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

Thoughts on Superior MBTI types.

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Read first! Disclaimer: This thread is not about ranking the various types against each other. Don't post which types you feel are superior or inferior for whatever reason you may have, this is not the Fluff section. :p

Also note I'm not a psychologist, but merely a layman, I'd love to hear peoples thoughts on what I'm about to say.


I have been having some thoughts about type strengths correlating to brain effeciency, which might bleed towards even explaining some mental deffeciencies or on the other side of the spectrum, genius.

We all know MBTI is merely a tool for categorization. It's not like INTP's have different brains than ESFJ's, but INTP's use their brains differently than ESFJ's. Possibly by supercharging different areas of the brain, but that's another topic.

Now if we know that is true, then it could also very well be true that the skill at which a certain type uses his brain can directly correlate to the ability and cpacity of that person in his or her area of expertise.

I don't think it would be far fetched to think there may be inferior and superior type people (in terms of usage of cognatve processes) walking around.

Inferior type:
Should not be seen as an unhealthy type by mbti standards as explained below.
A person who is not fully capable of using his or her brain in order to fully use the sets of cognative functions of their preference. Like type XXXX with dom A, aux B might not be able to fully tap into both cognative functions, and either have a weak dom, or a nearly non existing aux. Possibly resulting in a state where that person is forced in their inferior completely as a result of not being able to keep up with their environment.

'Unhealthy' type:
A person who ignores or misuses his or her cognative functions, often resulting stress and depression.

Normal type:
A type that is adept and effecient in their use of cognative functions. Especially when matured, not only will they boast a very strong dominant and auxillery, they are much less likely to be bothered much by their inferior. These are the general masses.

Superior type:
A type that is so effecient and adept at their brain, they can even transcend the functions set for any of the types. Not only will they achieve perfect control of their own functions, they can tap into the full spectrum of their auxilliries naturally. No doubt still preferencing their inherited auxillery, but to be able to use the opposite of their aux as skillfully as their inherited aux as a means to supply their dominate function.

To understand my reasoning, compare it against peoples ability to multitask. Some people can do one thing at a time, some two, others even more. How much a person can do at once says something about how good and effecient that person is in controlling the part of the brain that allows for that. Why could the same not be true for cognative functions?

These thoughts came to mind when thinking about some of the world's greatest. How much I reveled at their capacity of their cognative functions, I realized in some cases, it almost doesn't make sense that they have achieved what they did through their MBTI functions alone. As if they have an advantage over the limitations of their own type.

Einstein is seen as an INTP, yet I marvel at his intellect and how he could possibly reach his levels of understanding in unknown subjects to man through the use of Ti-Ne-Si, but if I add Ni into the picture, it seems to make much more sense. If he had a firm grip of the introspetive nature of Ni added to his auxillery Ne, I can totally see how someone of his intellect could explore and reach the unknown in the way that he did.

Like he was not Ti-Ne-Si, but Ti-N-Si. (Or Ti-Ne+Ni-Si).

Am I on to something or am I going to be shot down. :D
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Einstein is seen as an INTP, yet I marvel at his intellect and how he could possibly reach his levels of understanding in unknown subjects to man through the use of Ti-Ne-Si, but if I add Ni into the picture, it seems to make much more sense. If he had a firm grip of the introspetive nature of Ni added to his auxillery Ne, I can totally see how someone of his intellect could explore and reach the unknown in the way that he did.

Like he was not Ti-Ne-Si, but Ti-N-Si. (Or Ti-Ne+Ni-Si).

didnt read the whole thing, but having Ne rules out Ni completely, at least if using the correct definitions.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Einstein is seen as an INTP, yet I marvel at his intellect and how he could possibly reach his levels of understanding in unknown subjects to man through the use of Ti-Ne-Si, but if I add Ni into the picture, it seems to make much more sense. If he had a firm grip of the introspetive nature of Ni added to his auxillery Ne, I can totally see how someone of his intellect could explore and reach the unknown in the way that he did.

Like he was not Ti-Ne-Si, but Ti-N-Si. (Or Ti-Ne+Ni-Si).

