considered the least important personality dichotomy (at least not much thought goes into analyzing it beyond "one needs regular 'alone time', the other is ready to handle people 24/7").

    I personally believe the function order beyond the dominant and auxiliary, as I have said earlier, is largely spontaneous and heavily environmentally influenced. As a result of a heavily Feeling oriented mother (ENFJ), Fi became my third most used function. Personally, I don't trust Fi for decision making unless my Ti says that the issue is not innately logical, but it's useful to have well developed particularly for social purposes. Speaking about my personal opinions in a casual social environment, even if the conclusions reached were actually from using Ti, is clearly an Fi activity.

    As for the Ne/Se thing, all types have to use Se to SOME extent; it is the one function that we are using constantly from birth. This doesn't necessarily mean we prefer it over our intuition, though, or that it's well developed or heavily focused upon. To assume least used means not used is not how people work. We can't just go our entire lives without ever using or at least knowing an entire cognitive function. In order for Ne to happen, Se must be used as well, except the focus when using this Se will be much different than if we were to use it directly. In general, Intuition has to be channeled through Sensing, and Thinking has to be channeled through Feeling (logic is an eternally consistent way to express emotions).

  6. #6
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    so...

    Se gets information in the form of photons, air molecules, etc. Ne is necessary to differentiate between and organize objects. Se alone would see a classroom as basically sensory gibberish. Ne alone wouldn't have any information to connect -- it basically sees a void. so they have to trade off hundreds of times a second to see the room as a bunch of people sitting in wooden desks listening to a teacher, etc. etc.

    or, would some other function be able to do the work i attributed to Ne? would Se take in some gibberish that Si would make sense of based on the past? or would Ti break down the information into decipherable patterns?

    still, an Ne dom would have to use Se no matter what. so how would Se be an ENxPs #8 function? in fact, most ENxPs i know tend to favor an attitude of extroverted perception in general; it's not one OR the other, it's both -- with an emphasis toward one. i certainly use Se much less frequently than my ENTP ex.

    so your function order formula might work for certain types, but it can't work for Ne doms.

    or, maybe you're going to say that although Se is used often, it's less conscious? that would make sense.



    anyways, the model i have in my mind is quite different. think of an INTP, for example. their preferred function is Ti. some of them might consciously reject Fi's influence. but some of them may just have a strong preference for Ji -- they get information from a Pe, Ti it, then Fi it. (they're extremely I and extremely P, but only moderately T)

    or, say the INTP stays in Ti a ridiculous amount of the time. Ti would want information, any kind of information, to analyze. they like the information they get from Ne, but what if they also used Se a significant amount of the time?

    is that possible?
    Concerning your example, the two functions need not be Ne and Se per se. There needs to be a combination of sensation and Intuition. Generally, we have a combination of an introverted abstract function and an extroverted concrete or other way around. An introbverted perceiving funciton can well collect information about the external world.

    However, we find proof for Introverted perception properly collecting information of the external world when we ask an ISTJ to talk about what they saw in the room they visited 2 days ago. Almost impeccably they'd be able to describe every object they have seen.

    Or when we ask an INTJ to summarize the theory that has just been presented to them. We shall notice a similar effect.

    I should however mention that the introverted perception is indeed much influenced by our unconscious tendencies of perception, yet it does not greatly preclude the perceiver from making accurate observations.
    E.G

    Ne/Si
    Si/Ne
    Ni/Se
    Se/Ni

    This is the case because such functions are active for a given type. A dormant function is much less likely to be influential than an active.

    Keep in mind, inthe case of anENFP (as I understand your example), having inferior S does not imply lack of concrete data, but rather limited access. The ENFP still would hae enough access to get the imae of a classrom and chairs.

    Another note on this is that pure perception only gives you an image. You can react to it intuitively (N) or by impulse. Yet in order to make a conscious assessment of the situation you need to use a conscious function. Either Thinking or Feeling.

    Or in other words, you can flash images in your head about hte classroom, you can reflect on your memories of the cchairs you saw in the room. Yet in order for you to make assessments like, 'this room reminded me of the room I saw 2 years ago in a different school'. Or 'this room makes me anxious'. You need to use Thinking or Feeling.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  7. #7
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    All PMs will be answered within 24 hours of arrival.
    All PMs you say, are you sure about that?!?
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  8. #8
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badlands View Post
    It's interesting that you assume more fundamental differences between an Introvert and an Extravert; commonly, I-E is considered the least important personality dichotomy (at least not much thought goes into analyzing it beyond "one needs regular 'alone time', the other is ready to handle people 24/7").

    I personally believe the function order beyond the dominant and auxiliary, as I have said earlier, is largely spontaneous and heavily environmentally influenced. As a result of a heavily Feeling oriented mother (ENFJ), Fi became my third most used function. Personally, I don't trust Fi for decision making unless my Ti says that the issue is not innately logical, but it's useful to have well developed particularly for social purposes. Speaking about my personal opinions in a casual social environment, even if the conclusions reached were actually from using Ti, is clearly an Fi activity.

