User Tag List

First 234

Results 31 to 38 of 38

  1. #31
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    look, i am all for inventing an intelligence test, that can not be faked [by mistake OR desire] by people, except by prodigies who truly access all functions.

    but there is no in-between.

    current tests are not what you wish them to be, and the result of that is millions of people who are not sure about their type, and you can not change that, by wishing or demanding that people should not now anything, because they do.

    they do, already to some amount, and it cant be undone and therefore must be owned, used, differentiated to the point where it is no longer a source of error, but a source of correct communication

    they do, because it begins with that insane dichotomy, that is pregnant with polemic ethical implications, that holds a huge potential to provoke denial, false self .... judgers are rigid, perceivers are lazy .. there you have the first pattern. cant be deleted.

  2. #32
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    I think things have gotten lost in translation...when did I say people shouldn't know anything? All I said was that the ideal test would have questions such that the test-taker shouldn't HAVE to know anything to take the test and to get *accurate* results. And the more the test-taker does know, the more potential for bias.

    I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just stating my thoughts on the subject. My thoughts just tend to run counter to mbti theory, and I think the majority of the cognitive function stuff is ridiculous. They are just a nice little 'blueprint' for the specific personality type. But most people don't fully relate to any one mbti type to begin with (although granted: there are a minority who relate to anything and everything about their personality type, so are I would say more 'extreme' in all traits associated with that specific personality type), so obviously aren't going to line up seamlessly with the cognitive processing blueprint either.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...Gd5N3NZZE52QjQ

  3. #33
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    All I said was that the ideal test would have questions such that the test-taker shouldn't HAVE to know anything to take the test and to get *accurate* results.
    yeah, i agree with that, except that this test seems to be rather impossible.

    until we have automates at the side of the street where you sit in, throw a coin, and get a physiognomical or genetical analysis ...

  4. #34
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanook View Post
    i have zero trust in that test, that you are probably referring to. or maybe its how people answer these tests. can anyone give the "right" answers? anyone who has not downloaded enough of the function ideas to apply patterns on his traits, that are compatible with the tests questions?

    i did that test a year ago and got exactly the result that i expected (socionic infp), because i have the according understanding of the patterns...
    First of all, this wasn't truly based on that cognitive function test, although the test was the initial starting point. The test placed Ne (6th) highest for me... which simply isn't correct. I derived this mainly from introspection on my part... looking at how forum members describe what each function meant to them. So yes, there is the potential for bias as they tend to look at things that fit the traditional pattern.

    HOWEVER, If the traditional pattern is to be correct... then why would you get such an odd pattern? Why wouldn't it be 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 or 1,2,5,6,3,4,7,8?
    My stuff (design & other junk) lives here: http://nnbox.ca

  5. #35
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    HOWEVER, If the traditional pattern is to be correct... then why would you get such an odd pattern? Why wouldn't it be 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 or 1,2,5,6,3,4,7,8?
    i think by analyzing your self or what other people say or report you can get a picture of the first four functions, but not even their order. how on earth could you tell anything about 789 .... ? you could assume that a function must be down there, because it is not up here, but thats about all you can say, based on observation.

    if you have any fancy idea about how the seventh function has a specific role in life (magic zombie or whatever), you might come to the conclusion, that this role in an particular life is taken by function XY. but how could you proof your idea? maybe the magic zombie is 6.

    then why would you get such an odd pattern? Why wouldn't it be 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 or 1,2,5,6,3,4,7,8
    so i will say, because its random! there is currently no reliably methodology (in my mind, and probably in yours) to access the order. maybe a linear order does not even exist. maybe order is the product of differenciation, and only exists in developed individuals.

  6. #36
    Senior Mugwump Apollanaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightning View Post
    What I've also notice is that for most people, it's the 6th (aka witch) that tends to be the most problematic under stress. Not your inferior 4 or the daemon 8.

