User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 43

  1. #31
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Expanding the concept of "imagery" I gave above, I think these may be the best simple descriptions of the perception functions yet:

    Se: individual's images match current environment
    Si: individual's images ONCE matched the environment, but currently can only be held among individuals sharing the experience
    Ne: individual's images never matched environment, but are still based on the environment (and thus can possibly be perceived by others)
    Ni: individual's images have never matched the environment, and can only be directly perceived by the individual.
    (and hence, why it's so hard to explain).

    To extend it in this way to judgment:

    Te: individual's assessment of true/false (mechanics of the situation) are determined by the environment.
    Ti: individual's assessment of true/false (mechanics of the situation) are determined by individual reflection.
    Fe: individual's assessment of good/bad (soul-affect of the situation) are determined by the environment.
    Fi: individual's assessment of good/bad (soul-affect of the situation) are determined by individual reflection.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas
    Likes Punderstorm liked this post

  2. #32
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  3. #33
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post

    This is a wonderful publication, and IMO it really should get its own thread. Thank you for sharing it.

    There is SO much good stuff in here, and could potentially be useful to a number of people on here with sorting through their S/N axis, as well as disconnecting it from T/F axis material that can muddle the former. There's great information on types in general and the paper does a very good job at carefully and analytically analyzing the data and presenting the results. It's information dense, and takes a while to read, but it's SO worth it.
    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari


  4. #34
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Iterating something with no truth value does not make it any truer. But the iteration does distract the mind and make it more plausible.

    So iteration replaces truth value with believability.
    Likes Legion liked this post

  5. #35
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    1,862

    Default

    hm I think of S as object-recognition, and N as pattern-recognition.

    @Eric B - do you think the functions are discrete entities, or do they sort of blend into each other? like, is a judging process necessarily either F or T, or it could be sort of halfway in between, without actually using 2 different processes at once?

  6. #36
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    They're just abstract concepts (and hence, these discussions on them attracting more N's, and the larger S society, including the psychology field, think it's not "real" enough to take seriously).

    It's like I've said: "these divisions are already implicit in all the data we run across in life.

    In everything we process, there is some sort of tangible object or energy [S]... It can be intangibly connected to other objects, contexts, ideas or impressions [N]... We will think something about it is true or false, [T]... and we may like or dislike it or something about it [F]... (and all of this based either on an environmental [e], or internal [i] perspective."

    What determines whether the process gets the T or F is the particular ego state (complex) that is focusing on the truth or liking judgment; particularly the ego's main achieving or supporting states (i.e. dominant or auxiliary, which in turn indcate the function as typologically "preferred").
    But then the opposite is always likely there, in the background; it's either "undiferentiated" (just connected with our limbic response), or associated with one of the other complexes if they arise.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  7. #37
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    In deciphering the two different attitudes of each function, the question to ask is:

    WHO is really doing the actual Thinking?
    WHO is really doing the actual Feeling?

    With perception, it’s always the subject “doing” the process (taking in the information). What’s different, is where it’s processed from.
    So instead of “who”, it’s simply “where”.
    WHERE are your sense impressions?
    WHERE do meanings (inferred from sense impressions) TAKE PLACE?
    I had above expressed the attitudes as “who is doing the thinking/feeling”, but that wouldn't have made mense for S/N. Now, it just occurred to me that instead of “who is doing...”, it could be expressed as “What is creating...” to keep it more in continuity with T/F:

    WHAT is really creating the actual sensation? (the object in the environment, directly, or the subject’s individual storehouse of memory)
    WHAT is really creating the actual intuition [i.e. pattern connection]? (the object in the environment [directly implies connection to something else] or the subject’s individual unconscious impressions [which infers connections by some other means than the object itself])
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  8. #38
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Really seeing that two of Jung’s alternate functions description (mentioned in Hunziker’s new book) really make the most sense:

    S: “registers reality as real”
    F: “sorts out our feelings”

    The first tells us what the S function does with tangible reality. The key word being “register”. The second distinguishes the Feeling function from what we commonly call “feelings” (which is often a source of confusion).
    Of course, N is still “where it’s heading” (or specifically associated with time), while T is “defining” (basically, telling us "what" it is).

