• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[MBTI General] Why do some type forums have the two middle letters but this one has second and last?

mooseantlers

Knobgoblin
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
322
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9
Why do some type forums have the two middle letters but this one has second and last?
 

Tyrinth

...
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
1,154
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
649
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
.
 
Last edited:

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Intuitive people focus on mental processes which are thinkings and feelings, whereas sensors focus on physical phenomena which is more action and decision oriented like perceiving and judging is my idea.
NT= Abstract Utilitarian
NF = Abstract Cooperator
SJ = Concrete Cooperator
SP = Concrete Utilitarian
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
It's Keirsey's fault.

If we followed Jung, we would actually be divided into SPs, SJs, NPs, and NJs. (Se/Si/Ne/Ni).

However, Keirsey felt that while P and J make a big huge wild difference between the sensing types, with the intuitives the bigger difference is between T and F.

If you read Please Understand Me II it will explain all that.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
It's Keirsey's fault.

If we followed Jung, we would actually be divided into SPs, SJs, NPs, and NJs. (Se/Si/Ne/Ni).

However, Keirsey felt that while P and J make a big huge wild difference between the sensing types, with the intuitives the bigger difference is between T and F.

If you read Please Understand Me II it will explain all that.

Keirsey even went so far as to say ISFPs and ISTPs shouldn't even be real types and aren't defined by the dominant function. He was that hung up on everyone falling into a strict hedonist/"in constant action" kind of category.

Jungians think ISTPs are just like INTPs with only minor differences, but this is based on the ISTPs as "introverted thinking" types". INTPs are logicians, philologists, and architects in the way they think, but ISTPs are completely disinterested in such pursuits.

"Uncomplicated in motivations."

I think it's only partly true. Devil's in the details.. But he's an INTP. The model of reality is more important than any actual reality set before him. Kind of like those guys who read PUA books.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,145
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's Keirsey's fault.

If we followed Jung, we would actually be divided into SPs, SJs, NPs, and NJs. (Se/Si/Ne/Ni).

However, Keirsey felt that while P and J make a big huge wild difference between the sensing types, with the intuitives the bigger difference is between T and F.

well, it's not a crazy idea per se.

For concretes, who operate in and/or are focused on the tangible external world, openness/closure in the external world plays a huge role.

For intuitives, who are operating/concerned more with the connections between things rather than the things themselves, the TYPE of connection (which is typically woven of either T or F priorities) typically has value in considering.

However, I think these are just various frameworks/ways of looking at things. There is some value in doing the standard SJ/NJ/SP/NP breakdown as well, or the NF/NT/SF/ST breakdown. New things can be learned from how we categorize the data.

Keirsey even went so far as to say ISFPs and ISTPs shouldn't even be real types and aren't defined by the dominant function. He was that hung up on everyone falling into a strict hedonist/"in constant action" kind of category.

Where did he say that, exactly?

Jungians think ISTPs are just like INTPs with only minor differences, but this is based on the ISTPs as "introverted thinking" types". INTPs are logicians, philologists, and architects in the way they think, but ISTPs are completely disinterested in such pursuits.

I find it kind of ironic how different INTP and ISTP is from each other, despite being so close in some ways. The logic rules are the same, but the assumptions and priorities of data being examined can be so different that very different results can be achieved (one of the most typical being how ISTP often sees INTP as just pissing away time on meaningless distinctions that the INTP considers to be of prime importance, etc).
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Where did he say that, exactly?

I was going to give a page number (203), but it's in the first Keirsey/Bates version. I have the second edition too and it's just Keirsey and revised. I guess that's good to know.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,145
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I was going to give a page number (203), but it's in the first Keirsey/Bates version. I have the second edition too and it's just Keirsey and revised. I guess that's good to know.

Okay, thanks. I really had not seen that and was curious about where you read it.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Keirsey based it on the ancient four temperaments, via Kretschmer's character styles (depressive, hypomanic, anesthetic and hyperesthetic), and they happened to map onto the S + J/P and N + T/F groups.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I find it kind of ironic how different INTP and ISTP is from each other, despite being so close in some ways. The logic rules are the same, but the assumptions and priorities of data being examined can be so different that very different results can be achieved (one of the most typical being how ISTP often sees INTP as just pissing away time on meaningless distinctions that the INTP considers to be of prime importance, etc).[/QUOTE]

Last I heard it's the INTPs who get annoyed when ISTPs nitpick with minor details that are puzzle pieces constructing the big picture lol.
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Socionics theory groups the temperaments as IJ, IP, EJ and EP.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Last I heard it's the INTPs who get annoyed when ISTPs nitpick with minor details that are puzzle pieces constructing the big picture lol.

No I think Se types get annoyed with INTPs nitpicking very subtle points with Ti/Si.

It drives me batty. I got into a debate/argument with an INTP on another forum, I told him he was a huge bore and time-waster.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Last I heard it's the INTPs who get annoyed when ISTPs nitpick with minor details that are puzzle pieces constructing the big picture lol.

Although I do agree that sensing types might be more likely to do what an INTP might see as wasting time, by informing every detail of their day, or every detail of a social drama.

I've even annoyed an ISTJ by telling him every detail of not only eating, but what I ate. Stuff like that. I've also had people say, "no I don't want to know what's going on." LMAO.
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
No I think Se types get annoyed with INTPs nitpicking very subtle points with Ti/Si.

It drives me batty. I got into a debate/argument with an INTP on another forum, I told him he was a huge bore and time-waster.

I think it has more to do with the fact that you (and I) are an Fi/Te user. we're like "get to the point, we get the idea" and they want to spend time analyzing EVERY subtle detail and stubbornly stay there until it is perfect. most conversations are not a pre rehearsed sales presentation where every detail is taken into account. I wish Ti users would take into account the idea of general to specific. you have to focus on the main point/big picture before diving into details
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I think it has more to do with the fact that you (and I) are an Fi/Te user. we're like "get to the point, we get the idea" and they want to spend time analyzing EVERY subtle detail and stubbornly stay there until it is perfect. most conversations are not a pre rehearsed sales presentation where every detail is taken into account. I wish Ti users would take into account the idea of general to specific. you have to focus on the main point/big picture before diving into details

I think it's because of Ti/Si loops. It causes people to become pedantic, and the same thing doesn't happen in ISTPs because they use Ti with Se or Ni. INTPs tend to become pedantic and participate in hair-splitting sophistry, like if they realize they're wrong in principle, they'll try to prove you're wrong on some really minor point to protect their NT Rational egos of "being right."

ISFJs also have a version of this, but it expresses itself more outwardly, usually. In ISFJs I think it takes the form of a more nit-picky control that affects their environment or people around them instead of ideas. I associate ISFJ Si/Ti loops, for example, with the English teacher who takes points off of your grade, despite content, for things like misplaced commas.
 
Top