User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 54

  1. #21
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    It's obvious to me (and anyone promoting Socionics) that you're forcing it to fit, when it naturally fits the ISxP better.
    You probably only think that because you skimmed and saw that Jung brought in something about art as an illustration, and thought "Oh, this is about painters! Must be ISxP, not ISxJ." Or at least, that's what I'm going to think unless you show me that you've thought it through better than that.

    Can you stop asserting that this is how things are, and start explaining why this is how things are?

  2. #22
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Jack, tell me.

    How do I think?
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    You probably only think that because you skimmed and saw that Jung brought in something about art as an illustration, and thought "Oh, this is about painters! Must be ISxP, not ISxJ." Or at least, that's what I'm going to think unless you show me that you've thought it through better than that.
    Wrong. Read carefully and you'll notice the appropriately consistent perceiving nature of the function as described, and in contrast the judging nature of Thinking. And what do you know, it fits SPs and SJs, respectively.

  4. #24
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyward View Post
    Haphazard vs Jack Flak

    Typical NT love-hate relationship
    I believe this would properly be a 'hate-hate' relationship, unless Jack has feelings for me that I don't know about.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  5. #25
    Badoom~ Skyward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,087

    Default

    'Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and its better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring.' - Marilyn Monroe

    This is who I am, escapist, paradise-seeker.
    -Nightwish

    Anthropology Major out of Hamline University. St. Paul, Minnesota.

  6. #26
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Wrong. Read carefully and you'll notice the appropriately consistent perceiving nature of the function as described, and in contrast the judging nature of Thinking. And what do you know, it fits SPs and SJs, respectively.
    So your theory is based on the idea that all Js should lead with a judging function, and all Ps with a perceiving function.

    Okay, then... that means you disagree with the idea that the extraverted auxiliary would "mask" the dominant nature of a given individual and affect their test results in terms of J/P.

    It sounds like you pulled on the thread in one place... and kept pulling until you unraveled everything it was connected to. Interesting. I don't understand what compelled you to see that particular aspect as a flaw, but I can tell that you did.

    It does seem like you're insisting on starting with the theoretical nature rather than how SJs or SPs tend to be, though.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    So your theory is based on the idea that all Js should lead with a judging function, and all Ps with a perceiving function.

    Okay, then... that means you disagree with the idea that the extraverted auxiliary would "mask" the dominant nature of a given individual and affect their test results in terms of J/P.

    It sounds like you pulled on the thread in one place... and kept pulling until you unraveled everything it was connected to. Interesting. I don't understand what compelled you to see that particular aspect as a flaw, but I can tell that you did.
    You don't have to take my word for it. Sure, I think I have the right idea, but if you prefer more prevalent theories, you only have to look at Socionics, which matches dominant functions with J/P.

  8. #28
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    You don't have to take my word for it. Sure, I think I have the right idea, but if you prefer more prevalent theories, you only have to look at Socionics, which matches dominant functions with J/P.
    I know of Socionics, actually. But J/P are used to mean different things in Socionics than in MBTI. To be frank, J/P doesn't even exist natively in Socionics. That notation is the remnant of an ill-conceived attempt to "convert" the types to be recognizable to Western MBTI users. The correct Socionic notation is something like SEI or SLI for an Introverted Sensing type.

    Isabel Myers created the J/P scale as a forth dichotomy to explain type. What Socionics calls "J/P" is actually the Jungian concept of rationality/irrationality (which is actually redundant in Socionics since knowing what the dominant function is tells you that in that system).

    If you're equating J/P with Jungian rationality/irrationality, and hence talking about Socionics, then I most definitely agree that the descriptions in question describe what Socionics calls ISxps (that is, SxI's), more than ISxjs (xSIs).

    My complaint is that I believe that MBTI J/P is NOT equivalent to Jungian rationality/irrationality the same way that the "converted" Socionics notation is.

    Jungian rationality/irrationality is inherent in the functions themselves. N and S are irrational functions, T and F are rational functions. They're about how a person operates primarily, regardless of how they present themselves or interact with the world. MBTI J/P was based on how one presents themselves and interacts with the world, regardless of how they operate primarily. They're different concepts.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I know of Socionics, actually. But J/P are used to mean different things in Socionics than in MBTI. To be frank, J/P doesn't even exist natively in Socionics.
    That's not true. J/P always mean Judging/Perceiving, and they're always in reference to functions. It's inevitable, because it describes the nature of the functions. Under MBTI it supposedly refers to the dominant extroverted function.
    That notation is the remnant of an ill-conceived attempt to "convert" the types to be recognizable to Western MBTI users. The correct Socionic notation is something like SEI or SLI for an Introverted Sensing type.
    I know that, but whatever you call the types, they still have a function order. And they correlate with MBTI types (The types match, not the function orders)

    Isabel Myers created the J/P scale as a forth dichotomy to explain type. What Socionics calls "J/P" is actually the Jungian concept of rationality/irrationality.
    She created the designation.

    You're too narrowly defining the Jungian concept. He calls perceiving irrational, but that doesn't fully define it.

    If you're equating J/P with Jungian rationality/irrationality, and hence talking about Socionics, then I most definitely agree that the descriptions in question describe what Socionics calls ISxps (that is, SxI's), more than ISxjs (xSIs).
    You're saying that Introverted Sensing, as described by Jung, is a more appropriate dominant function for ISxPs than ISxJs, which is exactly what I said.

    My complaint is that I believe that MBTI J/P is NOT equivalent to Jungian rationality/irrationality the same way the "converted" Socionics notation is.
    Depends on what exactly you're talking about, whether I agree or disagree here. If you remove function order completely from MBTI, then it's all accurate. P types prefer perceiving. Once you insert function order, and add a Judging function as dominant for a P type, you blow it.

  10. #30
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    What our Mr. Flak is doing is exposing the truth that no one wants to hear.

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI vs socionics j/p
    By Poki in forum Socionics
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-10-2014, 06:33 PM
  2. Socionics Online Meetup #2: MBTI vs. Socionics
    By HandiAce in forum Socionics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-10-2013, 03:12 PM
  3. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Amargith in forum Socionics
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 03-27-2013, 07:57 PM
  4. MBTI vs. Socionics: Which one is better?
    By Idontcare in forum Socionics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 02:13 PM
  5. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Urchin in forum Socionics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-21-2007, 07:19 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