User Tag List

First 7151617181927 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 385

  1. #161
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    I've been studying personality for going on two years now. I also know some of these people getting these preposterous results perhaps a tiny bit better than you, so I see just how ridiculously wrong it is, while you don't.

    And you clearly don't understand enough about Jungian function theory to see exactly what Jag and skylights exposed with that code.
    You don't know me. And anyway, you should be thanking me for bringing to this forum, at least indirectly, evidence of a LIE that the MBTI has been perpetrating for decades now. That is, if one wants to call a logical fallacy a lie. Thank you Mr. Fud- fud- oh whatever!
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #162
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    You're right, I don't know you, but I see the evidence of your clear misunderstandings in this thread.

    Enjoy your tin foil hat.

  3. #163
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Fudge and Dink T
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvBatcJ5RNM].[/youtube]

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post

    i've noticed in my INTP dad that he has many "J" traits, as well. i've attributed those to being J-dom in MBTI.
    In Jungian terminology, the Ti and Fi dominant are Introverted Rationals. In a sense, "IJ". And I think at closer inspection (like your father), you'll see that. Myers-Briggs thought Jung was examining (as best as possible) the internal viewpoint. They proposed that dominant Introverted Judgement is private - that when these introverts "externalize" themselves, they express it with Pe. Jung's Introverted Rational now becomes IP.

    Although he occasionally refers to judging and perceptive types among extraverts, Jung never mentions that the JP difference can be seen in introverts and that it reflects the character of their extraversion. This omission is inevitable because he never discusses the introvert's extraversion.

    Instead, Jung divides the types into rational and irrational: the "rational" types are those whose dominant process is thinking or feeling, and the "irrational" are those whose dominant process is sensing or intuition. This distinction is of little practical use in ascertaining a person's type. The rationality of the introverted feeling type, for example, is too interior and subtle for the observer to perceive with any certainty, or even for the subject to report. It is safer to depend on relatively simple and accessible reactions.

    The JP preference does show itself in simple and accessible reactions. It serves admirably as the fourth dichotomy if one detail is borne in mind: It deals only with outward behavior and thus points only indirectly to the dominant process of the introvert.

    [..]Inclusion of the JP preference in the theory came about as a result of unpublished personality research by Katherine C. Briggs before Jung's Psychological Types was published. The type categories she had devised were entirely consistent with Jung's, but less detailed. Her "meditative" type included all introvert types. Her "spontaneous" type corresponded to the perceptive extraverts, in whom perceptive behavior is at it's strongest. Her "executive" type exactly described the extraverted thinker, and her "sociable" type the extraverted feeling people.

    When Jung's theory was published in 1923, she saw that it went far beyond her own, and she made an intensive study of it. Putting together sentences quoted earlier in this chapter, she interpreted them to mean that the auxiliary process run's the introvert's outer life. She looked at the outer lives of her"meditative" friends to see if this was true and concluded that it was.

    Briggs also found that when the introvert's auxiliary was a perceptive process, it gave rise to a perceptive attitude and an outer personality that resembled, in a quiet way, the "spontaneous" personality of the perceptive extravert. When the auxiliary was a judging process, it produced a judging attitude and an outer personality that was the opposite of "spontaneous". -Gift's Differing p.42
    Anyways, I don't mean to point out the obvious.

    I think the basic temperment from MBTI pretty much remains the same, but there can be variation (like this test is trying to show) on when/where Judging or Perception shows up.

  4. #164
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    You're right, I don't know you, but I see the evidence of your clear misunderstandings in this thread.

    Enjoy your tin foil hat.
    Nobody learns anything by getting the answers right every single time.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #165
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mal12345 View Post
    Nobody learns anything by getting the answers right every single time.
    You're not learning anything from the things we're saying to you.

    Do you want to actually understand personality theory or not?

  6. #166
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    You're not learning anything from the things we're saying to you.
    Which personality ideas do you think I am in need of learning?

    Do you want to actually understand personality theory or not?
    I thought I did up until this Fudgy guy came along.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  7. #167
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    If what he said never occured to you until just now, you still have a long way to go.

    No, function theory doesn't always match the four dichotomies. This is common knowledge among people who study personality theory. It is not "brilliant."

    And yes, getting NTFS as an Extrovert would = ENTP and as an Introvert = INTJ. You would have gotten that several pages ago in this thread if you understood Jungian theory.

    Also, if you understood Jungian theory, you would have seen the glaring flaw in the test. It claimed to measure functionality, but was measuring neither Ne/Ni nor Se/Si nor Fe/Fi nor Te/Ti.

    And if you don't believe in functions but only believe in the four dichotomies, then why would you think this test is enlightening? Because it's surely not.

    There are two people in this thread who consistently type as Sensors and identify as Sensors who got high Intuition scores. This probably means they have Se and the test only measures Si, which is more detail oriented.

    Or like Jag said, it's dwelling in terrible stereotypes.

    The test is simplistic and flawed, and it's quite easy to compare it to MANY MANY MANY MANY others.

