When I begin studying type years ago, I started with PUM II. After reading about temperament, I was not satisfied, so purchased books by Otto Kroeger, and Paul and Barbara Teiger who based their theories on dichotomies. I learned that there were type functions, so became interested in Jung's defintions, as well as Myers-Briggs and her followers. Once I had a good understanding of cognitive functions, Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi were able to put it all together for me in their revision of temperaments, cognitive functions and introducing interaction styles.
Since learning about type functions, and furthering my studies of the system9s), I find referencing to dichotomies in making comparative analyses, quite rudimentary.
QUESTIONS FOR THE FORUM:
1) When making comparisons, is there any specific reason that you generalize (ie, S/N, T/F, etc.) by utilizing dichotomies instead of cognitive functions?
2) Are you aware that you make generalizations, when most of you are learned in cognitive functions?
3) If you do it on the forum, are you just as capable of generalizing IRL by stereotyping races, ethnic groups, gender biases, etc?
I don't ask these questions in an attempt to be facetious. I am unsure whether some of you are aware of generalizations being made.
I have my theories, after posting at the forums for some time, and can say that it is done equally at the entp.org forum:
* Either the usage of Ne inables you to learn cognitive functions, in lieu of constantly reading into the language; or
* You read only enough to get the basics before going off on tangents and creating theories.