User Tag List

First 142223242526 Last

Results 231 to 240 of 276

  1. #231
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    As you wish.

    Based on what I've gathered in this thread, you're basically a failed author who believes his work is superior to Isabel Myers' and Keirsey's.

    Incorrect, the comparison between myself and these two authors is illegitimate. I am writing in the Jungian tradition, they're writing in the tradition of modern popular psychology. Our objectives are entirely different, I did not intend to sell as many books as possible by simplifying typology in a manner they did. For what it's worth, Principles of Typology sells a few copies each quarter and my readers take an altogether different approach to typology than the acolytes of Keirsey and Briggs.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    So when observers watch the failed author
    My only intention was to write a book on theoretical typology for a very narrow audience of readers who are dissatisfied with the "folk typology". In that respect, I have succeeded, but the book definitely needs to be re-written because it hasn't even been proof-read, let alone comprehensively edited. In short, it is a very rough draft and a work in progress to start a meaningful conversation on typology, the project has just begun and is far from failure. If you want to define success in salesman's terms of "volume, volume, volume"and enjoy your Keirsey, be my guest.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    As criticizing the work of the accomplished authors (and people influenced by them) without giving them any merits whatsoever,
    Sure they have merits, after all who would ever say that Dr. Phil's books are completely worthless? It's just that we need to grow out of their immature theoretical frameworks if we cherish any hopes of gaining a meaningful understanding of typology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    what can they usually conclude about the motivations behind it?
    My dear illustrious friend, you may conclude whatever you want, I trust that what you'll come up with will be nothing short of profoundly illuminating.
    "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. #232
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,931

    Default

    you're good.
    -----------------

    A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'
    A man creates. A parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?'
    A man invents. A parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God... '


    -----------------

  3. #233
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    [...] if we cherish any hopes of gaining a meaningful understanding of typology.
    What is typology? Did Jung invent it? If not, why is it wrong to deviate from his ideas?

  4. #234
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    What is typology?
    Jung coined the term of "psychological types" which is the endeavor of differentiating between personalities based on their underlying traits of temperament. Jung's work is meritorious because it is founded on a coherent theoretical framework and analysis of temperaments is not easily influenced by observations of superficial or highly visible behavioral traits. Most modern publications on typology do not even pretend to be intellectually respectable, they were meant to be popularized and lucrative in the market-place. These are the ideas that form the basis of typological discourse on this forum, as pleasant and easy to work with they may be, they are crude distortions of the cognitive tendencies that Jung wrote about.

    Strictly speaking, Jung did invent typology as we know it, modern popularizing writers did not so much deviate from it, but rather distorted it.
    "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/

  5. #235
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Strictly speaking, Jung did invent typology as we know it, modern popularizing writers did not so much deviate from it, but rather distorted it.
    Does that mean there can never be typology without reference and adherence to Jung's work? If that is so, should we perhaps begin to regard typology as a literary endeavor, like theology, 'Psychologische Typen' as its Bible?

  6. #236
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Does that mean there can never be typology without reference and adherence to Jung's work?
    Sure there can be, there is the Enneagram and the Big Five. Jung's theoretical framework is just one method of doing typology, however, if we are going to reference his terms and ideas, there is little sense in radically deviating from his theories. If we're going to do that, we might as well sever all ties with Jung and start our own system of temperaments. However, my problem with the modern distortions of Jung's work is not so much that they are disloyal to their founding paradigm but that they're becoming less rigorous with each new system. Who could argue that Keirsey is less rigorous than Briggs? Soon enough, typology will degenerate into a balderdash that we'll scarcely recognize, it will soon be on the level of mere superstitions such as parapsychology and tarot card reading.
    "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. #237
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honor View Post
    Defining intelligence is difficult, a point you brought up before and a good one. When I speak about intelligence, I'm not necessarily talking about IQ as a measure of intelligence, although I don't believe that a good IQ test is entirely useless. Off the cuff, I'd say that one's capacity for high-level analysis, reasoning, and perhaps one's memory might be attributes of intelligence.

