User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 83

  1. #61
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    In enneagram he was pretty much a 5. I still don't like some stuff about 5 that's reminiscent of him...

    In MBTI he was INTx something and I also don't like certain qualities about stereotypical INTx for the same reason. Specifically, too much thinking, being withdrawn/very asocial etc.

    Most likely Ni-dom (sort of INTJ)... Ugh maybe I'm ESFP ha-ha :P
    Ha ha...Well if you're an 8, or even a 7.. you will most likely have some hang ups with 5's. To me, it sounds like a shadow. Cause those qualities are not inherently bad. You just don't prefer them. That's all.

    Same thing with Se Dom. You are not prone to enjoy those things, because Se doms dont value them. Se doms want more action than that. They also want more flowing conversation and thoughts. Meaning they don't want to be talking about the same subject for too long, variety is desired.

    Where Ni doms (at least ime) don't experience time in the same fashion. It's a completely different set of preferences. Often Ni doms are trying to figure the depth of a situation.


    Well that doesn't sound like an easy task lol
    Yea, it's not always a comfortable process for everyone.

    Something I tried doing was writing things down. Like I would write the person's name at the top of the page, and then write something positive about that person. There are some people that I still can only write 1 or 2 things about..but the purpose of the practice is to activate a part of your brain that will look for the answer.

    You could try that with certain characteristics as well. Like trying to list the positives of an introvert or something along those lines. Cause what you've described, are just really introverted qualities.
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  2. #62
    failed poetry slam career chubber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    4,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SophiaDeep View Post
    Shouldn't the shadow of ESTP be an INFJ? So how can your shadow be an ENFP? You can't be extroverted and have an extroverted shadow as well as you can't be a Pe type and have a Pe shadow. Your shadow type use the same function as you, but in completly different order. http://personalitycafe.com/estp-foru...fj-shadow.html If you think your shadow is an ENFP, than you're an ISTJ.
    How does one work out what your shadow personality is?

    Currently it looks like thumb sucking going on here. I was under the impression that

    Se Ti Fe Ni -> ESTP

    shadow functions
    Si Te Fi Ne -> ISTJ source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESTP#Shadow_functions

    Fi Ne Si Te -> INFP (claimed shadow personality by the OP)

    shadow functions
    Fe Ni Se Ti -> ENFJ (what the OP should be according to the shadow functions)

    So what IS the shadow personality then? Because currently it looks like, oh I don't like that personality so it must be my shadow personality.

  3. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chubber View Post
    How does one work out what your shadow personality is?

    Currently it looks like thumb sucking going on here. I was under the impression that

    Se Ti Fe Ni -> ESTP

    shadow functions
    Si Te Fi Ne -> ISTJ source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESTP#Shadow_functions

    Fi Ne Si Te -> INFP (claimed shadow personality by the OP)

    shadow functions
    Fe Ni Se Ti -> ENFJ (what the OP should be according to the shadow functions)

    So what IS the shadow personality then? Because currently it looks like, oh I don't like that personality so it must be my shadow personality.
    It's strange, because what I've found on various forums looks like I said..shadow functions are your functions backwords. For INFP it's Te-Si-Ne-Fi that means ESTJ. I found it on personality cafe as well as on INFJforums not only in one article or thread, so I don't know why wikipedia described shadow functions like that. I am very sure about this, when NFP is under stress it can start to use the shadow functions and become more Te-ish, or Si-ish that can make us more preoccupiedwith details, or wierdly domineering. Here's another thread about it: http://personalitycafe.com/enfp-foru...-examples.html

  4. #64
    failed poetry slam career chubber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    4,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SophiaDeep View Post
    It's strange, because what I've found on various forums looks like I said..shadow functions are your functions backwords. For INFP it's Te-Si-Ne-Fi that means ESTJ. I found it on personality cafe as well as on INFJforums not only in one article or thread, so I don't know why wikipedia described shadow functions like that. I am very sure about this, when NFP is under stress it can start to use the shadow functions and become more Te-ish, or Si-ish that can make us more preoccupiedwith details, or wierdly domineering. Here's another thread about it: http://personalitycafe.com/enfp-foru...-examples.html
    Here they say Shadow Processes, confirming what Wikipedia states.
    http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16Types/16Types.cfm

    And @andante mentioned the same thing to me.

