User Tag List

View Poll Results: What type is House?

Voters
409. You may not vote on this poll
  • INTP

    74 18.09%
  • INTJ

    121 29.58%
  • INFP

    2 0.49%
  • INFJ

    2 0.49%
  • ISTP

    4 0.98%
  • ISTJ

    4 0.98%
  • ISFP

    2 0.49%
  • ISFJ

    5 1.22%
  • ESFJ

    6 1.47%
  • ESFP

    5 1.22%
  • ESTJ

    3 0.73%
  • ESTP

    1 0.24%
  • ENFJ

    1 0.24%
  • ENFP

    1 0.24%
  • ENTJ

    25 6.11%
  • ENTP

    153 37.41%
First 1826272829303878 Last

Results 271 to 280 of 1047

  1. #271
    Senior Member Nonpareil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    i really don't mean to come across as an asshole, but i can't help defending my stance.
    Defend away.

    You are free to think the way you do. But from someone who isn't obsessed with neither and doesn't understand it as much: what you say makes no sense. Looking at it from a child's point of view, it doesn't seem to describe people accurately.

    I'm not saying your 18 months of research is worthless but I am saying it's not complete - our understanding of the human mind will probably never be complete. 18 months is not a long time in terms of researching something as complex as the human mind. I would say 18 years is not even enough time. You are basing what you believe on things you read, how long have you spent actually studying people - their beliefs, their experiences and how it relates to their actions?

    I'm not trying to attack your beliefs, I'm just saying, from a more niave and objective standpoint, what you say still makes no sense to me - it lacks scientific backing. It's not that scientific backing is all there is, but MBTI found four personality traits that I can see in everyday life. I can't see how functions represents the behaviours I see in everyday life. It may say how people are suppose to think but it doesn't help me see how they behave. I think there is more to the human mind than mbti says (let alone functions), people just can't be broken down as easily. Life/past/present experiences, trauma, and social encounters all affect how one would react/think in life. I do not believe that functions or mbti can explain the cognitive behaviour of our minds that easily.
    Sorry for any typos, spelling or grammer errors but I'm a bit preoccupied planning my wedding.
    Or if you want to read more about me and help me gain more insight to your world (I do need more experiences in life), feel free to skim through my blog.

  2. #272
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    i see what you're saying. but we have different definitions of introverted and extroverted functions. take, for example, Se and Si:

    your definition says for an Si person, their sensing is focused inward. what does this mean? i'll assume it means they sense things about themselves/their inner world. (correct me if i'm wrong).

    but in function theory, Si is defined completely differently. Si is a storehouse of past sensory information. it's basically a hard drive. so, in function theory, if you're Si-ing, you're looking at past experiences you've had.

    Se (in function theory) would more accurately correlate to the Si where you're sensing things about yourself. Se is basically seeing details about the current moment in time. So if you're feeling a certain way, Se will focus on the details of that feeling.


    so i'm not incorrect. i'm incorrect based on your definitions, true. but that's not function theory.
    MBTI uses the same functional history as the functional theory that you are using... although there are some differences between Jungian and MBTI views, just as there are differences from Socionics and Jungian views (mostly on hierarchies though). MBTI is just meant to find the order of functions - the definitions are more or less the same. (That is, as best as they can be defined - they are pretty hard to define in the first place, not having any physical representations.)

  3. #273
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    This is technically incorrect. MBTI tests the main two dimensions (S/N and F/T). J/P determines attitude (i/e) and E/I determines which attitude is dominant in the hierarchy.

    ie:

    INTP -> N, T (+P) -> Ne, Ti (+I) -> Ti-Ne(-Sx-Fe)
    ESFJ -> S, F (+J) -> Si, Fe (+E) -> Fe-Si(-Nx-Ti)
    Right/

    The behaviours expressed in J/P are suppose to determine if the rational function is extroverted or introvered (and the irrational) through questions that extraverted rationals have - likewise for E/I, to see if they are predominantly outwardly focused or not.
    Oh and again. You know the theory according to the book. GG son.

    The application makes no sense though. Dissonance is right, in that.

    This is only correct according to what MBTI claims to do. Actually what you said is probably verbatim from the mission statement.

    Here's the problem: With
    The behaviours expressed in J/P are suppose to determine if the rational function is extroverted or introvered
    We notice that it tells if THE rational function is extraverted or otherwise. But wait... Oh! There are TWO rational functions. And since serve opposing purposes, having a question that asks ONLY about whether the rational function is extraverted is meaningless, unless they can ask questions specific to either Feeling or Thinking. Instead though, they have that in a completely separate question. One that ignores the attitude of the rational function. If the question puts a mark for the thinking side but it calls for Ti, but the person normally employs Te, they're going to answer no. This will cause them to lose a thinking point, when they would have otherwise deserved it. The same takes place with the J and P scale.

    If we have a question asking if someone uses Fe, but they use Te, the obvious answer is no, and they get a P point, even though they're using Te, which is implicative of a J.

    It's impossible to measure how extraverted or introverted someone's rational function is without figuring out first what rational function they use. Conversely, you will be hard pressed to get an accurate measurement of the correct rational function without first determining the attitude of the function...

    Unless... Eureka! We could COMBINE them and ask function specific questions! This way we figure out if someone favors Te or Ti, Fe or Te, Ti or Fi etc. The same applies with the perception axis.

    On depends on the other, which is why it makes so little sense to separate the questions.