    So the notion of “sorting out our feelings” really explains what the function is. “Ordering our feelings” is sometimes associated with the introverted version, specifically, but both types sort out their feelings. Fi simply sorts them directly, internally, and uses them to gauge others’ feelings. The extraverted variant simply merges them with others, which are taken as their own (including providing environments that others are known to like).

    We may think of T as more “orderly”, while F is less controlled, as we watch F types be more “emotional”. But really, their emotions are more controlled than we think. This illusion comes from T types projecting their own weaker experience of F onto others. Our idea of “ordering” emotions is to stuff them, but then that is when they’re more likely to erupt in the fashion we think we see F’s display them. I know how I hate to feel negative emotions, like toward a sad story, and sometimes even don’t want to feel happy emotions, fearing I’ll be “caught off guard” when something bad inevitably happens. This is an avoidance of sorting through them! F types are better able to embrace the feelings, and are less ashamed to display them. Again, this is from sorting them out. The determination of “good” and “bad” comes from this.

    For me, the Inferiority Complex sorts out feelings in comparison to others, and feels I’m coming up short, or "should" be responding to others in a way I’m not (because it contradicts the Hero’s agenda). The Demonic Personality Complex handles the sorting out of negative emotions, which make situations feel destructive to the ego. Others’ strong emotions are a threat, as I project “if I were reacting that way, I would have to be feeling SO bad”. I even may get annoyed at them, thinking they should react rather than feel. Stories that evoke strong emotions are uncomfortable, because I just don’t want to sort those emotions, so I stuff them and shut down.
    Feeling good emotions, associated with gratification or moral self-contentedness, are sought as representing “integrity”, and thus are the source of “narcissism”. This too is projected onto people who seem to be self-contented, or have gained their way, especially at what I perceive to be my expense.

    Trying to come up with comparable terms for N and T, I think “how things work” is best for T. Not even sure why I didn’t decide on this earlier, especially given the “tells you about the object” and “technical” definitions. Really, I wonder why Jung didn’t put it this way! “Defining” is done basically by determining "what it is" by how it works, or what it does (as opposed to how we feel about it). This then yields the judgment of “true” that things are measured true or false by.

    Since Jung defined N in terms of “time“ (i.e. “where it’s heading”), I think of some N products that don’t seem to have a time element.

    For example:
    •Archetypes are ruling patterns that play out as sequential behaviors
    •Typology looks at sequences of people’s behaviors based on the idea of an archetypal category.
    •Many analogies are comparisons of sequences.

    I was thinking of STATIC objects, which I also make parallels to other objects with. But I think the time element there lies in the fact that the objects still had to have come from somewhere. It’s just noted how they seem to have developed into the same or similar form, and from that, a connection is inferred or at least looked for.

    Another possibility, is like when I compare a symmetrical building for instance (with four segments that are mirror images of each other) to the similar symmetry of the Expressive/Responsive temperament matrix; while it’s comparing a pattern, it’s really more introverted Thinking than iNtuition. It’s looking at a tangible (not conceptual) object, and then comparing a conceptual matrix to it. The commonality lies in the logical “framework” (the mirror symmetry, which is a logical “archetype”) determining what’s “true”, moreso than any timelike “implications”.

