User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 48

  1. #31
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    True. I have used different groupings too, depending on what I was trying to explain. For instance, I can use the Keirsey way and say my little brother and I are both Artisans (SP), and my older brother is a Rational (NT.) That only tells part of the story, but it tells the part that's relevant if I'm talking about how our actions are most often demonstrated. But I have also said that I am emotionally concrete (SF), while my younger brother is logically concrete (ST) and my older brother is logically abstract (NT.) This was used to point out more about the way we think than the way we act. So, different parts of the whole theory casserole can be used for different purposes.
    Interesting. The original Myers-Briggs temperaments were in fact ST, SF, NF, and NT. I always thought that was more "symmetrical" than Keirsey, which seemed arbitrarily lopsided. You know what I mean?

    Anyway, that's actually a pretty good description of how different perspectives on types could be used to explain different things about them. Good use of tertiary Ni. I agree with you here.

  2. #32
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasz View Post
    i thought that Keirsey came up with the NF/NT/SJ/SP split as a result of the various behaviours of people in real life and in his theory was supported by the many historical parallels to such grouping of tempraments. i'll check the book tonight but i don't remember him "concocting" temprament groupings in his lab based on which MBTI components he thought fir better (or less well) together.
    Not only in real life, but based on the observation of his parents in noticing that as SPs they did not behave and have similar core values as his friends parents who were SJ.

    It's necessary to keep in mind that Keirsey's work is not based on the 16 types, but the four temperaments that have been passed down through the ages by Plato, Aristotle and Galen. After considering his own family and following Myers-Briggs' work for decades, Keirsey realized that the ST/SF temperaments proposed by her did not do justice based on his own observations. Once he changed the two letter codes around, he saw the perfect fit between Myers-Briggs and the predecessaors of temperament Adickes, Spranger, Kretschmer and Fromm With this said, it's the reason that SPs have an equally arduous time in the SJ world as NTs or NFs.

    Off topic but until today, I had not read his excerpt on comparing his four temperaments to the Wizard of Oz characters. When I scanned his book years ago, I instantly thought about Dorothy (SJ), the Scarecrow (NT), the Tinman (NF) and the Cowardly Lion (SP). Their needs during the story represent the core values of each type very well.

  3. #33
    Senior Member dnivera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp
    Socionics
    LSI?
    Posts
    165

    Default

    I'll have to re-watch the Wizard of Oz again now. Great!
    Si>Ti>Te>Ne>Fe>Ni>Fi>Se

    Introverted (I) 60% Extroverted (E) 40%
    Sensing (S) 56.25% Intuitive (N) 43.75%
    Thinking (T) 61.29% Feeling (F) 38.71%
    Judging (J) 71.88% Perceiving (P) 28.13%

  4. #34
    Senior Member Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5 sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    There is practical relevance to going directly for psycho-analysis, in that it can tell you how to persaude someone. . . .
    So you want to use personality typing to gain power over people?

    Keirsey expressed the hope that people would use it to better understand and appreciate people.



    Well, I'm not that concerned with aesthetic things like eloquence. As for "real worldviews" I don't know what you mean. They come closer to being like the old Hippocratic temperaments. I have no reason to assume that makes them closer to how people really think.
    I doubt if you know a whole lot about how people think. I doubt if Jung did either. And I suspect most people who are very concerned with "how people think" are on power trips.

    People are not machines. Our minds do not function like engines built from discrete functioning parts. Hence, IMO Keirsey was right to dismiss Jung's musings on "cognitive processes." Any system built on that foundation is flawed from the outset; it attempts to describe people as machines of a sort, when in fact we're organic and spiritual beings of a holistic nature.

    That said, it's interesting to note that Linda V. Berens, a former student of Keirsey's, has published works that advocate using Jung's cognitive processes (functions) as another model in conjunction with Keirsey's temperament theory. She subordinates the cognitive processes to temperament (i.e., she still considers NF, NT, SP, and SJ the roots of personality), but she acknowledges that system as valid.

    On the whole, I agree with those who've said Keirsey's system is elegant, intuitive, and useful for most general, everyday purposes.