    For INFJs, the 6th is Fi. There's a tendency to feel insecure about the self and abilities/work. Thoughts like "Why aren't I good enough?" "I'll never be able to..." floats around when they're stressed out or depressed.
    Talk about synchronicity! I've just posted about this exact thing on this thread:

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post589816

    Here's the relevant part of my post:

    As for Fi,

    I sort of can tell when my Witchy Fi flares up: I start to feel unworthy of my high ideals, become very moody (depressed or angry) and feel very critical of myself and others, but I don't usually express any of this out loud. But Fi is still very murky terrain for me. Again, this makes sense, because according to Beebe, the sixth function is commonly the last one to develop.
    INFJ 9w1 sx/sp/so

    "A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to." - Gandalf The Grey

    And if I only could,
    I'd make a deal with God,
    And I'd get him to swap our places,
    Be running up that road,
    Be running up that hill,
    With no problems.

    - Kate Bush

  7. #37
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanook View Post
    i think by analyzing your self or what other people say or report you can get a picture of the first four functions, but not even their order. how on earth could you tell anything about 789 .... ? you could assume that a function must be down there, because it is not up here, but thats about all you can say, based on observation.

    if you have any fancy idea about how the seventh function has a specific role in life (magic zombie or whatever), you might come to the conclusion, that this role in an particular life is taken by function XY. but how could you proof your idea? maybe the magic zombie is 6.
    My analyzes is based on aggregate sampling. I'm assuming well balanced individuals will display at least 1, 2, 3... people who're more "pure type" (younger/imbalanced etc) will show a predominance of 1 and a misuse of either the inferior or a shadow function.

    I started out looking at INTPs first because 3 years ago MBTIc didn't existed... there's only INTPc. I went by the assumption the thinking style displayed by most INTP there would illustrate dominant Ti. If you cannot go by this assumption... then there's no point in linking typology to cognitive functions. Then I look at selected individuals who shows the most undiluted use of Ti... (I started off with Seawolf/SolitaryWalker in case you're wondering.) Then I switch over to looking at those with auxiliary Ti... since there weren't many ESTPs I used strictly ENTPs. How is their thinking style different than INTP? Then I did tertiary Ti in INFJs... then I finally gotten ISTP samples to compare. I did the same thing for most other functions... Not in this detail of cause but that's my approach.

    About the 6th... Here's is my unproven rational behind why it's the 6th that's problematic and not 4,7 or 8. For something to be problematic... we must be aware of it, and use it in some very limited fashion. Which throws 7 (trickster) and to some extent 8 (daemon) out the window, because those two barely register on somebody's radar.

    7 is the shadow of your tertiary and is also the direct opposite of your auxiliary... For INFJ 7th is Te... Under most circumstances, Fe automatically makes a decision. Unless you consciously practice overriding Fe with Te... there's no way Te will affect your life. And if it's practiced conscious use... well I suspect it wouldn't flare up unexpectedly.

    8 is the shadow of your inferior, which is Si for INFJ. You hear people whine and "complain" about how they had lousy memory... and are total space cadets. But they're never seriously complaining that it's a problem... It's more of an affectionate thing. They don't mind the lack of Si... because their dominant Ni takes care of everything (same direction (internally directed) opposite (N vs S)).

    4 is the inferior, Se for INFJs. This one is harder to explain as to why the 6th and not 4th is usually the most problematic... You do see 4 flaring up under stress... but that tends to happen to less balanced individuals. Berens? theory of JP pairs... under normal circumstances, dominant and auxiliary runs everything. Stress happens when dominant and auxiliary can't handle it... and the person is forced to use the ill-equipped 3rd and 4th. Hence function misuse shows up. However most theories don't look at well developed individuals with practiced use of 3rd and shadows... If you see yourself doing something that you don't like... then chances are you'll try to correct it. It doesn't really matter whether they know what specific function it's called or if it's even a function... they practice to improve it so they don't do that stupid thing again. If you're aware of a problem... you're less likely to be caught by surprise... which is why the inferior is rarely the problematic function in a well developed individual.

    6 is the shadow of your auxiliary, Fi in INFJs. It's the most problematic in well developed individuals because as Apollanaut said it's one of the last functions for you to develop... it also doesn't have a very strong same direction opposite (i.e. your Ti is only tertiary). This is the function that's most likely to catch you blindsided because it's the least balanced.

