## View Poll Results: Which of these type groupings is most useful for you?

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
• is-in-es-en (xx--)

6 11.32%
• it-if-et-ef (x-x-)

1 1.89%
• ip-ij-ep-ej (x--x)

8 15.09%
• st-sf-nt-nf (-xx-)

15 28.30%
• sp-sj-np-nj (-x-x)

13 24.53%
• tp-tj-fp-fj (--xx)

10 18.87%

# Thread: How to group the 16 types?

1. ## How to group the 16 types?

We're familiar with the keirseyan NT-NF-SP-SJ division, where Keirsey has the N and S handled differently. Then there's regular divisions of the 16 types into 4 groups by 2 of their dichotomies, with any of these templates:

xx--
x-x-
x--x
-xx-
-x-x
--xx

For example, people speak of EP and say they are a certain kind of people. Grouping the 16 types by their E/I and P/J we would get EP, EJ, IP, IJ. Some people think of any of the "IJ" as one of the kind, and IP something completely other, never mind the T/F and the S/N.

So, which of these (6) possible groupings is the one you think of the most significant? Please tell us why. I'll start.

2. It's a tie between -xx- and x--x.

There is a similarity between the the center types, in that they both direction represent your functions.
The book-end types are attitude and preference, so they sort of share the fact that they both determine function management, in a sense.

It's like -xx- represents the dynamo of your mind, and x--x represents the gyro.

I think these are the best two in conjunction with each other.

3. I'd go with --xx. One immediately knows which function is extraverted and whether the T/F or the S/N is primary.
Close second would be the -x-x.

4. As a general point, consistency and symmetry are important. I hate the way Keirsey made the Temperaments based on different variables...

Any one of the possible permutations is better than Keirsey's system if you remain consistent. I have put a great deal of analysis into all of them, and they all have interesting, unique qualities. They could all be useful. I do try to avoid overlap, though. Hence -xx- and x--x. It would seem silly to me to combine -xx- with -x-x, as it is redundant on one, and leaves another out.

5. I'm most familiar and think the most with the -xx- division, which divides the types into NT, NF, ST and SF. Note, that irregular divisions, like the keirseyan NT NF SP SJ, were not included in this poll.

I do think of people as Artisans, Guardians, Rationals and Idealists. This is common knowledge for everyone in here.

But then, starting from my own type, I also think there's something special with EP.

I think you could find the most useful division by thinking which 2 of your dichotomies you think of the most. I'm decidedly N so I don't think about it much. I guess I steer away from most S. I'm comfortable with either T or F, so I don't think about it that much either. That leaves me E/I and J/P which I think the most.

So, my second most thought about division is between EP,EJ,IP and IJ (third option). I actually voted that. I didn't want to vote for the usual thing.

6. Originally Posted by Santtu
I'm most familiar and think the most with the -xx- division, which divides the types into NT, NF, ST and SF. Note, that irregular divisions, like the keirseyan NT NF SP SJ, were not included in this poll.

I do think of people as Artisans, Guardians, Rationals and Idealists. This is common knowledge for everyone in here.

But then, starting from my own type, I also think there's something special with EP.

I think you could find the most useful division by thinking which 2 of your dichotomies you think of the most. I'm decidedly N so I don't think about it much. I guess I steer away from most S. I'm comfortable with either T or F, so I don't think about it that much either. That leaves me E/I and J/P which I think the most.

So, my second most thought about division is between EP,EJ,IP and IJ (third option). I actually voted that. I didn't want to vote for the usual thing.

It looks like we are on the same track here.

7. Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
It looks like we are on the same track here.
How would you name the different groups by this system? I'm bad at this, but just off the top of my mind,
EP: the expressionists
IP: the contemplators
IJ: the doers

8. Originally Posted by Santtu
How would you name the different groups by this system? I'm bad at this, but just off the top of my mind,
EP: the expressionists
IP: the contemplators
IJ: the doers
EP: Exlporer.
EJ: Commander.

The other two are harder to imagine.
The IP should have something that focuses on contemplation. But words like deliberator or meditator just sound stupid.

Like wise, IJs aren't necessarilly more doers than EJs are, or even EPs sometimes. IJs are introverted, stationary directors. They are something like regulators or monitors. They control things, too, but they don't run around taking more. I suppose you could alternatively call EJs conquerors.

9. Maybe try something like

INF: Introverted Intuitive-Feeling (INFJ)
IFN: Introverted Feeling-Intuitive (INFP)
IFS: Introverted Feeling-Sensor (ISFP)
ISF: Introverted Sensor-Feeling (ISFJ)
etc.

P/J and temperament are effectively removed. Yay for less stereotype!

10. I think the most important variable is --XX. FJs, TJs, FPs, and TPs are pretty obviously distinct groups to me. J/P tells the attitude of the person, and T/F tells the focus of that attitude.

I think most groupings can be useful, though. I think -XX- would be the next most important, closely followed by X--X. I don't find XX-- and X-X- very useful, although I find X-X- to be the easiest to type, generally.

#### 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