    You might say that the definition is skewed toward NTs and suggest that NFs display an equal amount of intelligence although a different kind. In response to that, I'd say that I think all types have something equally valuable to bring to the table, but I am not sure if empathy, or interpersonal skills, really count as "intelligence." I can't also say that they don't count as a form of intelligence because some people do use high-level reasoning, analysis, and whatever else intelligence is to understand and respond to others. But in my observation, many people who relate well to the masses and are skilled interpersonally do not have a very high capacity for analysis, reasoning, etc. Most importantly, I'd like to point out that even by my original definition, I don't think every F would score lower than every T. Simply being a T doesn't mean you have developed your capacity to reason further than an F, though you may have been more predisposed to do so.

    As for which types might be among the more intelligent, I do have some ideas about who they might be, but I wouldn't say on the forum because people get reactive over stuff like that and then, start insane arguments.
    See my problem is, ok, you've mentioned "high-level analysis, reasoning, and [...] memory" as attributes of intelligence. That all sounds reasonable to me considering a common concept of "intelligence". At the same time, why is empathy not included in that measure? After all, empathy is linked to mirror neurons and ability to recreate another person's state of being, which is certainly a sort of analysis and reasoning in and of itself. So what is it, exactly, that intelligence measures?

    Until we have a definition of "intelligence" that is abundantly clear about what exactly it is a measurement of, and what it is not a measurement of, people will continue conflating it with self-worth and individual value, and in that sense it will only serve to obfuscate actual ability and stir up negative feelings. I am not one to follow "political correctness" either, but I find "intelligence" a useless concept at the moment - and a dangerous one, as we even sort children into being "gifted" or not. It is my opinion that this sort of testing and analysis - which we know will never be perfect - is far more likely to hamper people who have undiscovered talents than it is to benefit society by pushing the "gifted" forward, especially as those "gifted" students have an overwhelming tendency to be affluent white children raised in stable homes with abundant resources.

    In other words, I don't think the concept of intelligence is being used in an objective or constructive way. I think it's poorly defined, conflated into individual worth, poorly tested for, and mired in sociocultural prejudices. There is little benefit to be had in applying it to typology.

  8. #238
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    while we're talking about faulty typology... can someone please explain to me "vibe"?
    you don't vibe like a 2
    you vibe more like a head type
    i'm getting more of a Ti vibe from you

    this has being a particular annoyance for me in regards to enneagram (somewhat rarer but still in use in regards to MBTI)... wtf does it mean? "i associate you with person A & B which were type X"? "i don't have the words to explain this"? is this the adult-acceptable form of "because!"?

  9. #239
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    while we're talking about faulty typology... can someone please explain to me "vibe"?
    Modern folk typology is far too rigorous for some of our forum users, so they want to take it down another notch. Instead of placing people into neat and simplistic boxes based on observations of superficial, highly visible behaviors, they want to type them on fleeting whim.
    "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/

  10. #240
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Modern folk typology is far too rigorous for some of our forum users, so they want to take it down another notch. Instead of placing people into neat and simplistic boxes based on observations of superficial, highly visible behaviors, they want to type them on fleeting whim.
    I didn't realize signing up here was akin to applying to the Harvard of typology.

Similar Threads

  1. [ISTJ] How NOT to Mislead an ISTJ?
    By Bubbles in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-03-2015, 03:37 PM
  2. [ENFJ] ENFJ Communication/ how not to annoy them?
    By paddington bear in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-16-2011, 08:23 PM
  3. ENFJ Communication/ how not to annoy them?
    By paddington bear in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-07-2011, 09:35 PM
  4. [ISTJ] How not to pursue an ISTJ
    By raz in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 09-15-2010, 12:24 PM
  5. How not to geocache
    By Martoon in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-23-2008, 04:48 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