User Tag List

First 8161718192028 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 385

  1. #171
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Statistics, patterns, steward, disoriented by too many choices, precise and thorough, uptight, and learn how to be more creative could all be definitely more associated with Si than Se.

    I say "patterns" with Si because it follows linear patterns, and Ne sees "patterns" as well and they feed into each other in both NPs and SJs to a degree.

    The rest sound more generally sensor-ish.

  2. #172
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    cba to make the test because questions need too much thinking needed. i wish who ever made this test learned the basics of psychological research
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #173
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    cba to make the test because questions need too much thinking needed. i wish who ever made this test learned the basics of psychological research
    Fudj's a really smart nice guy but came across as an amiable "ivory tower" / cloistured intellectual when I talked to him (and if you read his papers). He just runs in more academic circles by nature, and his presentations aren't necessarily aimed at the mainstream.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #174
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Fudj's a really smart nice guy but came across as an amiable "ivory tower" / cloistured intellectual when I talked to him (and if you read his papers). He just runs in more academic circles by nature, and his presentations aren't necessarily aimed at the mainstream.
    im just saying that its one of the basics in this kind of stuff that the questions NEED to be understood with anyone who can pretty much barely talk.. possible misunderstandings of people who are being assessed can cause tests reliability go down really much. so no matter how well(and intellectually) the test is done on other things, the whole thing can fail on this basic thing. i mean this was like the first thing they thought us on psychological research course.. this sort of stuff can cause bias towards some types because some types might be better at understanding this sort of 'hard to get' language and he will get more reliable results from those types -> other types are more random -> the test fails. or it might just be that there will be so many random answers from all types and it wont be just bias towards certain types, but failure on the whole thing.

    im not saying that he doesent know anything about psychology or that he is dumb, just saying that he is missing one basic thing that can ruin the whole test(and theory of something if he wants to test it with this).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #175
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    im just saying that its one of the basics in this kind of stuff that the questions NEED to be understood with anyone who can pretty much barely talk.. possible misunderstandings of people who are being assessed can cause tests reliability go down really much. so no matter how well(and intellectually) the test is done on other things, the whole thing can fail on this basic thing. i mean this was like the first thing they thought us on psychological research course.. this sort of stuff can cause bias towards some types because some types might be better at understanding this sort of 'hard to get' language and he will get more reliable results from those types -> other types are more random -> the test fails. or it might just be that there will be so many random answers from all types and it wont be just bias towards certain types, but failure on the whole thing.
    I know you're saying that.
    I was agreeing with you, wasn't I?

    im not saying that he doesent know anything about psychology or that he is dumb, just saying that he is missing one basic thing that can ruin the whole test(and theory of something if he wants to test it with this).
    I know.

    I just had talked to him in e-mail a number of years ago -- so I was verifying that, yes, he's not trying to be enigmatic or elitist, he just has issues with talking in language that the average user can understand.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #176
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amazingdatagirl View Post
    I don't know if this has been discussed elsewhere in this thread (I didn't read the whole thing) but Fudjack has his own nomenclature. Although the same 4 letter codes are used, John Fudjack and Patricia Dinkelaker assign different meaning to their type definition.

    This article gives a brief overview of their system. Using MBTI INFP as an example, Fudjack/Dinkelaker would code that personality type as inF (because F has highest preference). FD33 differs from MBTI in that they add 16 more type definitions. Each of the standard 16 types can be either closure/non-closure (or directive/non-directive). So, our INFP could either be inF (closure) or inF (non-closure).

    My results look like this
    N 13
    S 5
    F 9
    T 10

    N-T-F-S
    iNtj (INTJ closure)
    iNtp (INTJ non-closure)
    eNtj (ENTJ closure)
    eNtp (ENTJ non-closure)

    My T/F is pretty much even - I could just as easily test as INFJ (closure/non-closure).

    I like the F/D nomenclature - it seems to address some of inconsistencies that I have experienced in attempting to pin down my own typing. If I were actually a non-closure version of an MBTI directive type (either INTJ or INFJ) then it would provide a better descriptor than the ill-fitting INTP.
    Yeah, the new "j/p" is what they use for this new "closure" factor. (Even though "closure" is supposed to be apart of the MBTI J/P. I would say that when P's desire "closure, it's likely from being dominant Ji. This would explain my own identification with the notion of "closure" sometimes. They desire internal rather than external closure like a J. If this is so. then it is already implicit in the other letters).

