User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Type Rarity?

  1. #1
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default Type Rarity?

    Does anyone remain convinced that there are rare types, or is it pretty much understood that all cognitive processes are used equally across the board? Jung says in his introduction of Personality Type:
    Naturally, at first, one is inclined to regard such differences as mere individual idiosyncrasies. But anyone with the opportunity of gaining a fundamental knowledge of many men will soon discover that such a far-reaching contrast does not merely concern the individual case, but is a question of typical attitudes, with a universality far greater than a limited psychological experience would at first assume. In reality, as the preceding chapters will have shown, it is a question of a fundamental opposition; at times clear and at times obscure, but always emerging whenever we are dealing with individuals whose personality is in any way pronounced. Such men are found not only among the educated classes, but in every rank of society; with equal distinctness, therefore, our types can be demonstrated among labourers and peasants as among the most differentiated members of a nation. Furthermore, these types over-ride the distinctions of sex, since one finds the same contrasts amongst women of all classes. Such a universal distribution could hardly arise at the instigation of consciousness, ie. as the result of a conscious and deliberate choice of attitude. If this were the case, a definite level of society, linked together by a similar education and environment and, therefore, correspondingly localized, would surely have a majority representation of such an attitude. But the actual facts are just the reverse, for the types have, apparently, quite a random distribution. [p. 414]

  2. #2
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    The part that is highlighted does not speak to rarity but to distribution. The two are unrelated. It's saying that MBTI type does not predispose someone toward a certain social class nor is it a direct result of the choices that a person makes. However this has nothing to do with the rarity of a type. A type which appears with a 1% frequency will do so in all social classes. In particular if people which use intuition as their primary or secondary function appear in 20% of the population then they will appear with 20% frequency in every significantly large social grouping regardless of economic background or education.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  3. #3
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Yet what he does not say anywhere in his work that those preferring inuition are rare or more rare than those preferring sensing. In fact when he discribes Ne Jung says that they are so similar that, those who proposed to prefer Ne were actually describing Se traits.

    Also as stated in another thread, Myers-Briggs raises questions as to whether many are born with a clean slate thus not predispositioned to a certain type. As a result she questions whether the western culture may be the basis of so many preferring ESJ.

  4. #4
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    Also as stated in another thread, Myers-Briggs raises questions as to whether many are born with a clean slate thus not predispositioned to a certain type. As a result she questions whether the western culture may be the basis of so many preferring ESJ.
    If this is true, then Intuition actually is "rare". At least it is rare in western culture.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  5. #5
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    I am generally convinced that INs are rarer than ENs, ISs, and ESs.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #6
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    If this is true, then Intuition actually is "rare". At least it is rare in western culture.
    Yet it's based on cultural expectations, ergo ESJs who may actually be intuitives are merely being influenced by culture. We see it all of the time in people's confusion of their best fit type due to outside influences.

  7. #7
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I am generally convinced that INs are rarer than ENs, ISs, and ESs.
    So is Myers-Briggs and Keirsey, but Jung scoffs at the idea.

  8. #8
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    So is Myers-Briggs and Keirsey, but Jung scoffs at the idea.

    I just don't think it's very probable that there is even dispersion of all types. That sort of symmetry really isn't common among human beings. I also generally suspect that society would be rather different if there were more INs.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #9
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I just don't think it's very probable that there is even dispersion of all types. That sort of symmetry really isn't common among human beings. I also generally suspect that society would be rather different if there were more INs.
    I don't really know if it'd be INs in particular that would be rare -- just N dominants, at least through my observation. INPs and ENJs seem to be all over in real life, it's just that the INPs are reclusive enough to not notice each other.

    The idea being that, if type is at least partially by nurture, INJ would be anathema to the 'learned' ESJ attitude, and ENP anathema to the 'learned' ESP attitude.

    I wonder now how many ISPs there are compared to ESPs, and how many ISJs there are compared to ESJs.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  10. #10
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ?
    Yet it's based on cultural expectations, ergo ESJs who may actually be intuitives are merely being influenced by culture. We see it all of the time in people's confusion of their best fit type due to outside influences.
    I was responding to something you said about people starting with a clean slate. Now you are saying they may actually be intuitives. Which is it? It they are really intuitives, then they are not starting with a clean slate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
    I am generally convinced that INs are rarer than ENs, ISs, and ESs.
    I think this depends mostly where you draw the line between introversion and extraversion on the continuum. Some studies say introverts are about 25% of the US population, while others put introverts at over 50%. If the latter is true then IN's are certainly not less common than EN's. Also "?" may very well be correct. There may not be be any rarity among type even with respect to S and N. However he hasn't given any good reasons in this thread yet to back up that assertion.

    Anecdotally I have encountered a lot more IN's in my life than EN's. This is mostly because IN's group together, so you can find them if you know where to look. On the other hand EN's might turn up in just about any circle, but when you find them there is either an even mix of types or other types dominate the group.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

Similar Threads

  1. Each type in 3 words.
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 11-02-2016, 07:32 AM
  2. No Type
    By paulwhy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-05-2015, 09:01 PM
  3. Help figuring out your type?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 354
    Last Post: 09-25-2012, 12:12 PM
  4. Rarity of type?
    By Cellmold in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-26-2012, 06:44 PM
  5. [NF] What sort of topics are NF type topics?
    By Alienclock in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-23-2007, 09:39 AM

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