    Anything else about my approach you need me to explain?

    so i will say, because its random! there is currently no reliably methodology (in my mind, and probably in yours) to access the order. maybe a linear order does not even exist. maybe order is the product of differenciation, and only exists in developed individuals.
    So patterns can randomly exists? Even when you look into more and more people and the same pattern keeps on popping up? My Ti cannot take that as a coincidence. The foundation of Ni thinking is based upon patterns existing due to some cause. A difference in believes




    Quote Originally Posted by Apollanaut View Post
    Talk about synchronicity! I've just posted about this exact thing on this thread:

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post589816

    Here's the relevant part of my post:

    As for Fi,

    I sort of can tell when my Witchy Fi flares up: I start to feel unworthy of my high ideals, become very moody (depressed or angry) and feel very critical of myself and others, but I don't usually express any of this out loud. But Fi is still very murky terrain for me. Again, this makes sense, because according to Beebe, the sixth function is commonly the last one to develop.
    Yeah... Ni tends to do that a lot doesn't it? Try to link everything together. I'll reply to this on the other thread.
    My stuff (design & other junk) lives here: http://nnbox.ca

  8. #38
    Senior Mugwump Apollanaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Wow, I'm really impressed with your explanations, nightning. I thought I knew a lot about the 8 function approach to type, but your knowledge exceeds even my own.

    Before I respond to your specific examples of the functions (thank you for using INFJ as an example) I'd like to clear up a common misunderstanding regarding Ni, when it is used as a well-developed dominant function by INJs.

    It does not, as many people seem to believe, pull random ideas and theories out of the unconscious/ether/Astral Plane (or whatever) without reference to external reality. It is much more experiential than that: it takes note of certain recurring patterns or themes that catch its attention in those areas of life which have meaning or significance for the individual INJ. It observes these patterns over time, to check out if they are merely random or if they seem to represent a genuine phenomenon. If Ni concludes that there is something going on, then it will do two things:

    1) It will start to formulate a hypothesis to explain what lies behind the observed patterns. Unlike Ti, which seeks to explain, clarify and precisely define its observations, Ni is more concerned with their usefulness as a diagnostic and predictive tool. If something grabs its attention, Ni will leave no stone unturned in its research. It will seek out any and all information it can find that is even vaguely related, for clues and further insights. It will make sure that what it is looking for is new or speculative, if it finds out that it is an already accepted and explained idea, then it will rapidly lose interest.

    2) It will start to collect data to either confirm or deny its theory. If the growing body of evidence adds weight to the original idea, then it will start to test it out by making predictions and seeing how accurate they prove to be. If the accuracy rate is sufficiently high, then it will use the results to further refine the theory and improve the success rate. At some point (if ever) it may decide to publish its findings to a wider audience, for peer review and (possibly) a genuine scientific investigation.

    This is how Jung devised his ideas about the human psyche. After years and years of working with patients, his Ni noticed recurring themes and patterns which he found he could then use to make accurate diagnoses and predictions to better help his subsequent patients. Although he felt strongly enough to publish his findings and ideas, he did not do so in terms of the modern scientific method. He left that for others to do, or simply didn't care about this, as he was convinced of the validity of his ideas.
    INFJ 9w1 sx/sp/so

    "A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to." - Gandalf The Grey

    And if I only could,
    I'd make a deal with God,
    And I'd get him to swap our places,
    Be running up that road,
    Be running up that hill,
    With no problems.

    - Kate Bush

Similar Threads

  1. Government to own 50% of GM, unions 39%
    By Risen in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-29-2009, 02:10 PM
  2. Texas speaks up (HRC-50), Washington takes off the gloves (homeland security)
    By cogdecree in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-17-2009, 09:26 AM
  3. Replies: 85
    Last Post: 03-02-2009, 01:02 PM
  4. Answer: Owns a 50% stake in the Fed
    By kendoiwan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-02-2009, 02:23 PM
  5. 'Judging' versus 'Perceiving' Leading Function
    By Haphazard in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-17-2008, 11:43 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