    So to put together all eight (using the common terms the functions are based on to show how they relate):

    Se: registers [sensory] reality as real in the immediate environment
    Si: registers [sensory] reality as real in comparison to individual recollection
    Ne: infers the [intuitive] implications of objects from comparison to the environment
    Ni: infers the [intuitive] implications of objects from individual “gut” feeling or images
    Te: directs our thinking to how things work, according to environmental determination
    Ti: directs our thinking to how things work, according to individual determination
    Fe: sorts feelings according to environment (merges with others’ feelings)
    Fi: sorts feelings according to individual reflection (and figures others’ feelings from this)
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  9. #39
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    The 16 types based on dominant function (eight original Jungian "types"), distinguished by the focus shifted to by the auxiliary function. (Also show the difference between the same two functions as dominant and auxiliary or vice versa. Focusing more now on the definition of function attitudes in terms of "stimulation"):

    Se Person's drive is engaging with the current tangible world (stimulated by the tangible environment)
    +Fi directs this towards people, and what is universally pleasing to them ("fun")
    +Ti directs this toward how things work, and thus may be into adventure (hiking, etc), sports, etc. and self-promotion

    Ne Person's drive is engaging the implications of objects; what can be imagined from them (inferring is stimulated by objects)
    +Fi directs this toward people, and what universally brings smiles to one's face (silliness, puns, stories, etc)
    +Ti directs this toward how things work, and thus may be into philosophical discussions, politics, etc. but delivered in a more "open" way

    Ti Person's drive is toward an individual sense of how things work (stimulated by an individual models of what's technically "true")
    +Se directs this toward the current tangible world, and may be into mechanics, sports and dance moves, music production, other fine arts.
    +Ne directs this toward the implications of things, such as science and political theory, why things work the way they do

    Fi Person's drive is toward an individual sense of what is unversally "good" for people (stimulated by individual models of what's good)
    +Se directs this toward the current tangible world, and so may be into artwork and other "aesthetics"
    +Ne directs this toward the implications of things, and may be into ideals of altruism, self-care, etc.

    Si Person's drive is referencing an internalized sense of the tangible world (stimulated by internal remembrances of what's real)
    +Te directs this toward how things work according to environmental standards (good at "inspecting" to make sure things are being done right)
    +Fe directs this toward what is good to people in the environment and according to their obvious needs (good at acts of service)

    Ni Person's drive is referencing an internal sense of the implications of things (stimulated by internal model of unconscious inferences)
    +Te directs this toward how things work according to environmental standards (may be into math theory and other sciences employing this)
    +Fe directs this toward what is good to people in the environment and according to their obvious needs (may be into counseling, personality

    Te Person's drive is toward "objective" employing of the way things work (stimulated by the environment as determining what's correct)
    +Si directs this toward creating order based on an internal sense of the way the tangible world is (good at managing people and institutions)
    +Ni directs this toward creating order based on an internal sense of the implications of things (good at envisioning goals and plans)

    Fe person's drive is toward the environment of people (stimulated by the environment as the desired source of good)
    +Si creates harmonious order based on an internal sense of the way the tangible world is (good at hosting and caretaking)
    +Ni creates harmonious order based on an internal sense of the implications of things (good at inspiring and counseling)
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas
    Likes Snickie liked this post

  10. #40
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Another set of the function definitions; trying to narrow it down to more specific terms:

    Se engagement of tangible reality is stimulated by the environment
    Si engagement of tangible reality is stimulated by individual reference
    Ne engagement of the implications of reality is stimulated by the environment
    Ni engagement of the implications of reality is stimulated by individual reference
    Te determination of what's correct (true/false) is stimulated by the environment
    Ti determination of what's correct (true/false) is stimulated by individual reference
    Fe determination of what's desired (good/bad) is stimulated by the environment
    Fi determination of what's desired (good/bad) is stimulated by individual reference
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

Similar Threads

  1. Type and Reductionism: Is It Time to Move Away From the Eight-Functions Model?
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-25-2010, 01:58 PM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-07-2009, 11:22 AM
  3. Taking Communism away from the Communists: The Origins of Modern American Liberalism
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-15-2009, 01:12 PM
  4. From the Horses' Mouth: Jung's Root descriptions of the Functions.
    By Eric B in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 08:05 AM
  5. From the slums of Shoalin, its the GZA!
    By GZA in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-14-2007, 10:51 PM

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