User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 32

  1. #11
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    But you know, the reality is that both models are part of reality. Each letter means something on their own, but also functions play a deeper role to the letters.

    For example someone might be sure that he is an extravert, but has no idea about the functions. Not knowing the functions behind the extraversion, doesent remove the fact that he is an extravert.
    see i don't think that would work because the different uses of the word aren't speaking about the same things. you might know your an extravert because you have mad social skills granting you an awesome social life, but MBTI-wise it's entirely possible that your an INFJ who applies his Ni-Fe insights into people and learned how to use it for social situations. the word might be the same, but its simply not the same kind of extravert. sure, you might also happen be extraverted in the common use and extraverted in the MBTI use, but neither one means the other.

  2. #12
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    see i don't think that would work because the different uses of the word aren't speaking about the same things. you might know your an extravert because you have mad social skills granting you an awesome social life, but MBTI-wise it's entirely possible that your an INFJ who applies his Ni-Fe insights into people and learned how to use it for social situations. the word might be the same, but its simply not the same kind of extravert. sure, you might also happen be extraverted in the common use and extraverted in the MBTI use, but neither one means the other.
    The word for this non MBTI is extroversion
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #13
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    i noticed some people here have an x in their MBTI type, i am guessing representing that they either feel they are "in the middle", "both"... and something doesn't make sense to me:

    ...<deleted for brevity>...

    this pretty much goes on to all MBTI types with x's... what am i missing? how can that possibly make sense?
    The only case where I've seen literature refer to the possibility of someone being "balanced" - so far as to actually "name" that phenomena - would be the case of people who are balanced on Extroversion/Introversion, aka "Ambiverts."

    Apparently I tested at 51% "P" and 49% "J", but nonetheless, a Perceiver I am.

    It would have been easier if the system were not able to score people on an even numbered scale, and with only integer values, thus forcing each cognitive function to yield a polarity of one preference or the other.

    Is this not possible?



    -Alex

    P.S. I did read INTP's post about some people being unsure of one or more of their cognitive functions, and it did make sense to me, although I have not experienced it in determining my own type. For what it is worth, I did a quick analysis of all the type descriptions of types ExTx at http://similarminds.com/personality_types.html (because the descriptions are based on lists of "keyword" behaioral descriptions and thus easy to compare in MS Excel) and all 4 types had most of the same words in common. Granted these are not the best type descriptions on the WWW, the fact that many people have undoubtedly read poor type descriptions at one point or another seems to have legitimate possibility of confusing people.

    Finally, I enjoyed reading the type descriptions on the WikiSocion site at http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e_descriptions because they were so damn descriptive, and even differentiated between men and women of the same type, which I have not seen on other type description pages.

    -Alex
    --------------------
    Type Stats:
    MBTI -> (E) 77.14% | (i) 22.86% ; (S) 60% | (n) 40% ; (T) 72.22% | (f) 27.78% ; (P) 51.43% | (j) 48.57%
    BIG 5 -> Extroversion 77% ; Accommodation 60% ; Orderliness 62% ; Emotional Stability 64% ; Open Mindedness 74%

    Quotes:
    "If somebody asks your MBTI type on a first date, run". -Donna Cecilia
    "Enneagram is psychological underpinnings. Cognitive Functions are mental reasoning and perceptional processes. -Sanjuro

  4. #14
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,005

    Default

    It's not really acceptable because of the functions. If you put an X to mean even then it just doesn't make any sense... the only system where it's legit to put an x in your type is the Big 5 because it's a universally accepted aspect of the theory. If you only are using the dichotomies like F/T then I can see where putting an X would make sense for some people, but then again that's just looking at it wrong (it's being looked at like the Big 5, a series of on the surface traits vs psychological functions).
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  5. #15
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halla74 View Post
    The only case where I've seen literature refer to the possibility of someone being "balanced" - so far as to actually "name" that phenomena - would be the case of people who are balanced on Extroversion/Introversion, aka "Ambiverts."

    Apparently I tested at 51% "P" and 49% "J", but nonetheless, a Perceiver I am.

    It would have been easier if the system were not able to score people on an even numbered scale, and with only integer values, thus forcing each cognitive function to yield a polarity of one preference or the other.


    Is this not possible?

    on keirsey i get the entire range of xNxP myself, but on the MBTI that shouldn't happen.

    if anything, i would say that the way to do it isn't to score the dimensions at all: rather, score each of the 8 functions: Ni, Ne, Fi, Fe, Ti, Te, Si, Se. in the same time, ask questions to determine if the tested subject is currently or recently being under a lot of stress, to acount for the possible activity of his shadow functions.

    that's where things get interesting though: we can test the MBTI itself. on the user side, we can repriritize it by MBTI standards, a.k.a. I/E/I/E etc', but we can actually bring those rules to the test on our side.

    find out what if some people do have both strong Fi and Fe, what if people have more then 3 extraverted functions, etc...

    we can provide evidance to back the MBTI up scientifically, or fix it if it's wrong.

