User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 145

  1. #71
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukepd View Post
    And all of these "introverted" traits were explained that I felt this way when I was YOUNGER but don't even remotely feel this way now so I mistakenly THOUGHT I might of CHANGED TYPE which was then explained that I was always extraverted as its MY PREFERENCE but as a kid I had a lower Se and wasn't as expressive.

    I don't need to prove anything to you... I'm the most typical ESTP there is hell I'm even in PROMOTING for what I do for a living. I'm not sure why you seem hell bent on trying to prove I'm something I know I'm not.

    As I said I could prove it to you but I feel thats my personal life is none of your business and you should just take my word for it.

    This is my final post in this thread, I've read the useful relevant posts already thank you for your answers everyone. Feel free to continue discussion.
    Not attempting to prove anything and again could care less that you do not know your type. Most people start out not knowing their type, which is why they come to the forums. I just loathe people who choose to promote their ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity in claiming things that directly violate the principles of the system. My debate was never about you, it was about how the theory works per Jung, Myers-Briggs and everyone who has followed in their footsteps.

  2. #72
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    How is it different per individual? Give examples of when someone that gains in let's say Ti have equal or considerable use of their Fe.
    I linked you to one!

    Take BlackCat, he is INFP, and Fi is his dominant, yet his Te is his third strongest function.

    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  3. #73
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    And you just thought I would take your word for it? Where did the results come from? Where is the indicator and others who have taken it?

  4. #74
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    And you just thought I would take your word for it? Where did the results come from? Where is the indicator and others who have taken it?
    Are you from Missouri? Missouri is know as the "Show Me State." Ha! I am as much of a stickler for credible evidence as you, very funny!

  5. #75
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Ha ha, not from Missouri but I was not going to just take it as fact without knowing how the user derived at the results or what test was used. I will say after thinking about it, Costrin could be right in his assertion that one can have a hight Ti usage as well as a high Fe usage, depending on whose theory you follow on hierarchy of functions.

    Myers-Briggs followers claim that Ti-Fe are in complete opposition based on Jung's theory. However I have yet to read where Jung goes so specific as to claim exact functions. He does say that two judging or perceiving functions cannot follow one in succession. Therefore if thinking is dominant, then feeling cannot follow close or be the next function. There has to be a perceiving function between them.

    Jung does seem to assert that we cannot introvert or extravert two functions simultaneously. So Beebe's theory may make more sense that the opposite of Ti may not be Fe, instead the opposite could equally be Fi since it is the other judging function with the same attitude. Thus opposites in this case may not mean exact opposites, but functional opposites. I remain ambivalent about whose theory is correct since they are both equally plausible. But I must admit again that Costrin could be correct. Yet I will remain suspect to what you provide since it cannot be verified by whomever Black Cat is and the instument used to get the results.

  6. #76
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    If it helps feel free to look in my albums, that is my cognitive processes result. I always score like that too. Referring to this post- http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post566053

    It just goes to say that people aren't exactly alike each other... most everyone has different cognitive function use.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  7. #77
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halla74 View Post
    Are you from Missouri? Missouri is know as the "Show Me State." Ha! I am as much of a stickler for credible evidence as you, very funny!
    Eww... Missouri.

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    Yet I will remain suspect to what you provide since it cannot be verified by whomever Black Cat is and the instument used to get the results.
    http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/as...velop_old.html

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    If it helps feel free to look in my albums, that is my cognitive processes result. I always score like that too. Referring to this post- http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post566053

    It just goes to say that people aren't exactly alike each other... most everyone has different cognitive function use.
    So, does this satisfy you?
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  8. #78
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costrin View Post
    So, does this satisfy you?
    Sure it does. I took the instrument and marked all boxes, saying I used it often. Clearly my results were 100% of all functions across the board. The instrument is only as good as the person answering the questions is being honest are self aware. By now we know that if you take enough test, you can determine your outcome before completion of an instrument. Doesn't mean that I am a particular type, just that I am lying to myself. There are cognitive test that keep the results balanced. Are they correct in doing so, maybe not. I do know that Jung disagrees with your assertion declaring:
    This absolute sovereignty always belongs, empirically, to one function alone, and can belong only to one function, since the equally independent intervention of another function would necessarily yield a different orientation, which would at least partially contradict the first. But, since it is a vital condition for the conscious adaptation-process that constantly clear and unambiguous aims should be in evidence, the presence of a second function of equivalent power is naturally forbidden' This other function, therefore, can have only a secondary importance, a fact which is also established empirically. Its secondary importance consists in the fact that, in a given case, it is not valid in its own right, as is the primary function, as an absolutely reliable and decisive factor, but comes into play more as an auxiliary or complementary function. Naturally only those functions can appear as auxiliary whose nature is not opposed to the leading function. For instance, feeling can never act as the second function by the side of thinking, because its nature stands in too strong a contrast to thinking. Thinking, if it is to be real thinking and true to its own principle, must scrupulously exclude feeling. This, of course, does not exclude the fact that individuals certainly exist in whom thinking and feeling stand upon the same [p. 515] level, whereby both have equal motive power in con~sdousness. But, in such a case, there is also no question of a differentiated type, but merely of a relatively undeveloped thinking and feeling. Uniform consciousness and unconsciousness of functions is, therefore, a distinguishing mark of a primitive mentality.
    I stand by my conceded assertion that at least one of the feeling functions cannot be equal to introverted thinking. The one depends on whomever’s theory you prescribe to.