    I'm going to be sneaky here and drag Socionics into this. Socionics says that your inverse (what you mentioned above when swapping the functions' order) is your dual. So why would you hate your dual? (yeah I know Socionics don't map entirely to MBTI)

    @edchidna1000 what are you making of this?


  5. #65
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Personally, I like the Enneagrams concept with regard to a person being at an (to the far left of the continuum) "unhealthy" or (to the far right of the continuum) "healthy" as opposed to the MBTI concept of a given type's "shadow function."

    Here's why.

    In my mind, it's simply a hell of a lot easier to know what the typical behavioral predispositions of your E-type are, and how they will likely be expressed during times of high, moderate, or low stress.
    An unhealthy E7 will exhibit unhealthy E7 behaviors; whereas a healthy E7 will exhibit healthy E7 behaviors.
    There is no ambiguity using the method described above. It's simple, it makes sense, and it's easy to remember.

    Once you get into MBTI types and their respective "shadows" the water gets murky quickly for the following reasons:

    (a) Since there are so many other personality theories similar to MBTI (Socionics, Jung, Keirsey, etc.) that use the same core cognitive functions and 16 types, yet have their own little nuances/rules to determine how to define things like "shadow types." To me, this is as senseless as using the Arabic number system as a base set, and allowing several different schools of mathematical theory determine what their operators (+, - ,* , / , etc.) are, and what each operator does. That's like having seven different versions of the distributive property and being expected to know to apply it correctly even where there is not a universal understanding of core mathematics.

    (b) This is a pet peeve of mine. The whole concept of someone being an E/I - or - (and yes there are Ambiverts too) - or N/S - or - F/T - or - J/P is silly in a way because a "black and white" or "all or nothing" decision is made when determining someone's cognitive functions and their order - BUT - scores to the tune of ~51.5% = P / ~48.5% = J confound the concept of assigning on function dominance over its counterpart for the sake of theoretical definitions of archetypes, MBTI types, and ultimately "shadow types." Finally, considering there is such a mess of alphabet soup in the big garbled world of MBTI, the whole function order concept and applications of it seems like there is a hell of a lot more room for error than truth when pondering through it all and trying to build theoretical models that define vast groups of people in meaningful ways. Sorry, I just don't buy it. It's hokey.

    Cheers,

    -Halla74
    --------------------
    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

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    Ha ha...Well if you're an 8, or even a 7.. you will most likely have some hang ups with 5's. To me, it sounds like a shadow. Cause those qualities are not inherently bad. You just don't prefer them. That's all.
    I know nothing is "bad" in an objective sense. But meh, preference makes me feel that way.

    Yes I find it interesting how my enneagram type would also predict issues like that :P


    Same thing with Se Dom. You are not prone to enjoy those things, because Se doms dont value them. Se doms want more action than that. They also want more flowing conversation and thoughts. Meaning they don't want to be talking about the same subject for too long, variety is desired.

    Where Ni doms (at least ime) don't experience time in the same fashion. It's a completely different set of preferences. Often Ni doms are trying to figure the depth of a situation.
    Well I don't think I totally conform to these Se stereotypes. True, when I'm in a situation I definitely don't want to figure out depth of it or whatever. Otoh, when I'm more isolated from environment, e.g. sitting at this PC sort of helps doing that :P or when just nothing is going on, I'll stop paying that close attention to environment, so then, I might want more depth. I don't at all mind talking about the same subject in depth for a while. I just don't like thinking ALL DAY and the consequences of that.


    Yea, it's not always a comfortable process for everyone.