    This is actually part of what I was thinking about here:
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...872#post543872
    I had forgotten that Fudjack's system was different from Socionics, so I was attributing it to Socionics. I was clearly thinking of that tap3x article you linked, but mis-remembered it as being on one of the Socionics sites.

    Socionics doesn't "remove" J/P and put it back as something else; they just switch the meaning of J/P to dominant function (and they have a separate three letter system using different mostly letters). Fudjack is the one who converted the MBTI code to a three letter system, but then puts the fourth letter back with a new meaning.

    In either case, I think they should at least use a new letter dichotomy for something like that.
    See; just like with Socionics, we begin applying the type code to ourselves not realizing it's actually different from MBTI.

    Also, if they wanted to integrate a fifth factor like that, why not use Comfort/Discomfort (The missing Neuroticism factor of the more psychologically respected FFM)?
    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. #177
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    Statistics, patterns, steward, disoriented by too many choices, precise and thorough, uptight, and learn how to be more creative could all be definitely more associated with Si than Se.

    I say "patterns" with Si because it follows linear patterns, and Ne sees "patterns" as well and they feed into each other in both NPs and SJs to a degree.

    The rest sound more generally sensor-ish.
    That's what I figured too. Here's what Fudgy has to say about his FD33:
    But if it [the test] is flawed, and even if it is so tremendously flawed as to make the results arrived at by utilizing it absolutely useless, it would only mean that this particular test could not be used to identify iNfps and so forth. It would not effect the critique of the J/P designation that is generated by the alternative nomenclature, as described in our paper on that subject or in what we have said in this coversation, above. The argument associated with the nomenclature illustrates that the onus of proof is clearly on those who would use the J/P score to determine preference order.

    The point you're missing here, by focusing on a mere test, is that Katharine Briggs and Isabel Myers flubbed it big time. And since hardly anybody in the typology community is science-minded enough to spot these types of errors (which should have been easy for those trained at such investigations), and since the scientific community doesn't take typology seriously enough to investigate it, the error continued for about 60 years. This error trumps anything that might be wrong with the FD33.

    Some people take logical fallacies seriously; but I understand there are others who don't, and never will, take them seriously. This one was big enough to drive a semi through, it just wasn't very obvious.

    If I had trouble with the test (which gave me an answer I can work with), I would be digging deep to look into the issue. But for me it has only opened up a whole new range of possibilities.

    I remember back in the day when I would sit down with pen and paper scribbling notes and making various type charts in a futile effort to fix the MBTI. But I see now I was focused too much on structure and not enough on underlying theory.
    "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.”

  8. #178
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Yeah, the new "j/p" is what they use for this new "closure" factor. (Even though "closure" is supposed to be apart of the MBTI J/P. I would say that when P's desire "closure, it's likely from being dominant Ji. This would explain my own identification with the notion of "closure" sometimes. They desire internal rather than external closure like a J. If this is so. then it is already implicit in the other letters).
    Yes, I identify with that too -- the internal closure, the external openness (except for those times internal closure demands some external change).
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #179
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Yeah, the new "j/p" is what they use for this new "closure" factor. (Even though "closure" is supposed to be apart of the MBTI J/P. I would say that when P's desire "closure, it's likely from being dominant Ji. This would explain my own identification with the notion of "closure" sometimes. They desire internal rather than external closure like a J. If this is so. then it is already implicit in the other letters).
    Yes, the ultimate goal is closure, being expressed as unity within a system. But the system doesn't exist "out there." Not even INTPs (to use the old nomenclature) are forever open-ended, they are simply far-seeing in an intuitive sense. Closure may not even occur within the INTP's lifetime, but it exists somewhere over a horizon that has unknown limits. It's just a question of finding out what those limits are. The openness to possibilities is just a way of reaching toward and probing the potential extent of those limits. External reality can never provide enough data, most of the information is derived internally, and ultimately closure is not found through straight-arrow methodology but through flashes of insight.
    "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. #180
    Senior Member FakePlasticAlice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    430

    Default

    intuiting =17
    sensing =4
    feeling =4
    thinking =12

    that really doesn't seem right.
    "You can't take a picture of this...it's already gone."

    “But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?”
    -Mark Twain

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