User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 91

  1. #41
    Senior Member Valuable_Money's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    It's just an example, and there's also the possibility of people misreading it as well yeu have to take into account. On my second attempt at checking myself I got INTP instead of ENTP, though every subsequent test after has always been ENTP, and after reading the descriptions, entp's way more accurate for me.

    The thing is though... I'm very conflicting as well myself, my actions do not neccesarily match my strengths, this isn't exactly uncommon to be honest. A personality is not directly tied to whot yeu're 'good' at, how many people LOVE doing exercize, but their bodies just aren't capable of it? I physically have the genes and specialized muscle structure that I'm one of the few people physically capable from birth of being a sprinter, but I really don't care for it at all.

    .
    Im rather bizzare as well. Muscularly im built like a linebacker, tall with huge broad sholders. Yet because I get very little exercise Im very thin. If I did exercise regualrly I would probably resemble a body builder but instead I resemble frankenstein.
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh? wgah'nagl fhtagn

  2. #42
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Valuable_Money View Post
    Im rather bizzare as well. Muscularly im built like a linebacker, tall with huge broad sholders. Yet because I get very little exercise Im very thin. If I did exercise regualrly I would probably resemble a body builder but instead I resemble frankenstein.
    Well consider the good that comes with that! Cheap halloween costumes, all yeu need is some green makeup, a $5 haircut, and two screws with some tape/glue.

  3. #43
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    OK, here's an illustration where I aim to show how differentiation and the complexes proceed:

    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

  4. #44
    Senior Member SciVo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    924
    Posts
    244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    But see, you're stated function order is unsettling. I'd argue (or want to argue) that the apparent Ni and Te are artifacts, not actual preferences. For one, Te and Ti are inimical. I'm pretty sure that to do one well, one has to shut down the other. Probably likewise for Ne and Ni.

    Or maybe I like Llewellyn's idea for this, and your function order would be pleasantly represented as
    Ti > Ne (> Ni > Te) > Si (= Se > Fi) > Fe

    (Not that I want to be telling you what you are... I'm just trying to reconcile a theory I like and other people's reports but without thinking too much.)
    I have super-high Fi/Ne/Ni, and my Te/Fe/Si/Se/Ti are all much lower. Despite getting rather different MBTI results over the years -- including INxJ in a highly-structured high school and xNxx in a highly-social college environment while studying math -- one thing that always remains the same is my hard N, so I don't doubt at all that my Ne and Ni are both so high (and therefore so close).

    By my self-diagnosis, I'm currently an INFP. By Llewellyn's explanation, I guess I'm an INFP (Fi/Ne) first and an INTJ (Ni/Te) second? By Evan's calculator, my Ne and Ni are so close that moving the difference one point turns an ENFP into an xNFx. As it happens, I'm inclined to believe that the models are all imperfect representations of some objective reality that remains not fully knowable, so I don't see any contradiction in these results.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    ...From what I have come to see lately, the attitude (e/i) is tied more to the person (ego) than to the functions. So a type starts with an introvert or extravert who uses his dominant function in his preferred orientation. The function then takes on the characteristics we call Xe or Xi. The auxiliary then takes on the rejected other orientation. the other functions remain undifferentiated, but come up in the complexes represented by the archetypes.[cont'd]

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingMask;post794552
    I am interested why you don't think anything beyond 1, 2, and 4 should be standardized. Why not just 1 and 2, or why not 1-4 - or the first 5? Why did you settle on those three? I'm not really disagreeing I'm just curious.
    ...Because of the fact that again, everything the ego rejects is undifferentiated. When the dominant is established in the preferred attitude, the other three functions and the opposite attitude are rejected into the unconscious. Hence, in the original order, the aux. tertiary and inferior were all said to be the opposite attitude. So the aux. is in the opposite attitude, and then the Puer complex (according to Lenore Thomson) when it comes into consciousness then adopts the tertiary function and orients it in the dominant attitude.
    The anima remains in the opposite attitude with the inferior function. It's because of this dispute as to the orientation of the tertiary that 1, 2 and 4 were specified above. They were the most definite.
    Beebe then extended it by paralleling these four functions with those of the reverse attitude, and indentified four more complexes that manifest themselves through them.

    It really has nothing to do with relative strengths of the functions. Much of what is coming up on those tests is probably undifferentiated function behavior, and not any real ego-consciousness. Hence, beyind the dominant and auxiliary, we really can't use the rest of it to type ourselves.