    Something I tried doing was writing things down. Like I would write the person's name at the top of the page, and then write something positive about that person. There are some people that I still can only write 1 or 2 things about..but the purpose of the practice is to activate a part of your brain that will look for the answer.
    I do actually know what positive stuff was there about my dad, I sometimes thought about it, so that job's already done

    Btw I noticed now that you mentioned feeling ashamed when being temporarily like the shadow. What kind of shame did you mean there?


    You could try that with certain characteristics as well. Like trying to list the positives of an introvert or something along those lines. Cause what you've described, are just really introverted qualities.
    I know they're introverted stuff and I'd hate myself seeing as a heavy introvert lol

    This doesn't mean I can't sometimes be somewhat introverted, I had such a period in my life actually. But I still didn't like a lot about it. I did like the positive aspects of it so I know what would be in that list you suggested doing

    I don't know, in that period, was I integrating my shadow to some extent? ?

  7. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halla74 View Post
    Personally, I like the Enneagrams concept with regard to a person being at an (to the far left of the continuum) "unhealthy" or (to the far right of the continuum) "healthy" as opposed to the MBTI concept of a given type's "shadow function."

    Here's why.

    In my mind, it's simply a hell of a lot easier to know what the typical behavioral predispositions of your E-type are, and how they will likely be expressed during times of high, moderate, or low stress.
    An unhealthy E7 will exhibit unhealthy E7 behaviors; whereas a healthy E7 will exhibit healthy E7 behaviors.
    There is no ambiguity using the method described above. It's simple, it makes sense, and it's easy to remember.

    Once you get into MBTI types and their respective "shadows" the water gets murky quickly for the following reasons:

    (a) Since there are so many other personality theories similar to MBTI (Socionics, Jung, Keirsey, etc.) that use the same core cognitive functions and 16 types, yet have their own little nuances/rules to determine how to define things like "shadow types." To me, this is as senseless as using the Arabic number system as a base set, and allowing several different schools of mathematical theory determine what their operators (+, - ,* , / , etc.) are, and what each operator does. That's like having seven different versions of the distributive property and being expected to know to apply it correctly even where there is not a universal understanding of core mathematics.

    (b) This is a pet peeve of mine. The whole concept of someone being an E/I - or - (and yes there are Ambiverts too) - or N/S - or - F/T - or - J/P is silly in a way because a "black and white" or "all or nothing" decision is made when determining someone's cognitive functions and their order - BUT - scores to the tune of ~51.5% = P / ~48.5% = J confound the concept of assigning on function dominance over its counterpart for the sake of theoretical definitions of archetypes, MBTI types, and ultimately "shadow types." Finally, considering there is such a mess of alphabet soup in the big garbled world of MBTI, the whole function order concept and applications of it seems like there is a hell of a lot more room for error than truth when pondering through it all and trying to build theoretical models that define vast groups of people in meaningful ways. Sorry, I just don't buy it. It's hokey.

    Cheers,

    -Halla74
    I get your point, however the thing is, models will not determine reality. So if enneagram is a simpler model, that still won't make reality conform to it. Otoh, of course, a simpler model is easier to test and it has fewer assumptions thus most likely fewer incorrect ideas. Note this is based on likelihood, not actual certainty.

    I agree that ambiguity in theories is a big problem though. Of course, a solution to that is subscribing to just one theory or another solution is understand the differences between the theories to avoid mixing them in the wrong way. Another solution is altogether ignore speculative articles/discussions about delving deeper into refined details of the basic model (of function order, whatnot). I actually do the second and third solutions mentioned here :p

    I'm not sure what you meant by alphabet soup issue, enneagram has number digit soup right?

    As for the issue with black and white preferences, enneagram by default isn't any better there, you're still supposed to fit yourself into a type in a black and white way. With the extensions enneagram offers it does get a bit better though (wings, whatnot). Socionics offers similar extensions (subtypes with different emphasis on manifestation of certain functions), generic MBTI/JCF completely lacks this though.....

  8. #68
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Hey there Valaki!