    As to those who want to probe into what makes people tick or how people think or how to persuade people--well, I have to ask, What's your motivation for that? Because if your intentions are dishonorable, or if you're not sure, I ain't letting you into my mind!

  5. #35
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
    As to those who want to probe into what makes people tick or how people think or how to persuade people--well, I have to ask, What's your motivation for that? Because if your intentions are dishonorable, or if you're not sure, I ain't letting you into my mind!
    It just looks like fun, 's all.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

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

    Default

    To add to what others have already said, Keirsey's system is how ancient temperament maps to the MBTI. It has a whole different framework (originally, the behavioral factors of response delay (extraversion) and response sustain (ultimately, people-task orientation), so does not fit symmetrically on the MBTI framework, which among other things, has a new perception factor added, which throws things off (Melancholy and Sanguine are now on the same side, as "Sensors", rather than opposites, as they originally were).
    Berens adds, essentially another four-temperament matrix, the Interaction Styles, which now are more like the ancient matrix, in being measured by E/I and a new people/task orientation factor called "Directing/Informing". These are even more asymmetrical (the four being IST/INJ, EST/ENJ, ISF/INP, ESF/ENP). So each type is one temperament and one Interaction Style, and makes up a sort of "blend" of temperaments, like you have on this site: Profile Dynamics

    Berens "mixed model" seems to be the best approach.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
    That said, it's interesting to note that Linda V. Berens, a former student of Keirsey's, has published works that advocate using Jung's cognitive processes (functions) as another model in conjunction with Keirsey's temperament theory. She subordinates the cognitive processes to temperament (i.e., she still considers NF, NT, SP, and SJ the roots of personality), but she acknowledges that system as valid.

    On the whole, I agree with those who've said Keirsey's system is elegant, intuitive, and useful for most general, everyday purposes.
    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
    Senior Member Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5 sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    129

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    To add to what others have already said, Keirsey's system is how ancient temperament maps to the MBTI. . . .
    And, while we're adding things, let's remember that Jung didn't come up with his hypotheses in a vacuum. Nor was he able to dissect the brain or study DNA to find physical manifestations of Sensing, iNtuiting, Thinking, and Feeling. Among many other things, he knew about the old four-humor theory (Sanguine, Choleric, Phlegmatic, Melancholic) and astrology's four elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water). So, as he was musing on how cognition might work, he was no doubt mentally mapping to all those other things, consciously or unconsciously.

    There's no proof that such things as S, N, T, and F really exist. They're mental constructs that some people find useful, that's all. And they're no more or less valid than what Keirsey calls Artisan, Idealist, Rational, and Guardian temperaments.

    To me, it's all more intuitive than scientific. You pick up vibes from people, and you get a sense of what kinds of people there are in the world, or what groupings they naturally fall into. And if you're sharp and observant, you sort people out in useful or meaningful ways, which can help you understand yourself and orient yourself to others.

    We've all attempted that all our life, in one way or another. It's part of human nature. The trouble is, as long as we're doing it individually, it's hard to talk about what we're seeing or how we're sorting people. So, if we can agree on MBTI terminology or some other common language, we can get on the same page and make observations that most of us will agree on.

    The very fact that Keirsey's work has grown so popular (even though his name is unknown even to most people who use his system) suggests that he has hit upon something more or less universal. People readily see SJs, SPs, NTs, and NFs all around.

    And that can be pretty cool. It opens the door to embracing diversity. Instead of seeing my NT wife as some kind of cold-hearted alien who ought to learn to be more social and emotional, I can just say, "Ah! So you're one of those Rationals--a kind of person who has a whole different set of needs and preferences than I do. Interesting. I'll have to work at learning more about that and adjusting to it. Maybe even appreciating it."
    "Some would say that extended meaningful conversation is a thing of the past. But they'd say it more quickly." (Tom Morris)

  8. #38
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Errm guys... not to buck the trend or anything but if you look at the people instead of the little bits of paper it's a whole lot clearer.

    Which reminds me... I thought that particular manner of grouping was Jung's idea.