  6. #16
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    It's a very interesting thing, the thoughts between the different functions and how one cannot be a middle user based on such theory.
    The thought is that we are seeing things through the abstract categorical system in which one is one over the other by default. I imagine things may be slightly more complex with the given systems and thoughts. If one were to say the example of Fe, Fi, Te and Ti, one would be able to scale them. Each function would use 2-dimensional scales, one of which would be the dichotomy of the F/T and the dichotomy of Introvertion/Extraversion. In essence if it were any other way, functions definitions would simply be random unrelated nodes of judgement or perception which would put the jungian works of the functional models at a dead end. Of course, one would realise it's not such the case with the full understanding of the functions including its scaling factor. If you bring about the example of Ti:

    Ti will use the two scales of introversion/extraversion and thinking/feeling where the inclination from the 'unclear' midpoint of both scales would be introversion and thinking respectively. However, from again the unclear midpoint, the issue can be cause of greater confusion as to which is used at the particular time and so one who may be closer to that middle point of the scale, may type themselves as X within the MBTI dichotomies.


    Let's take this example here ^^. The scale from Ti to Te and Ti to Fi bears its strength by what one could use with regards to the lack of strength of the other.

    One way is that it could be represented by a sine curve.



    The wavelength represents how often a person retracts back to the pure logical mind processes whereas the amplitude represents how much distortion our logical processes are changed by feeling. It of course makes sense that pure logical thought has its impossibility of occurring by a lack of subconscious or conscious motivation to do so, so in essence a feeling is portrayed at all times the sine curve doesn't hit the center axis.

    The x axis would represent direction. This would be the dichotomy of introversion to extraversion as purely directional modes of thought towards a particular aspect. Where as one would process the thought with logical construct to application (Te) the other would process the thought with application to logical construct (Ti).

  7. #17
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    The official MBTI tests score each dichotomy based upon a sliding scale--clarity of preference. That is, MBTI assumes that there is a preference for each dichotomy but that the test may not illuminate them all.

    Uncertainties in preferences arise because because (a) the systems are imperfect, (b) people sometimes aren't sure of where they fall in those imperfect systems, and (c) people often conflate behavior and theoretical cognitive preference (in labeling both themselves and other people).


    I'm choosing to represent myself, in summation, 'eNfx,' knowing full well that the Lifestyle dichotomy (J/P) is the 'worst possible place' to have an 'x' and that the theorists could all yell at me (but.. but!! the functions!! they're all flipped around!!). I've simply chosen to factor in (a) how clearly my preferences might seem to manifest from the outside (and, perhaps, from the inside as well) and (b) that I'm looking at myself from the perspective of bunch of systems in combination (okay, and also (c) that I think that the assumptions in type-based systems are largely baloney).

  8. #18
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakysage View Post
    It's a very interesting thing, the thoughts between the different functions and how one cannot be a middle user based on such theory.
    The thought is that we are seeing things through the abstract categorical system in which one is one over the other by default. I imagine things may be slightly more complex with the given systems and thoughts. If one were to say the example of Fe, Fi, Te and Ti, one would be able to scale them. Each function would use 2-dimensional scales, one of which would be the dichotomy of the F/T and the dichotomy of Introvertion/Extraversion. In essence if it were any other way, functions definitions would simply be random unrelated nodes of judgement or perception which would put the jungian works of the functional models at a dead end. Of course, one would realise it's not such the case with the full understanding of the functions including its scaling factor. If you bring about the example of Ti:

    Ti will use the two scales of introversion/extraversion and thinking/feeling where the inclination from the 'unclear' midpoint of both scales would be introversion and thinking respectively. However, from again the unclear midpoint, the issue can be cause of greater confusion as to which is used at the particular time and so one who may be closer to that middle point of the scale, may type themselves as X within the MBTI dichotomies.


    Let's take this example here ^^. The scale from Ti to Te and Ti to Fi bears its strength by what one could use with regards to the lack of strength of the other.

    One way is that it could be represented by a sine curve.



    The wavelength represents how often a person retracts back to the pure logical mind processes whereas the amplitude represents how much distortion our logical processes are changed by feeling. It of course makes sense that pure logical thought has its impossibility of occurring by a lack of subconscious or conscious motivation to do so, so in essence a feeling is portrayed at all times the sine curve doesn't hit the center axis.