    As for the Ne/Se thing, all types have to use Se to SOME extent; it is the one function that we are using constantly from birth. This doesn't necessarily mean we prefer it over our intuition, though, or that it's well developed or heavily focused upon. To assume least used means not used is not how people work. We can't just go our entire lives without ever using or at least knowing an entire cognitive function. In order for Ne to happen, Se must be used as well, except the focus when using this Se will be much different than if we were to use it directly. In general, Intuition has to be channeled through Sensing, and Thinking has to be channeled through Feeling (logic is an eternally consistent way to express emotions).
    Domainant function- of all active functions,strongest natural predilection towards
    Inferior function- weakest natural predilection towards.

    Inevitably we use all functions, yet type is not about what we use, but about our unconscious tendencies towards the use.

    I agree that Sensation is inextricable from intuition, as I explicitly make this claim in my essay. Same is the case for Thinking and Feeling. However, it is possible for one of those functions to be distinctly more emphasized than the other.

    Consider the case of an Intuitive who pays little attention to his sensory observations, but uses them as means to the end to start his reveries and thought experiments.

    Consider the Thinker who pays little attention to his feelings, but only uses them as starting ground for his analysis.

    A Feeler who has no regard for logic, but only uses the truths about the world and his chain of reasoning to merely establish values and harmony with self and others.

    Sensor who only uses imagination to dream about the concrete things of the world he has observed with his five senses.

    Yes, functions are spontaneous, used interchangeably and often all are utilized simultaneously. We are in complete agreement in regards to this issue.

    However, this does not preclude us from having a stronger unconscious predispositions towards usage of one function than towards the other.

    As for instance, we all may use Thinking and Feeling, yet it is easier for some of us to learn logic than for others. Just as it is easier for some of us to dream than it is for others.

    We should also take note of this one important point. Experiencing emotion or experiencing Sensations is not the same thing as Sensing or Feeling.

    As one ITP profile pointed out that ITP children do not use a Feeling function in early age. This is not to say that they do not have feelings, but only that they are unable to reflect on them judiciously.

    Hence, we all always emote and experience concrete sensations (similar example could be made concerning matters of Thinkiing and INtuition), yet some of us naturally have an easier time properly utilizing the faculties of emoting or that of our senses.
    Last edited by SolitaryWalker; 04-17-2008 at 01:17 PM.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  9. #9
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Concerning your example, the two functions need not be Ne and Se per se. There needs to be a combination of sensation and Intuition. Generally, we have a combination of an introverted abstract function and an extroverted concrete or other way around. An introbverted perceiving funciton can well collect information about the external world.

    However, we find proof for Introverted perception properly collecting information of the external world when we ask an ISTJ to talk about what they saw in the room they visited 2 days ago. Almost impeccably they'd be able to describe every object they have seen.

    Or when we ask an INTJ to summarize the theory that has just been presented to them. We shall notice a similar effect.
    are you trying to say that a Pi can directly collect information about the outside world? or just that an IxxJ can collect information about the world? i'll assume it's the latter.

    i can understand how an INxJ would have access to all the necessary information -- Se takes sensory input in, Ni provides a pattern structure for the info. but how can an ISxJ do the same? where does the original sensory input come from? it's a feedback loop that can't start...

    isn't Se just completely necessary for every type hundreds of times a second? (unless you're alone and not moving)

    if the mind was a computer program, what would Se's code be? what about Ne? wouldn't Ne have to start with Se's information?

    as i understand the functions now, they do not seem parallel. if they're not parallel, why would the same formula work for ExxJs and ExxPs?

    </NiTi>

  10. #10
    @.~*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 Badlands View Post
    It's interesting that you assume more fundamental differences between an Introvert and an Extravert; commonly, I-E is considered the least important personality dichotomy (at least not much thought goes into analyzing it beyond "one needs regular 'alone time', the other is ready to handle people 24/7").
    If you just look at E/I as isolated functions, yes, they don't seem too complicated or different...

    ... but if you look at people as collections of functions and how the functions relate to each other, E/I makes a significant difference in how the other functions are used. This is the reason why E/I people often misread each other even when the other three type letters might match up.

    Case in point: You'd think ENTPs and INTPs could get along just fine, because the only difference is E/I... but watch the arguments that spring up between them even on this forum. There is a lot of misunderstanding/misinterpretation and explicit irritation that occurs in those conversations.

    This is because you can't understand a type by just looking at each function separate, you have to examine how the functions relate to each other.

    This also helps explain why an INTP forced to Ne most of their life will look different than an ENTP, and an ENTP forced to Ti (to the extent they might use it more than Ne) still looks different than an INTP. And so on.
    "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

Similar Threads

  1. Evolution of typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 05:33 AM
  2. Problem of Religious bigotry
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-26-2013, 03:57 PM
  3. how typology turned into a a problem of my soul
    By nanook in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-29-2011, 07:19 AM
  4. A Note on the Problem of Induction
    By reason in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-19-2007, 08:47 AM
  5. Problem of Problematicality
    By reason in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-23-2007, 05:36 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