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    I get your point, however the thing is, models will not determine reality.
    I am completely aware that models do not DETERMINE reality; I'm an IT Systems Analyst - I build all kinds of models all the time, I get it.

    However, models are frequently used to create REPRESENTATIONS of reality that are accurate to a degree acceptable by those using the model. Models also provide an opportunity for those using the model to have the benefits of (a) common language, (b) commonly defined relationships between the components of the model, and (d) commonly defined scope of the model's relevant range & applications, limitations and caveats.

    My point? Common understanding of a given phenomena can often be achieved by building a model that is reasonably accurate, and that allows those studying the phenomena do so intelligibly and more accurately than if all parties used their own proprietary jargon for the components of the model, and non-standardized relationships between the model's components and the myriad of potentially applicable outcomes.

    Again, my points are from my perspective - I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, but I'd wager tha others have similar sentiments for their own reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    So if enneagram is a simpler model, that still won't make reality conform to it.
    This statement is out of scope for this discussion. I don't recall models of anything controlling reality as a topic in this discussion. Poorly defined models, or adhoc hybridization of similar models in diffetent ways over time will lead to poor understanding of the core material under study, and confusing discussions based on the prevalence of the widespread lack of common understanding noted above. That's really all I'm pointing out here, at least that was my intent.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    Otoh, of course, a simpler model is easier to test and it has fewer assumptions thus most likely fewer incorrect ideas. Note this is based on likelihood, not actual certainty.
    Yes, you will have an easier time convincing a panel of actuaries that the budgeting model you built using multiple linear regression is valid if the variables are few in number, are proven to significantly contribute to the model's predictive ability (aka "R-squared"), and that the data used was valid and appropriate for use on populations who will be affected ala use if the model.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    I agree that ambiguity in theories is a big problem though.
    We do agree then more than not, yes?

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    Of course, a solution to that is subscribing to just one theory or another
    solution is understand the differences between the theories to avoid mixing them in the wrong way. Another solution is altogether ignore speculative articles/discussions about delving deeper into refined details of the basic model (of function order, whatnot). I actually do the second and third solutions mentioned here :p
    Yes, your three solutions above all work to various degrees in preventing ambiguity/confusion. There are limitations though. Rarely does one theory provide all necessary information to solve a complex problem.

    In such cases it might be necessary to use 2 or more models (provided their scopes, relevant ranges, and interaction effects between them are understood) - but that's basically a SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guess) and it's actually a bit scary how many big decisions that have far reaching implecations are decided by a SWAG.

    Finally, debating about minutiae on the the Internet is fun, and so we likely tolerate the inaccuracies discussed above here on TypC than we would ever tolerate in our careers or studies.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    I'm not sure what you meant by alphabet soup issue, enneagram has number digit soup right?
    I was being facetious, that's all.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki
    As for the issue with black and white preferences, enneagram by default isn't any better there, you're still supposed to fit yourself into a type in a black and white way. With the extensions enneagram offers it does get a bit better though (wings, whatnot). Socionics offers similar extensions (subtypes with different emphasis on manifestation of certain functions), generic MBTI/JCF completely lacks this though.....
    Agreed, I simply like Enneagram the best of them all, as I said above these are my preferences.
    --------------------
    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

  9. #69
    ndovjtjcaqidthi
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SophiaDeep View Post
    It's strange, because what I've found on various forums looks like I said..shadow functions are your functions backwords. For INFP it's Te-Si-Ne-Fi that means ESTJ. I found it on personality cafe as well as on INFJforums not only in one article or thread, so I don't know why wikipedia described shadow functions like that.
    That's the way I have understood it as well.

    I'm pretty sure we're right..

  10. #70
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chubber View Post
    How does one work out what your shadow personality is?

    Currently it looks like thumb sucking going on here. I was under the impression that

    Se Ti Fe Ni -> ESTP

    shadow functions
    Si Te Fi Ne -> ISTJ source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESTP#Shadow_functions

    Fi Ne Si Te -> INFP (claimed shadow personality by the OP)

    shadow functions
    Fe Ni Se Ti -> ENFJ (what the OP should be according to the shadow functions)

    So what IS the shadow personality then? Because currently it looks like, oh I don't like that personality so it must be my shadow personality.
    Hi chubber lol

    I'm gonna chime in here.