  9. #79
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Just to make clear on what I have attempted to say to Luke's inquiry from the begining yes you can adapt as we all do to our environment, but Jung’s deals with this contradiction in saying up front in saying that people who claim to completely change type is generally suffering some childhood trauma. Jung says:
    The relation between subject and object, considered biologically, is always a relation of adaptation, since every relation between subject and object presupposes mutually modifying effects from either side. These modifications constitute the adaptation. The typical attitudes to the object, therefore, are adaptation processes. Nature knows two fundamentally different ways of adaptation, which determine the further existence of the living organism the one is by increased fertility, accompanied by a relatively small degree of defensive power and individual conservation; the other is by individual equipment of manifold means of self-protection, coupled with a relatively insignificant fertility. This biological contrast seems not merely to be the analogue, but also the general foundation of our two psychological modes of adaptation, At this point a mere general indication must suffice; on the one hand, I need only point to the peculiarity of the extravert, which constantly urges him to spend and propagate himself in every way, and, on the other, to the tendency of the introvert to defend himself against external claims, to conserve himself from any expenditure of energy directly related to the object, thus consolidating for himself the most secure and impregnable position.

    The fact that often in their earliest years children display an unmistakable typical attitude forces us to assume that it cannot possibly be the struggle for existence, as it is generally understood, which constitutes the compelling factor in favour of a definite attitude. We might, however, demur, and indeed with cogency, that even the tiny infant, the very babe at the breast, has already an unconscious psychological adaptation to perform, inasmuch as the special character of the maternal influence leads to specific reactions in the child. This argument, though appealing to incontestable facts, has none the less to yield before the equally unarguable fact that two children of the same mother may at a very early age exhibit opposite types, without the smallest accompanying change in the attitude of the mother. Although nothing would induce me to underestimate the well-nigh incalculable importance of parental influence, this experience compels me to conclude that the decisive factor must be looked for in the disposition of the child. The fact that, in spite of the greatest possible similarity of external conditions, one child will assume this type while another that, must, of course, in the last resort he ascribed to individual disposition. Naturally in saying this I only refer to those cases which occur under normal conditions. Under abnormal conditions, i.e. when there is an extreme and, therefore, abnormal attitude in the mother, the children can also be coerced into a relatively similar attitude; but this entails a violation of their individual disposition, which quite possibly would have assumed another type if no abnormal and disturbing external influence had intervened. As a rule, whenever such a falsification of type takes place as a result of external [p. 416] influence, the individual becomes neurotic later, and a cur can successfully be sought only in a development of that attitude which corresponds with the individual's natural way.

    As regards the particular disposition, I know not what to say, except that there are clearly individuals who have either a greater readiness and capacity for one way, or for whom it is more congenial to adapt to that way rather than the other. In the last analysis it may well be that physiological causes, inaccessible to our knowledge, play a part in this. That this may be the case seems to me not improbable, in view of one's experience that a reversal of type often proves exceedingly harmful to the physiological well-being of the organism, often provoking an acute state of exhaustion.

  10. #80
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    Sure it does. I took the instrument and marked all boxes, saying I used it often. Clearly my results were 100% of all functions across the board. The instrument is only as good as the person answering the questions is being honest are self aware. By now we know that if you take enough test, you can determine your outcome before completion of an instrument. Doesn't mean that I am a particular type, just that I am lying to myself. There are cognitive test that keep the results balanced. Are they correct in doing so, maybe not.
    Duh...? So then are you asserting that BlackCat was either lying or mistaken?

    I do know that Jung disagrees with your assertion declaring:

    I stand by my conceded assertion that at least one of the feeling functions cannot be equal to introverted thinking. The one depends on whomever’s theory you prescribe to.
    From that passage I see that Jung is saying that you can only have one dominant function. I never disagreed with that.

    I disagreed with your assertion that the functions were zero sum. That increasing one function decreased it's opposite:

    Quote Originally Posted by "?" View Post
    A little hint, when you test cognitively the greater one function, the lesser it's counterpart, i.e. more Ti=less Fe, more Se=less Ni, etc.
    You are the one who made this assertion, therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove that this is the case.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

Similar Threads

  1. [ESTP] An ESTP broke off all contact with me. That type doesn't change their minds, right?
    By NancyD in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-29-2017, 03:59 AM
  2. [ESTP] Breaking through to an ESTP
    By JustHer in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 12-11-2009, 08:30 PM
  3. [ESTP] An ESTP thread!
    By stellar renegade in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-25-2009, 04:54 AM
  4. [ESTP] How to get an ESTP to care
    By Hunni518 in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 09-18-2009, 11:15 AM
  5. [ESTP] Ask an ESTP... my brother! (boring anecdote)
    By maliafee in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-27-2009, 03:37 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