User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 48

  1. #1
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default Question about NT/NF/SP/SJ

    Why are those specific type combinations the breakdowns? They aren't consistent in regard to which aspects are included (E vs. I, N vs. S, F vs. T, J vs. P). Why not NT/NF/ST/SF, or TP/TJ//SP/SJ? Is it based upon the dominant functions by type?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #2
    Senior Membrane spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp
    Socionics
    INTj Ni
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    I forget the rationale, but I think Keirsey might have included it in his Please Understand Me books. It's Keirsey's system.
    intp | type 9w1 sp/sx/so

  3. #3
    にゃん runvardh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    8,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirilis View Post
    I forget the rationale, but I think Keirsey might have included it in his Please Understand Me books. It's Keirsey's system.
    Yeah, it had to do with how he saw the bigger divide being between Sensors and iNtuitives first. After that Sensors break up better based on how Judging or Percieving they are wrather than whether they are Thinking or Feeling. On the other hand, iNtuitives are more easily divided by their inner processes (Thinking or Feeling) as opposed to how Judging or Perceving they are.

    This of course is the rationalization Keirsey gave.
    Dreams are best served manifest and tangible.

    INFP, 6w7, IEI

    I accept no responsibility, what so ever, for the fact that I exist; I do, however, accept full responsibility for what I do while I exist.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  4. #4
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by runvardh View Post
    Yeah, it had to do with how he saw the bigger divide being between Sensors and iNtuitives first. After that Sensors break up better based on how Judging or Percieving they are wrather than whether they are Thinking or Feeling. On the other hand, iNtuitives are more easily divided by their inner processes (Thinking or Feeling) as opposed to how Judging or Perceving they are.

    This of course is the rationalization Keirsey gave.
    This makes some sense, but I would argue that (for instance) STs and SFs probably have a fair amount of differences in mindset.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #5
    にゃん runvardh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    8,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    This makes some sense, but I would argue that (for instance) STs and SFs probably have a fair amount of differences in mindset.
    Oh there is, same with NJs and NPs, but he percieved those differences as less noticable than the divisions he picked.
    Dreams are best served manifest and tangible.

    INFP, 6w7, IEI

    I accept no responsibility, what so ever, for the fact that I exist; I do, however, accept full responsibility for what I do while I exist.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  6. #6
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,907

    Default

    Well, Mercury, you have stepped onto one of my age old gripes. I don't think there's anything that really makes Keirsey's system more accurate. I've pointed out many times in the past that there are several valid ways of grouping types. I think the middle ones make the most sense, because they pick your Judgeing and Perceiving functions, which I consider the most important thing.

    Using E/I or J/P as groups is a little weird due to the way the MBTI notation varies things depending on Introversion or Extraversion. Like how EPs rely more on Perceiving processes and EJs rely more on Judging processes, but IPs rely more on Judging processes while IJs rely more on Perceiving processes. Too mixed up for groupings if you ask me.

    But, if you want, you still can use both of those as your grouping system. EP, EJ, IP, IJ. What I have said is that, any grouping method has some kind of validity, just be consistent. And what do you know? That's the one thing Keirsey doesn't do. He doesn't stay consistent.

    NT, NF, SF, ST, I like. SP, SJ, NJ, NP would have been acceptable, too. But he had to mix it half and half for some reason.

    I hate Keirsey by the way. I don't like how popular and inseperable he has become with the MBTI, and I have a suspicion that he's responsible for a lot of the misconceptions about it.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #7
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Why are those specific type combinations the breakdowns? They aren't consistent in regard to which aspects are included (E vs. I, N vs. S, F vs. T, J vs. P). Why not NT/NF/ST/SF, or TP/TJ//SP/SJ? Is it based upon the dominant functions by type?
    The easiest way I can explain it is that Intuitives put more emphasis on decision making (T or F) while Sensors, being concrete, put more emphasis on doing (P or J). ST's and SF's are quite different in how they reason things and NP's and NJ's are quite different in how they interact with their environment, but to an N, T/F is more relevant, while to an S, J/P is more relevant.
    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

  8. #8
    Senior Member Jasz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    276

    Default

    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.
    .
    INTP/5w4 sx

  9. #9
    / booyalab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,511

    Default

    I've read Gifts Differing, which organizes the styles into ST SF NT and NF, and Please Understand Me- SJ SP NT NF. Kiersey's temperament sorter makes more sense once you get how the preferences manifest themselves the most.

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    The easiest way I can explain it is that Intuitives put more emphasis on decision making (T or F) while Sensors, being concrete, put more emphasis on doing (P or J).
    I can see what you're getting at with sensors, but intuitives put more emphasis on the abstract which manifests in language, which I think shows the T/F difference more than the J/P difference. There are definite NF vocab words and NT vocab words, not so much with STs and SFs.
    Kiersey shows there are SJ and SP vocab words too. But they tend to be used more by Ns to describe Ss than Ss themselves.
    I don't wanna!

  10. #10
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    The easiest way I can explain it is that Intuitives put more emphasis on decision making (T or F) while Sensors, being concrete, put more emphasis on doing (P or J). ST's and SF's are quite different in how they reason things and NP's and NJ's are quite different in how they interact with their environment, but to an N, T/F is more relevant, while to an S, J/P is more relevant.
    I really don't think this is true. I think this is especially confused by the facat that J/P aren't really functions. The only way they manifest themselves is in ones preferences of their other functions. J/P does not so simply correlate to "doing". In a way, I'd think if that's what it were about, then there'd be more logical connection between S and the E/I divide, but even that would be very short of satisfaction.


    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 behaviors 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.
    Yes, I recall his historical comparisons. Other than that, he basically uses first-hand experience to gauge the types, which is surprisingly S of him. In general, I can't say that knowing his idea is modeled around the theories of Hippocrates and then later alchemists makes me confident in his theories.

    As for personal experience, I think he puts far too much emphasis on it versus theory, and I think it's part of what creates is really narrow descriptions of certain types.

    Quote Originally Posted by booyalab View Post
    I've read Gifts Differing, which organizes the styles into ST SF NT and NF, and Please Understand Me- SJ SP NT NF. Kiersey's temperament sorter makes more sense once you get how the preferences manifest themselves the most.
    All in all, I don't really agree. I find ISTPS at least just as similar to ISTJs as they are to ISFPs, if not more so. Experience aside, in theory, I have no reason to believe that ISTPs and ISFPs would be more similar. I also don't have reason, by experience or theory, to believe that the differences between and NP and an NJ are smaller than the difference between an SP and an SJ.

    Lastly, Keirsey's point of view is too behavioralist. He basically says that if you walk like a duck, you are a duck. My way of looking at it is more cognitive, which is closer to the original point, what with it being about cognitive processes. I wouldn't mind so much if people made more of a concsious effort to seperate Keirsey's work from the rest of the MBTI and cognitive process theories, but they don't. Even the forums here are modeled around Keirsey's temperaments.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

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