    The x axis would represent direction. This would be the dichotomy of introversion to extroversion as purely directional modes of thought towards a particular aspect. Where as one would process the thought with logical construct to application (Te) the other would process the thought with application to logical construct (Ti).
    first of all - + 100 rep, i've had a very similar idea years ago when i just learned of the MBTI about representing the midway sections via a wave formation, somewhat inspired by one of the puzzles in Myst... doesn't seem so original now (pfft)... but still from a different direction:

    my notion was that the level of extroversion vs. introversion of any given mental process can be described in terms of frequency, defined as the rate of the process relatively to the rate at which we experience it (RoE), and that most differences between an introverted and extroverted function can be defined by that frequency.

    imagine a slow motion movie of a water stream: you would be able to see every wave as it breaks against the rocks, every droplet as it flies through the air and arches it's way back to break through the surface of the water. you would catch the patterns within it, learning what will come of each drop like a child learns to figure out where the ball will hit, you would be able to ignore the whole as it waits for you and break down the components of the otherwise chaotic system, as each drop flies the sight of the other drops in similar patterns would still be in your peripheral vision. you sit their in your peace of mind, waiting quietly for the movie to come to you.

    now imagine the same movie but in fast motion. the chaotic system becomes even more chaotic, you catch glimpses of what's happening, your trying to figure out the possible variables of how everything was in the moments you missed to figure out the possibilities of where it might go again, you build generalizations to engulf it as a whole without seen what it's made of, your eyes are racing after the stream trying to catch more details, your always experiencing that your missing information so you look to find what others see and as you communicate it you force the view of the stream in your mind to slow down to the rate at which you communicate it.

    thus:
    when a mental process is moving at a slower frequency then the rate at which we experience it, it is an introverted process.
    when a mental process is moving at a faster frequency then the rate at which we experience it, it is an extroverted process.

    by illustrating this as frequency, and by calling the Y axis the level of awareness we have of a process, we gain the advantage of a clear visual depiction of for "multiply small glimpses of awareness" as the wave structure crosses the X line at a higher frequency vs. "long focused moments of awareness" as the wave structure crosses the X line at a lower frequency. hopefully the metaphor allows for the entire range between an introverted process and an extroverted process to be immediately and visually apparent.

    ____________________

    i would also add another dimension to the new description, though i am not sure how to represent it on the visual metaphor:

    adapting the information to ourselves vs. adapting ourselves to the information.

    when we adapt the information to ourselves, we allow it to sink into the schemes and meanings that we recognize at the back of our heads, the patterns and subjective experiences that we intimately know, and process it from in a more Recognizable form. such is the case with intuition and feeling.

    when we adapt ourselves towards the information, broken down into the various inputs and tidbits that we have, we experiencing it in it's raw detailed form, making new connections and Generating new mental schemes. such is the case with sensing and thinking.

    so a function can be attempting to:
    Generate schemes
    Recognize schemes

    and likewise, can still be perceiving or judgemental.
    GP = S, GJ = T
    RP = N, RJ = F

    whatever way we depict it, it is entirely possible that we are able to do both in the same time, in fact i am pretty sure we almost always have too in order to come up or understand anything at all, so the description here shouldn't present a false dichotonmy but rather a full range of possible gray areas.

  9. #19
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    my notion was that the level of extroversion vs. introversion of any given mental process can be described in terms of frequency, defined as the rate of the process relatively to the rate at which we experience it (RoE), and that most differences between an introverted and extroverted function can be defined by that frequency.
    I've always been under the impression that the rate of function usage is irrelevant to the introversion/extroversion -- those terms only apply to the scope of data the process uses. For example, Thinking is a deductive process (Feeling, too, for that matter) -- it is passed data from some perceiving function and combines it with its own premises to check for consistency. The only difference between Ti and Te would be which premises are built into the function. Te uses premises biased towards environmental relevance, whereas Ti uses premises biased towards internal relevance. I don't see how frequency has anything to do with this distinction, unless maybe you're using the word more metaphorically than I am assuming.

    BTW, check out my type calculator in my signature; it's pretty relevant to your OP... (Does OP stand for original post or original poster? Hmmm; now I'm wondering about my usage. )

    Edit: oh shit the site went down; I'll post it later.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    There are a lot of reasons for this:

    1. Some people use type to discriminate others.
    2. A lot of people think type is about stereotypes, so people are hesitant to go with one.
    3. Discussing this with an open mind is hard because of the common bigotry that goes with stereotypes.
    4. This isn't the philosopher's stone of psychology, so some people are reluctant to take it too seriously.
    5. There's going to be a difference between how someone acts in person and how they act online, versus how they act with their grandmother, versus how they act with their boss, versus how they act with their friends, versus how they score on the test, etc., so some people are genuinely confused by it all.
    6. People who argue type is innate think everything else falls under persona, which is ignorant and makes people feel like their talk is cheap, so they ignore them (I do).

    7. Some don't think it's a good idea to excuse behavior due to type.
    8. Some don't like how type becomes a prophecy that partly determines our future if taken too seriously.

    I'm going to stop. If you can get something constructive to discuss out of that, I'll be surprised.

Similar Threads

  1. [ESTP] An ESTP broke off all contact with me. That type doesn't change their minds, right?
    By NancyD in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-29-2017, 03:59 AM
  2. [NT] mbti type with most will power
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-27-2017, 04:10 PM
  3. [NF] mbti type with most basic life?
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-26-2016, 10:28 PM
  4. [MBTItm] mbti type with most will power?
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-15-2016, 11:51 AM
  5. [Other] Tim Burton & Myers Briggs (MBTI) Types- With Gifs
    By CarolineForbes in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-13-2015, 12:53 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