    Anyhoo... people always talk about NTs and NFs on here and SJs get mentioned a lot as do SPs (less so but still present). Those combinations represent strong characteristics. EJ doesn't say anything about a person really. It lacks context. NT however does give you a fair grounding to a person even without the extra preferences.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  9. #39
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
    The very fact that Keirsey's work has grown so popular (even though his name is unknown even to most people who use his system) suggests that he has hit upon something more or less universal. People readily see SJs, SPs, NTs, and NFs all around.
    It's true. There are a lot of examples from popular culture where the plot revolves around 4 characters with different personalities: The Simpson's, Seinfeld, Sex and the City, I Love Lucy, The Honeymooners, ("?" already mentioned The Wizard of Oz), etc....
    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

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

    Default

    How about Herman's Head? (remember that?) That was about four characters inside one person.

    (The concept of inner conflict within a person is explored in Sigmund Freud's concepts of Ego, Superego and Id, and Eric Berne's transactional analysis).

    Angel represented his sensitivity. As the only female character in his brain, Angel also represented his feminine side, or in Jungian terms the anima, and sometimes used this fact to manipulate the male characters.
    Animal represented his lust or hunger. He was an archetypal fratboy, and possibly derives his name from Animal House. He usually bullies Wimp.
    Wimp represented his anxiety. He was a paranoid hypochondriac. But since he always expected the worst, he was often the best prepared to handle crises when the others could not decide.
    Genius represented his intellect and logic and because of this he clashes with the naive nature of Angel and stupidity of Animal. At times he could get overworked, as in one episode where his face is blackened by soot and he exclaims "I think I blew a fuse!", after Herman makes a ridiculous decision.

    Seeing LaHaye's temperament characters reminded me of this, and I thought it would be nice for them to do a show like this with characters representing the temperaments.

    I always pictured LaHaye's "Rocky Choleric" to be like Animal. However, LaHaye's temperaments would correspond more to the Interaction Styles. These four; Angel would obviously be NF, Genius, NT. I guess Wimp would be closest to SJ from the descriptions, and Animal would end up SP.

    Or, it seems since they are in one single person, and Angel was already identified as the "anima", perhaps they are function archetypes. So Angel would be Inferior, but what would the others be? It might depend on what Herman's actual preference order is. Some of them sound more like they would fit shadows.


    As for the different combinations, I was told that Otto Kroeger gives lectures on those. As one person points out, any of the groupings may be "better" or the most useful for a particular purpose. If you want classic "temperament", there's Keirsey's groups or Beren's styles. If you want symmetrical groups using the function pairs, there's the original ST, SF, NT, NF, or function attitudes (S/N+J/P, T/F+J/P). If you want the strongest distinctions, Keirsey's are good, but the "mirror" grouping (NP, NJ, ST, SF) is better. Even more distinct (according to analysis data) is another "assymetrical" set: SP, SJ, EN, IN.
    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    Anyhoo... people always talk about NTs and NFs on here and SJs get mentioned a lot as do SPs (less so but still present). Those combinations represent strong characteristics. EJ doesn't say anything about a person really. It lacks context. NT however does give you a fair grounding to a person even without the extra preferences.
    I/E + J/P are called "sociability temperaments" (George Frisbie writing in JPT)
    What they tell us is:

    EP dominant extraverted perceiving (Jung's "irrationals")
    EJ dominant extraverted judging
    IP dominant introverted judging/aux. extraverted perceiving
    IJ dominant introverted perceiving/aux. extroverted judging

    For N types, they also correspond to the Interaction Styles. (and for S types, it would be E/I + T/F)
    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. What if the world were run by SP? SJs? NFs? NTs?
    By nharkey in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 05-31-2015, 11:44 AM
  2. NF/NT vs SP/SJ?
    By Aquarelle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-09-2010, 05:00 PM
  3. Why is it devided, NF, NT, SP, SJ?
    By magil in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-08-2010, 09:28 PM
  4. NT, SJ, NF, SP anecdotes...
    By MDP2525 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-2009, 03:02 PM
  5. [MBTItm] NTs/NFs on SJs
    By Giggly in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 03-05-2009, 04:13 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