    See
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post748446
    I have no idea WTF you just said. However, it sounds like you have an explanation for why my 3 isn't the conventionally expected Si, so I'll try re-reading it for understanding.
    Last edited by SciVo; 08-29-2009 at 12:12 PM. Reason: Typo: Ni/Te are INTJ, not INFJ, natch.
    INFP ~ Fi/Ne/Ni/Te ~ 9-2-4 sp/so

  5. #45
    Senior Member Valuable_Money's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    OK, here's an illustration where I aim to show how differentiation and the complexes proceed:

    Graphs should make things simpler not complicated-er.
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh? wgah'nagl fhtagn

  6. #46
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Well, sorry, but it was kind of hard to represent the process.
    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. #47
    Senior Member SciVo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    924
    Posts
    244

    Default

    I think I've almost got it. My puer complex somehow chose N (oriented in the dominant attitude), even though my ego also chose N (oriented in the opposite attitude) for the auxiliary to my dominant Fi? While Te, the inferior function in the opposite attitude, was the anima as normal. Which means... that my puer is also my senex? And then where does my S come into the story? :confused:
    INFP ~ Fi/Ne/Ni/Te ~ 9-2-4 sp/so

  8. #48
    Senior Member Valuable_Money's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SciVo View Post
    I think I've almost got it. My puer complex somehow chose N (oriented in the dominant attitude), even though my ego also chose N (oriented in the opposite attitude) for the auxiliary to my dominant Fi? While Te, the inferior function in the opposite attitude, was the anima as normal. Which means... that my puer is also my senex? And then where does my S come into the story? :confused:
    Your crazy alien language has ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD!!!!

    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh? wgah'nagl fhtagn

  9. #49
    Member FlamingMask's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTp
    Posts
    79

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    OK, here's an illustration where I aim to show how differentiation and the complexes proceed:

    I thought you were saying that anything other than the primary function isn't differentiated. Are we talking complexes now? (I don't mean to conflate them but it's unclear.)
    I (89%) N (88%) T (88%) P (56%)

    Ti > Ne > Ni > Te > Si = Se > Fi > Fe

    Enneagram: 5


  10. #50
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SciVo View Post
    I have super-high Fi/Ne/Ni, and my Te/Fe/Si/Se/Ti are all much lower. Despite getting rather different MBTI results over the years -- including INxJ in a highly-structured high school and xNxx in a highly-social college environment while studying math -- one thing that always remains the same is my hard N, so I don't doubt at all that my Ne and Ni are both so high (and therefore so close).

    By my self-diagnosis, I'm currently an INFP. By Llewellyn's explanation, I guess I'm an INFP (Fi/Ne) first and an INTJ (Ni/Te) second? By Evan's calculator, my Ne and Ni are so close that moving the difference one point turns an ENFP into an xNFx. As it happens, I'm inclined to believe that the models are all imperfect representations of some objective reality that remains not fully knowable, so I don't see any contradiction in these results.


    I have no idea WTF you just said. However, it sounds like you have an explanation for why my 3 isn't the conventionally expected Si, so I'll try re-reading it for understanding.
    Quote Originally Posted by SciVo View Post
    I think I've almost got it. My puer complex somehow chose N (oriented in the dominant attitude), even though my ego also chose N (oriented in the opposite attitude) for the auxiliary to my dominant Fi? While Te, the inferior function in the opposite attitude, was the anima as normal. Which means... that my puer is also my senex? And then where does my S come into the story? :confused:
    The function order is not based on relative strength. So if your third strongest might be N, still, for an INFP, the tertiary is S, and the puer complex will always manifest through the tertiary. If it's weaker than the two N's (good parent and senex), then you simply have a weak puer. It doesn't switch complexes.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingMask View Post
    I thought you were saying that anything other than the primary function isn't differentiated. Are we talking complexes now? (I don't mean to conflate them but it's unclear.)
    Yes, the diagram starts with the dominant, and the other functions undifferentiated, but then shows how the complexes manifest the other functions or function attitudes.
    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

Similar Threads

  1. Explain the cognitive functions to me
    By Colors in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 10:40 PM
  2. MBTI and Cognitive Functions
    By RansomedbyFire in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-10-2007, 06:52 AM
  3. [JCF] Leanor Thomson's Theory and INFP cognitive functions
    By heart in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-31-2007, 01:07 AM
  4. Cognitive Functions Test?
    By MerkW in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-23-2007, 04:01 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