  8. #168
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    If what he said never occured to you until just now, you still have a long way to go.
    Of course I sensed something wrong somewhere for a long time, decades longer than you've been studying this system. But unlike Fudgy, who was an old man back when I first heard about him 15 years ago, I don't have time to sit around all day pondering sterile theories that try to fit 5 or 6 billion personalities into 16 little squares and yet can't explain why everybody is so different.

    No, function theory doesn't always match the four dichotomies. This is common knowledge among people who study personality theory. It is not "brilliant."

    And yes, getting NTFS as an Extrovert would = ENTP and as an Introvert = INTJ. You would have gotten that several pages ago in this thread if you understood Jungian theory.
    You're missing something important here. Before I started this thread, those were just three types strung out at random. Sure, they're objective scores on tests, assumed valid. But there is no systematic reason for them to exist unless someone brilliant like Fudgy explains it for us. And all you're doing here is explaining it to me as if you knew all along. Maybe there is some hints of it out there in MBTI land, but the brilliant part of all this does not require that John Fudjack re-invent the wheel. It does require that someone create the induction based on the bits of evidence scattered here and there (which even I was aware of), and find just one chink in its logic armor based on someone else's flawed ass-umption about Jungian functions made decades ago.

    And anyway, this test has a 1998 copyright date on it, so there's no reason to believe there aren't now similar ideas out there based on his theory. Perhaps you've read some of those derivative viewpoints that came after, and now you're convinced that Fudgy didn't accomplish very much after all.

    I found in an online search that Fudgy also invented other brilliant concepts.

    Also, if you understood Jungian theory, you would have seen the glaring flaw in the test. It claimed to measure functionality, but was measuring neither Ne/Ni nor Se/Si nor Fe/Fi nor Te/Ti.
    You're assuming this was not done on purpose. So far, I have been given plenty of reason to give old Fudgy credit for brains, even if back in 1996 he did write some silly off-topic rambling thing on Professionalism. I bet you didn't know about that? I did. I wrote for and subscribed to the same Enneagram journal that both of our articles were published in.

    And if you don't believe in functions but only believe in the four dichotomies, then why would you think this test is enlightening? Because it's surely not.
    I cut my eye-teeth on functions. But I'm not terribly impressed with dichotomies.

    There are two people in this thread who consistently type as Sensors and identify as Sensors who got high Intuition scores. This probably means they have Se and the test only measures Si, which is more detail oriented.

    Or like Jag said, it's dwelling in terrible stereotypes.

    The test is simplistic and flawed, and it's quite easy to compare it to MANY MANY MANY MANY others.
    So far all the criticisms of this test have been based on the assumption that this test is like all the others. And so far, those assumptions have been blown out of the water. All it required is a little investigation that thankfully someone else took care of for me.

    This is not a typical type indicator that you're aware of, it is not fair to judge it by those others which are based on flawed premises.

    And it doesn't claim to be the complete test. It is a "Short Form 1.1(experimental)" yet very enlightening. This test has a different orientation than those others, it is setting out to accomplish a bit more than just determining your function preference. Now that I know what that goal is, and what it is intending to accomplish, I see that its heading down the right track, one that should have been taken 50, 60, 70 years ago.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  9. #169
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    "There are two people in this thread who consistently type as Sensors and identify as Sensors who got high Intuition scores. This probably means they have Se and the test only measures Si, which is more detail oriented."

    Don't get me wrong, I think this is worth looking into if true. But only to find out why this test was constructed in such and such a way - not to find out what's "wrong" with it.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  10. #170
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    These are some of the S questions on the FD33. You tell me if they represent Se or Si.

    Don't waste your time imagining unrealistic possibilities - learn how to use statistics to assess the viability of a strategy.
    Isn't one better off learning how to make accurate observations than trying to honor mere hunches?
    I am more intrigued by patterns
    When I am in a leadership position I often find I am best as a good steward
    I would least like being called an idealist
    When I am conversing with someone, I get most annoyed when they speak in a way that is mystifying
    I'd say that I'm most often concerned with what is
    I am most likely to feel disoriented by too many choices
    I am least offended when I am labeled an empiricist
    Although I don't like it, I must admit that I can sometimes get superstitious and somewhat flakey
    Although I may not brag about it, I can sometimes be perfectly precise and thorough
    People with whom I am not compatible might misconstrue my actions as uptight
    At this point in my life I probably need to learn how to be more creative
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Similar Threads

  1. "ADD" and function preference
    By King sns in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-08-2011, 08:10 PM
  2. The Fudjack-Dinkelaker Poll result
    By Mal12345 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-22-2011, 01:54 PM
  3. Questions about Preference and Skill in using functions
    By sticker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-24-2010, 02:00 PM
  4. Mixed preferences and the 8 functions...
    By Ethereal in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 08:33 PM
  5. Cognitive functions & preference for quiet or not so quiet study environments
    By Usehername in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-02-2008, 03:16 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