User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 92

  1. #71
    Senior Member mlittrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    THAT I could see being true to a point. I would still venture to say that most people fit the standard but I could see some exceptions. The Ne, Te, Fi, Si thing...no, I can't see that working very well; it just doesn't make sense. I personally would say that everybody fits their standard functions but that wouldn't be open-minded Though I believe it to be true.
    "Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress. "

    "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty."

    "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

    Mahatma Gandhi

    Enneagram: 9w1

  2. #72
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    I'm wondering how you guys define dominant. Is it amount of use? Or some other method?

    Is the order an order of use? Or an order of how much of an effect on total consciousness each function has? Or...what?

    When Jung made profiles for types, he only wrote of these ones:
    Extroverted Thinkers (ETJ)
    Extroverted Feelers (EFJ)
    Extroverted Intuitors (ENP)
    Extroverted Sensors (ESP)
    Introverted Thinkers (ITP)
    Introverted Feelers (IFP)
    Introverted Intuitors (INJ)
    Introverted Sensors (ISJ)

    There were only 8 types. Myers and Briggs had their own interpretation.

    And I don't know who came in and introduced function order, but I'd rather not blindly follow them. Whoever they were, it made sense that the opposite function would be the inferior. But why the order of the middle two? Because it looks more symmetrical?

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    I'm wondering how you guys define dominant. Is it amount of use? Or some other method?

    Is the order an order of use? Or an order of how much of an effect on total consciousness each function has? Or...what?
    For the purposes of this thread, I define dominant as preferred for use and areas of greatest skill and confidence.

  4. #74
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    So it's impossible that someone would be Ni dominant and prefer Ti for use after Ni? It's impossible that they could have greater skill and confidence with Ti than Fe?

    Yes, the person would be an extreme introvert. Yes, they would still approach the world with Fe. But couldn't they Ni+Ti first before Fe-ing?

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    So it's impossible that someone would be Ni dominant and prefer Ti for use after Ni? It's impossible that they could have greater skill and confidence with Ti than Fe?

    Yes, the person would be an extreme introvert. Yes, they would still approach the world with Fe. But couldn't they Ni+Ti first before Fe-ing?
    I would say, according to most theories, and a little thinking on my part, that it's most likely misinterpretation of Te as Ti. For the purposes of this thread...

  6. #76
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Again, what I've found, is that the "order" is not necessarily strength, but rather the roles (archetypes) the functions play. So one may appear to prefer NiTi, by their strength, and the Ti may actually be used more than Fe, but the Ti will still play the "relief" role, while the Fe will still play the "parent" role. What this means, is that you will probably be very much into "relief" activities, such as hobbies, etc. using that function, perhaps as much as an NeTi or SeTi, but I imagine in a less serious way than they. It's their "lead" or "supporting", while it's still your "relief".

    For me, Si is "relief", and in the proper place; hence; I'm very nostalgic. All the SJ's around me, are more serious, and into "rules" and such, with the function. Ne is then less seriously used, for them. Fi and Te for me have moved up above Fe and the others, so that would explain why some people have thought me to be an ENFP. But the role they actually play in my life is rather negative, and I've found it hard to tap into the more positive aspect of them (organizing for efficiency sucessfully. Knowing "what's important for myself" in a more systematic way, etc). They overdeveloped, I would say, largely in defense in the dysfunctional, largely STJ environment I grew up in, plus some other factors.

    In fact, most INTP's who take the CP test, Fi winds up above Fe, which in many of them, is as low as it can get. It is still an "aspirational" function for them, yet it has not developed yet, however, life has probably led to Fi developing first, since that would tie in with basic wants and needs.
    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. #77
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Meh. I'm gonna stop after this post, because this is pointless.

    Listen, I know the difference between Te and Ti and I can certainly say my thinking is pointed in and my feeling pointed out. I can also say with certainty that I'm much more comfortable with thinking than feeling (I could go into psychological reasons that I'd be different from the average member of my type in that sense).

    I've also met INTJs that are Ni>Fi>Te and even ENFPs that are Ne>Te>Fi. I think it's quite possible, I just doubt that the person would be healthy... That's another argument altogether.

  8. #78
    Member sleepless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance
    Every function should check every other one, honestly.

    I think the reason we're disagreeing at all is that we understand the functions differently. I've done a ton of work over the last few months trying to figure out a computer science-ey model of how these functions would interact (I'm pretty obsessed with programming). Plus, I talked to BW on AIM for hours and hours (and nocapszy too) until my model made complete sense to me and included every single possible cognitive behavior. (Behavior is a key word, not motivation.)

    On top of that, I'm probably much more T than you are and much less F. Even within type, there is room for variation.
    Seems like I forgot to answer to this...