Am I on to something or am I going to be shot down. :D

TiNi looping would indeed make for a very radical and intellectual combination, but if you are an MBTI fundamentalist, the only 2 types that would be possible for are ISTP and INFJ, although I for one do not see Jungian cognitive functions as that solid of a theory, as it has made for some painfully sad and confused discussions all over typology central, and I do agree that Einstein was indeed an INTP with well developed Ni. I am also probably INTP with heavy Ni, as this thread seems to indicate:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/enneagram/54894-5w6-istp-vs-5w4-intp.html
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
didnt read the whole thing, but having Ne rules out Ni completely, at least if using the correct definitions.

Yes, but I'm kicking the 'correct definitions' around a bit since it's wrong to assume they are absolute. Like I said. It's not like person A grew two middle fingers and a ring finger where person B grews a pinky and some thumbs. We all have the same brain, but how we use that defines our use for cognative functions. Knowing that I would think it's a bad idea to think of cognative functions as absolute.

Although I do agree with the preferential nature of MBTI and that an INTP for example, can't exist without Ne or Si or something like that. But it doesn't seem to far fetched in my observation to think that any type could take advantage of using their cognative ability by tapping into other functions.
 

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Read first! Disclaimer: This thread is not about ranking the various types against each other. Don't post which types you feel are superior or inferior for whatever reason you may have, this is not the Fluff section. :p
:sadbanana:
I wanted to see some chaos.
Mbti theory is full of loopholes. Btw, using your parameters, I think we could call Einstein both unhealthy and superior.
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
:sadbanana:
I wanted to see some chaos.
Mbti theory is full of loopholes. Btw, using your parameters, I think we could call Einstein both unhealthy and superior.

Not really, For unhealthy I meant misuse of there prefered/standard functions, and superior a good use of prefered/standared with additional function use. :alttongue:
 

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Not really, For unhealthy I meant misuse of there prefered/standard functions, and superior a good use of prefered/standared with additional function use. :alttongue:
His Fe usage was likely crap; he had serious issues with relationships. Unless he deliberately planned it all, but I doubt he would do that.
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
His Fe usage was likely crap; he had serious issues with relationships. Unless he deliberately planned it all, but I doubt he would do that.

Fe is his inferior. And I wouldn't think it past an INTP to completely ignore relationships in order to focus on what the INTP finds to be of more importance. I do that myself too after all. I'm still a healthy INTP that can be as social as the next INTP, but just won't go through the lengths of commitment.

My inferior Fe most clearly shines when I am rebelling a bit against myself for the choices I've made in particular to my social life. So basicly when I use Si, the Fe starts to surface.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Yes, but I'm kicking the 'correct definitions' around a bit since it's wrong to assume they are absolute. Like I said. It's not like person A grew two middle fingers and a ring finger where person B grews a pinky and some thumbs. We all have the same brain, but how we use that defines our use for cognative functions. Knowing that I would think it's a bad idea to think of cognative functions as absolute.

Although I do agree with the preferential nature of MBTI and that an INTP for example, can't exist without Ne or Si or something like that. But it doesn't seem to far fetched in my observation to think that any type could take advantage of using their cognative ability by tapping into other functions.

the whole idea of Ni is about trusting subjective perspective on intuition over the objective one. how can you trust objective over subjective while also trusting subjective over objective?
 

Santosha

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,516
MBTI Type
HUMR
Enneagram
6
Instinctual Variant
sx
They are some interesting ideas, some that I've wondered about as well. It's just, well, maybe my Ne on overdrive but there seems to be so many possibilities, how can we filter through what is a good idea and what is bunk? When we remove the fundamentals of mbti we expand possibilites and so many people are not even in clear agreement on what each function, let alone what combined functions, clearly and indisputably manifest. How could any of this be quantified? How to find the truth?

