Case in point, little if anything regarding introversion and extroversion survives in the MBTI portraits of types. Where Myers-Briggs considered I/E to be a behavior, Jung considered it to be an attitude. Much could be deduced about behaviors resulting from attitudes, but social psychologists have known for decades (and studies prove it) that attitudes do not necessarily correspond with behaviors. The science of social psychology is practically based on this fact.
The relevant part of this quote comes in the first sentence, "General attitudes are poor predictors of behaviour e.g., attitude to environment." That is, introversion and extroversion, as general attitudes, are poor predictors of behavior. (It does not mean attitude toward environmentalism or ecology...)Can Attitudes Predict Behaviour?
General attitudes are poor predictors of behaviour e.g., attitude to environment
However, attitudes are likely to predict behaviour when:
The attitude and behaviour are specific
Environmental reinforcement matches attitude
Important others share the same attitude
Can Attitudes Predict Behaviour?
...attitudes are likely to predict behaviour when:
Attitudes are implicit (unconscious)
Attitudes are strong
Attitude has developed from personal experience
A difference in general attitude toward one's environment can be visualized through a simple question: When you lose something such as the TV remote, do you immediately: A. ask someone if they've seen it (assuming anybody is around to ask), or B. start looking for it yourself and only ask someone more or less as a last resort?
True, introverts are more "self-sufficient" in the latter sense. However, one cannot predict, with certainty, on any given occasion of losing something whether or not the introvert or extrovert is going to act out with either A (ask someone immediately, if possible) or B (start hunting around without asking for help).
So the insertion of introverted and extroverted behaviors into the MBTI was not based on any kind of scientific fact or study, when there is supposedly some kind of root or origin with Jungian typology regarding general attitude. It is simply original Myers-Briggs typology granted, without warrant, the intellectual reputation and dignity of Jung's great theory of types by mashing it together into one homogeneous blend of theories.
I have nothing against VagrantFarce's theory of communication styles quoted above. But it is reminiscent of some superficial, pre-Jungian idea Myers and Briggs may have come up with before they met up with Jungian typology. And as usual it is being given the respectability, not only of Jung, but of the MBTI which has gained much popular (although not scientific) credibility since it originated around 1940.
05-17-2011, 10:47 PM #151"But you forget that there is one value that is greater than all others: human freedom. Because no matter how perfectly you set the world up for humanity, they will always rebel simply to exert their own selves. You cannot win."
09-29-2011, 03:14 PM #152
I am sure that there are plenty of self-help w/ types on the internet. This particular one seems very helpful to me, and if you read the all of the "preferences" she has given, they seem to be the same descripts as MBTI only written slightly different. People are always saying about ALL the personality tests that they can't choose which b/c they do both! Well, obviously if you understand any personality test you will understand that we all behave using all of the functions. The difference is what you prefer MOST of the time! That means, that while I may be an introvert, I may not be as introverted as someone else whom may use introversion more of the time than I do. That doesn't mean that I don't prefer it, it just means that I just don't USE it as often as someone else. Therefore, I may be INTP, BUT that doesn't mean I am like EVERY OTHER INTP. Not at all, b/c I am a HUMAN BEING. Aren't we supposed to be like snowflakes? I may have some things in common w/ other INTP's (and I do), BUT that doesn't mean we are identical. It simply means we prefer the same preferences.
In conclusion, if you are getting pissed off or attacking someone b/c you don't understand personality preferences, calm down, read more, and try to understand before just denying that any of this is valid...
(note...I can be VERY directive when frustrated...after trying to "ask nicely" so many times, I get pissed)
11-13-2011, 09:10 PM #153SingSmileShineGuest
Yup. Still an ENFP. Thank you! That was very interesting. (:
05-21-2012, 04:58 AM #154
- Join Date
- May 2012
- 9w1 sx
INTJ? i thought i was infp.. more confused now :S
07-19-2012, 07:06 PM #155
08-01-2012, 04:22 PM #156
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
maybe i should reconsider my type"I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. "
10-14-2012, 05:11 AM #157
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
The only one Informing/Responding and Abstract/Pragmatic had in common were INTP.
02-26-2013, 10:35 PM #158
Confirms xNTP, but doesn't help much with the I/E. Equally Get-things-going and Behind-the-scenes I think. Definitely Abstract, and probably Pragmatic because my first instinct is definitely to act autonomously and independently. I keep the group in mind, but it's not my primary focus. I like group work because 1) it lessens my work load, 2) I encounter new ideas, 3) I get to socialize; but it always makes me feel a bit nervous because I feel bound by obligations I don't entirely understand.http://badges.mypersonality.info/badge/0/24/244970.png
6w5, 4w3, 1w9 (probably)
03-04-2013, 02:15 PM #159
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
I believe that this validates me being a definite INFP.
03-05-2013, 04:53 AM #160
Hmph. This somehow transformed me into an ENTP. I'm positive that I'm an Introvert.
[MBTItm] Am I INFJ or INTJ? A Quick GuideBy CuriousFeeling in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)Replies: 15Last Post: 11-11-2015, 01:20 AM
By Jaguar in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 19Last Post: 11-12-2010, 02:05 PM