    But perhaps we were done with our discussion. I can only say that I agree that we understand the functions differently. I think I see what you mean with all functions being used all the time, it's true in a way, but I think the more common understanding of the functions as being used more exclusively is also true, on another level.

    A "computer science-ey model on how the functions would interact"? Would that be possible? Aren't the functions way to abstract for that?

    On your discussion with mlittrell, I just have to ask (again) about the Ni-Ti thing. I mean, the simple reason for why Ni-Fe should be preferable to Ni-Ti is that Fe is extraverted, thus it can interact with Ni in a way that Ti cannot. Can two introverted functions actually "interact" at all? Don't they just sort of block each other? Well, I think I'm just repeating what I said before, but... I just can't see how they could work together in a positive way. With that model you've been working on, what would you say about this?

    (Edit: Whoa, when I started writing this, there was 4-5 posts less to deal with)

  9. #79
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Meh. I'm gonna stop after this post, because this is pointless.

    Listen, I know the difference between Te and Ti and I can certainly say my thinking is pointed in and my feeling pointed out. I can also say with certainty that I'm much more comfortable with thinking than feeling (I could go into psychological reasons that I'd be different from the average member of my type in that sense).

    I've also met INTJs that are Ni>Fi>Te and even ENFPs that are Ne>Te>Fi. I think it's quite possible, I just doubt that the person would be healthy... That's another argument altogether.
    Yes, they might not be healthy, because of things being out of order. But ask those people which roles those functions play in their life. (though it will not stand out as much as a shadow function moving up into the primary range).

    Also, I should point out, that one type expert has pointed out that the "relief" is also known as the "inflated" function, meaning that it does appear to become much stronger than it's supposed to be. So ENFP's are described as "out Te-ing Te preferrers" at times. Likewise, I can get lost in memories much more than many SJs (and they'll even criticize me for that sometimes), but again, this is basically "relief", and not usually their serious use of it. Meanwhile, my ISTJ parents would be heavy on the Fi a lot of times.
    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

  10. #80
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sleepless View Post
    Seems like I forgot to answer to this...

    But perhaps we were done with our discussion. I can only say that I agree that we understand the functions differently. I think I see what you mean with all functions being used all the time, it's true in a way, but I think the more common understanding of the functions as being used more exclusively is also true, on another level.
    A "computer science-ey model on how the functions would interact"? Would that be possible? Aren't the functions way to abstract for that?
    The functions should not be abstract at all. They need to be concretely defined. We can then build a model of how they interact, and that interaction would create the complexity.

    Just to say, my major in school is all about the mind and modeling it on computers. This is just the way I think; I'm a compsci nerd. If I can't think of something in a computer function-ey way, it doesn't make any sense to me.

    I mean, the simple reason for why Ni-Fe should be preferable to Ni-Ti is that Fe is extraverted
    This I agree with. It is preferable in that sense. That doesn't mean everyone uses it in a preferable way.

    thus it can interact with Ni in a way that Ti cannot. Can two introverted functions actually "interact" at all? Don't they just sort of block each other?
    That part I disagree with. Ni is depth based and internal, so it goes deep into one idea at at time. Fe would mess up Ni's path just as much as Ti, as it's concerned with implementation/the external world -- it can interrupt Ni's internal path if something is "bad" according to the external standard (the premises readily available in the environment). Although, for INJs, the Ni has the reigns. Ni will pretty much go about what it's doing and each time it finishes one idea in depth, it will check it with Fe to see if that idea is "good" according to the external standard.

    Ni can use Ti in pretty much the exact same way. It will finish an idea and check with Ti whether or not that is "true" according to the internal standard (the set of premises in the current thought process).

    Any judgment function is going to check Ni and take it out of certain paths of thought. Fe will take it out if it's bad according to visible external premises. Ti will take it out if it's false according to the internal premises, as in, the current thought process. (This is why Ti checks more for total consistency than Te, as Ti uses the same premises as the thought process and Te uses the premises of the environment, which may be completely different).

    So yeah, I'd even say that Ti works with Ni better than Fe because it at least uses Ni's own ideas as a standard for truth/falsehood. Fe uses a totally different set of ideas, which would probably be even more jarring to Ni.

    (Sorry, that was kinda all over the place.)

Similar Threads

  1. Ne - post your dominant, auxiliary, tertiary, and inferior experience with it.
    By ZNP-TBA in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-06-2016, 10:53 AM
  2. What are your experiences with getting psychotherapy?
    By Economica in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-24-2009, 09:09 PM
  3. Complementary/alternative medicine - your experiences??
    By Fairy... in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-04-2009, 05:54 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