Did Einstein have a verified IQ? I don't think he did.. so while someone can be brilliant in 1 field, they can be hopeless in others. I think I read that Einsteins brain was a bit different from the norm and I'm not sure this is something you'd find with other INTP's, even very bright ones. Marion Diamond from UC Berkley said the brain had significantly more glial cells in the area responsible for synthesizing information, and then there was the whole wrinkle thing. Einstein was brilliant, but he also couldn't pass his first college entry exam on language, history, geography. Some of the letters between himself and his first wife were down-right crude, indicating quite a lack of empathy. Perhaps his Ti-Ne converged to look like Ni at the level he was operating on. Or perhaps the standard mbti theory is bunk and he did access Ni.. but I don't think he was well balanced in the way your describing a superior type.. if he had perfect access to all his functions, where did he demonstrate Fe?

I dunno, random thoughts =P

Edit: just saw everyone elses posts about the Fe, lol.
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
the whole idea of Ni is about trusting subjective perspective on intuition over the objective one. how can you trust objective over subjective while also trusting subjective over objective?

What about being able to trust both your subjective and objective perspective on intuition, finding the best in both worlds? I don't see why this would be impossible.

The definition of using Ne might be using the objective over the subjective and vice versa, but that doesn't mean you can trust both.
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
They are some interesting ideas, some that I've wondered about as well. It's just, well, maybe my Ne on overdrive but there seems to be so many possibilities, how can we filter through what is a good idea and what is bunk? When we remove the fundamentals of mbti we expand possibilites and so many people are not even in clear agreement on what each function, let alone what combined functions, clearly and indisputably manifest. How could any of this be quantified? How to find the truth?

Did Einstein have a verified IQ? I don't think he did.. so while someone can be brilliant in 1 field, they can be hopeless in others. I think I read that Einsteins brain was a bit different from the norm and I'm not sure this is something you'd find with other INTP's, even very bright ones. Marion Diamond from UC Berkley said the brain had significantly more glial cells in the area responsible for synthesizing information, and then there was the whole wrinkle thing. Einstein was brilliant, but he also couldn't pass his first college entry exam on language, history, geography. Some of the letters between himself and his first wife were down-right crude, indicating quite a lack of empathy. Perhaps his Ti-Ne converged to look like Ni at the level he was operating on. Or perhaps the standard mbti theory is bunk and he did access Ni.. but I don't think he was well balanced in the way your describing a superior type.. if he had perfect access to all his functions, where did he demonstrate Fe?

I dunno, random thoughts =P

Edit: just saw everyone elses posts about the Fe, lol.

I don't think MBTI as it is now is truely quantifiable. But even from a philosophical point of view, it fascinates me. It is a platform that allows me to more clearly penetrate the mystery of the psyche. And hmm, maybe Einstein is not the best of examples as a truely 'superior' type. But more of a possible combination thereof, using the extra element described in my superior type as well as failing with his inferior in an unhealthy manner.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
the whole idea of Ni is about trusting subjective perspective on intuition over the objective one. how can you trust objective over subjective while also trusting subjective over objective?
Ah, but trust implies a judgment. Ni is only perception. The highest judgment function of a Ni-dom/aux is Te, which values objectivity. Hence, objective judgment applied to often subjective perceptions (plus a bit of more objective Se perceptions for good measure).
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Perhaps his Ti-Ne converged to look like Ni at the level he was operating on. Or perhaps the standard mbti theory is bunk and he did access Ni.. but I don't think he was well balanced in the way your describing a superior type.. if he had perfect access to all his functions, where did he demonstrate Fe?

Those are my thoughts exactly, that although MBTI is a very interesting theory, the idea that each type gets assigned a strict set of functions to follow without deviation could be a giant load of horse maneur.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Ah, but trust implies a judgment. Ni is only perception. The highest judgment function of a Ni-dom/aux is Te, which values objectivity. Hence, objective judgment applied to often subjective perceptions (plus a bit of more objective Se perceptions for good measure).

trust can be also obtained by not having an unconscious disposition towards distrust. there is no need for T or F with that.

[MENTION=6643]Fluffywolf[/MENTION] i started to write a reply, but it got so long and its getting late, so i gotta go to sleep, ill try to finish the reply tomorrow
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
trust can be also obtained by not having an unconscious disposition towards distrust. there is no need for T or F with that.
We make unconscious judgments all the time, often F-based, probably sometimes T-based as well. It is better, of course, to learn to recognize when we are doing this so we can make a conscious judgment instead, based on the best information at hand.
 
Top