    Hope you don't mind.

    This is what I was referring to before. The part where I was saying that typology cannot reveal the entirety of the shadow.

    You both are right.

    I actually forgot about what you had mentioned, but you are right as well. The ISTJ is the shadow of ESTP by definition yes.

    However, there's more to it than just definition. The ISTJ shadow is not going to explain the only avenue in which the shadow of an ESTP's is revealed. The inferior and tertiary functions also live in the shadows of the dominant function. Even further...the aux (if not developed properly or enough) could be a route to revealing the shadow.

    That is, if we are talking about the entirety of the shadow of one person.

    And not just the shadow of the personality type called ESTP.

    There's more to shadows than just typology.

    And one of the ways that a shadow manifests itself, is by projection.

    When someone says "I hate when Jack always has to get his way." that is typically a sign of projection. And we project our shadow to protect ourselves. We don't want to have that quality of always having to get our way, cause that would make us unlovable. So we project it on to others as if it's their problem.

    The degree of how much you hate Jack for doing this....determines if it's a shadow, or how deep seeded the shadow is.

    We project shadows all day everyday. It's practically unavoidable. We are not perfect.

    Quote Originally Posted by chubber View Post
    Here they say Shadow Processes, confirming what Wikipedia states.
    http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16Types/16Types.cfm

    And @andante mentioned the same thing to me.

    I'm going to be sneaky here and drag Socionics into this. Socionics says that your inverse (what you mentioned above when swapping the functions' order) is your dual. So why would you hate your dual? (yeah I know Socionics don't map entirely to MBTI)

    @edchidna1000 what are you making of this?

    I actually don't like my dual most of the time.

    I have a lot of shadows dealing with ISFj's (socionics, ISFP's MBTI) that I'm working through atm.

    I like socionics, but I never have related to the relationships aspect.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Btw I noticed now that you mentioned feeling ashamed when being temporarily like the shadow. What kind of shame did you mean there?
    A shadow is something you've suppressed usually. For example as I child I repressed the side of me that was bored, and the side of me that wanted everything in the store. This is because my impression of what my parents had about those characteristics....was unlovable. That is shame.

    And now as I'm working through this shadow, I am realizing that there is no gd shame in wanting a candy bar in the store ha ha....

    I still have problems with the word bored. I still find it to be shameful to be bored...but this is my own shadow.

    I know there is nothing wrong with other people being bored. Most people accept this. I have not. So when other ppl say their bored I roll my eyes. That's an example of how I was influenced to think it was shameful. Know what I mean?


    I know they're introverted stuff and I'd hate myself seeing as a heavy introvert lol
    Yea, that is shame. ^

    This doesn't mean I can't sometimes be somewhat introverted, I had such a period in my life actually. But I still didn't like a lot about it. I did like the positive aspects of it so I know what would be in that list you suggested doing

    I don't know, in that period, was I integrating my shadow to some extent? ?
    Could be. Like I said, it's so hard to tell cause I don't know you that well, and can't see you face to face...stuff like that. Shadows are pretty personal and cannot always be seen via typing to one another.
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

Similar Threads

  1. Why Did Nobody Talk About The Alt-Right Until Recently?
    By Mal12345 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 12-13-2016, 02:53 PM
  2. Oh God, lets talk about God.
    By evilrubberduckie in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 153
    Last Post: 08-26-2016, 07:08 PM
  3. Lets talk about healthcare
    By Virtual ghost in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-12-2016, 05:57 AM
  4. [MBTItm] We Talk About the Good A Lot.
    By ReflecTcelfeR in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-21-2010, 01:51 PM
  5. [NF] So my NF brethren...lets talk about you...and other general stuff
    By FalseHeartDothKnow in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-20-2010, 03:58 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