  4. #274
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Right/

    Oh and again. You know the theory according to the book. GG son.

    The application makes no sense though. Dissonance is right, in that.

    This is only correct according to what MBTI claims to do. Actually what you said is probably verbatim from the mission statement.

    Here's the problem: With We notice that it tells if THE rational function is extraverted or otherwise. But wait... Oh! There are TWO rational functions. And since serve opposing purposes, having a question that asks ONLY about whether the rational function is extraverted is meaningless, unless they can ask questions specific to either Feeling or Thinking. Instead though, they have that in a completely separate question. One that ignores the attitude of the rational function. If the question puts a mark for the thinking side but it calls for Ti, but the person normally employs Te, they're going to answer no. This will cause them to lose a thinking point, when they would have otherwise deserved it. The same takes place with the J and P scale.

    If we have a question asking if someone uses Fe, but they use Te, the obvious answer is no, and they get a P point, even though they're using Te, which is implicative of a J.

    It's impossible to measure how extraverted or introverted someone's rational function is without figuring out first what rational function they use. Conversely, you will be hard pressed to get an accurate measurement of the correct rational function without first determining the attitude of the function...

    Unless... Eureka! We could COMBINE them and ask function specific questions! This way we figure out if someone favors Te or Ti, Fe or Te, Ti or Fi etc. The same applies with the perception axis.

    On depends on the other, which is why it makes so little sense to separate the questions.
    thanks. why aren't you on AIM?

  5. #275
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nonpareil View Post
    Defend away.

    You are free to think the way you do. But from someone who isn't obsessed with neither and doesn't understand it as much: what you say makes no sense. Looking at it from a child's point of view, it doesn't seem to describe people accurately.
    Perhaps only because you haven't gathered enough information. It's a double edged sword isn't it? MBTI and function theories are extremely complex, and unfortunately, depend heavily on semantics.

    It's not intended to inform children anyway. It's supposed to be as accurate as possible, which means most likely that most adults will never even get it.

  6. #276
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    thanks. why aren't you on AIM?
    Sshh you'll blow our cover.

  7. #277
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    MBTI uses the same functional history as the functional theory that you are using... although there are some differences between Jungian and MBTI views, just as there are differences from Socionics and Jungian views (mostly on hierarchies though). MBTI is just meant to find the order of functions - the definitions are more or less the same. (That is, as best as they can be defined - they are pretty hard to define in the first place, not having any physical representations.)
    I was under the impression that they were exactly the same, but that MBTI was just used as an INDICATOR of what functions you MIGHT use.

  8. #278
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nonpareil View Post
    You are basing what you believe on things you read, how long have you spent actually studying people - their beliefs, their experiences and how it relates to their actions?
    i basically spend every second i'm with people trying to refine my views on personality. i observe behavior all day every day.

    also, i'm an INFJ, and have a pretty good intuitive sense of people's motivations. Ni + Fe is good at that.

  9. #279
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    I was under the impression that they were exactly the same, but that MBTI was just used as an INDICATOR of what functions you MIGHT use.
    That is to say, tested for validity or not, it knows it can be wrong, which is a direct result of either people lying on the test to get the results they want or that they screwed up in structuring the questions, and the questions don't apply for some people.

  10. #280
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Here's the problem: With We notice that it tells if THE rational function is extraverted or otherwise. But wait... Oh! There are TWO rational functions. And since serve opposing purposes, having a question that asks ONLY about whether the rational function is extraverted is meaningless, unless they can ask questions specific to either Feeling or Thinking.
    *sigh* They are tested independently because they could not be reliably tested together. I've said this many times so far. MBTI evolved the way it did for a reason.

    Instead though, they have that in a completely separate question. One that ignores the attitude of the rational function. If the question puts a mark for the thinking side but it calls for Ti, but the person normally employs Te, they're going to answer no.
    No, they aren't. The whole point of the factor analysis was to determine that the 4 traits being measured were unique data points. Just as every question on the official test is measured to ensure that it is distinct enough that, in combination with other questions, it is indicative of that particular trait.

    It's impossible to measure how extraverted or introverted someone's rational function is without figuring out first what rational function they use. Conversely, you will be hard pressed to get an accurate measurement of the correct rational function without first determining the attitude of the function...
    Ah well, be sure to let the researchers know... they must of overlooked this for the last 60 years...

    Unless... Eureka! We could COMBINE them and ask function specific questions! This way we figure out if someone favors Te or Ti, Fe or Te, Ti or Fi etc. The same applies with the perception axis.
    Yah, cause that wasn't tried...

    On depends on the other, which is why it makes so little sense to separate the questions.
    Oh, it makes sense... but only when you are actually forced to validate your system against real people.

    Course, all of this is just because MBTI still uses functional theories. If it wasn't for MBTI, there would likely be no functional theory left and we'd all likely be using versions of NEO, MMPI or DSMs. The work CPP/CAPT put into MBTI (and other instruments they own) is about the only validation it has.

Similar Threads

  1. What type is Shadow the Hedgehog (Sonic Adventure 2 Battle)
    By Athenian200 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-29-2016, 05:04 PM
  2. What type is Falcarius the dinosaur?
    By Falcarius in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-06-2015, 09:34 PM
  3. What type is Dr. House?
    By Anentropic IxTx in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-02-2009, 11:15 AM
  4. What type is he?
    By Climber07 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-28-2008, 03:34 PM
  5. What type is the most pedantic?
    By Kiddo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 10-24-2007, 02:11 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