User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: entp or enfp

  1. #11
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Yea...I'm more ENTP...I really felt the need to doubt that.

    As for the X thing, it can be quite confusing. I believe that there are people with 50%-50% T/F because this is a very possible variation. It can't ALWAYS be one dominant all the time. I believe that there are exceptions, because they are possible.

    But then again, you can never know for sure till you experiment.

  2. #12
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady X View Post
    yeah...i gotta agree. according to the functions test i use ni and fe too...and se actually a bit but i don't prefer it...it is not default mode....i also relate a lot to the entp profile...i would almost consider myself more of an idea or inventor person than an advocate...but i'm clearly an enfp.

    100% perceiving??What?! Didn't think that was possible)

  3. #13

    Default

    Read lots of profiles, chat to lots of other people of the types, see where you fit. You are right that you won't necessarily fit a type description. This is normal. MBTi does not completely describe a person and the letters are not true dichotomies, but there is normally a description which you fit slightly more. If you fit two, then put an x in (ENxP) and maybe look at career paths that overlap both.

    I've questioned which of these two types I was also, because I work in physics and have always been a strong logical/mathematical type. I found the point that decides T/F for me is my motive when I take a stand. Think about what really spurs you into action, not the time when it's interesting, but when you feel a duty almost.

    p.s. oops, I didn't realise there was a first page . Did I mention super attention to detail?
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  4. #14
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by guesswho View Post
    Yea...I'm more ENTP...I really felt the need to doubt that.

    As for the X thing, it can be quite confusing. I believe that there are people with 50%-50% T/F because this is a very possible variation. It can't ALWAYS be one dominant all the time. I believe that there are exceptions, because they are possible.

    But then again, you can never know for sure till you experiment.
    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    Read lots of profiles, chat to lots of other people of the types, see where you fit. You are right that you won't necessarily fit a type description. This is normal. MBTi does not completely describe a person and the letters are not true dichotomies, but there is normally a description which you fit slightly more. If you fit two, then put an x in (ENxP) and maybe look at career paths that overlap both.

    I've questioned which of these two types I was also, because I work in physics and have always been a strong logical/mathematical type. I found the point that decides T/F for me is my motive when I take a stand. Think about what really spurs you into action, not the time when it's interesting, but when you feel a duty almost.
    The grand oversimplification simple MBTI popularizes.....

    I recommend learning about the Cognitive Functions---the origin of these "TNSFJP" you speak of.

  5. #15
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    The grand oversimplification simple MBTI popularizes.....

    I recommend learning about the Cognitive Functions---the origin of these "TNSFJP" you speak of.
    +1

    Hey guys, guess what! I'm an XXXX because I use all the functions equally! Yay!

    But yeah, OP sounds much more ENTP than ENFP, based on first glance. I guess he's come to that conclusion already though.

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    The grand oversimplification simple MBTI popularizes.....
    I saw I got quoted. Please clarify what this has to do with my post?

    I agree. Cognitive functions can be quite beneficial when understanding the desciptions of types and methods of thinking. But cognitive functions in no way remove the problem that MBTi uses sets of two letters which a person is not necessarily on one side of. They don't always map directly to type descriptions either as type is a best fit thing, not necessarily something inherited directly from the functions. I'm guessing the reason for this is that MBTi is used for career choices, so a best fit description of the personality is more beneficial than a theoretically derived type based on Jungian functions.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  7. #17
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    I saw I got quoted. Please clarify what this has to do with my post?
    You ended with MBTI and I believe that to be a cause for inaccuracy.

    Read lots of profiles, chat to lots of other people of the types, see where you fit. You are right that you won't necessarily fit a type description. This is normal. MBTi does not completely describe a person and the letters are not true dichotomies, but there is normally a description which you fit slightly more. If you fit two, then put an x in (ENxP) and maybe look at career paths that overlap both.
    I believe this is insufficient. Cognitive Functions are worth it.

    Cognitive functions can be quite beneficial when understanding the desciptions of types and methods of thinking.
    There are no "descriptions of types", there are only cognitive functions. Type descriptions are tendencies. Tendencies are indirectly related to "methods of thinking", which is presumably known as cognitive functions.

    Thus, when one wants to "know" personality in Jungian terms, one must obligatorily acknowledge that Type descriptions have an indirect relationship with type. They do not define type.

    X = Y/Z wherein X = Reality, Y = Type, and Z = Nurture.

    Y != X.


    But cognitive functions in no way remove the problem that MBTi uses sets of two letters which a person is not necessarily on one side of.
    ????

    The original theory inductively pronounces that we must have temperaments(natural inclination). Inclination pronounces that every human must be in one side or the other. Hence, there is a "Hierarchy of Functions." Arguing that there are "special X" people is either the result of ignorance of MBTI or a new theory that suggests either the absolute, "there is no pattern in personality", or the idea that the patterns must consist of more than 16 personality types. In most cases, the former.

    In other words, If I'm understanding you correctly, my answer is: this problem is an illusion and is not the main fault of MBTI.


    They don't always map directly to type descriptions either as type is a best fit thing, not necessarily something inherited directly from the functions.
    Yes. Type Descriptions exist for simplification. Therefore, unwise to significantly rely on.

    I'm guessing the reason for this is that MBTi is used for career choices, so a best fit description of the personality is more beneficial than a theoretically derived type based on Jungian functions.
    It serves as a medium of misunderstanding.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    You ended with MBTI and I believe that to be a cause for inaccuracy.
    Agree with this. MBTi is not the be all and end all of anything, but neither was my post. I was just offering one or two suggestions and throwing out some anecdotal stuff from what I'd done. The OP was wondering about MBTi, so that was my focus.


    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    I believe this is insufficient. Cognitive Functions are worth it.
    As above, why are omissions in a single post of a thread relevant. Can I chat and offer a little or is there a law which enforces complete descriptions of everything at all times?

    Cognitive functions, like MBTi, have something to add to a persons understanding, but are also a distortion of it (IMO). No method of typology is superior to in depth study of one's self, and inserting self understanding into the structure of any typological theory would probably be detrimental both to one's objectivity and scientific approach.


    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    There are no "descriptions of types", there are only cognitive functions. Type descriptions are tendencies. Tendencies are indirectly related to "methods of thinking", which is presumably known as cognitive functions.

    Thus, when one wants to "know" personality in Jungian terms, one must obligatorily acknowledge that Type descriptions have an indirect relationship with type. They do not define type.
    See plural. If you read enough descriptions and see enough members of a type you gain some understanding of which traits are persistent in the bigger picture. It is not the best method, but it can give a person a start, where theory can often be difficult to translate to an understanding of what one with those traits is really like. (see half the threads on TC)


    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    X = Y/Z wherein X = Reality, Y = Type, and Z = Nurture.

    Y != X.
    I disagree that X=Y/Z, so the rest is irrelevant. There is little to no evidence that type can predict anything in reality, let alone reality itself.


    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    The original theory inductively pronounces that we must have temperaments(natural inclination). Inclination pronounces that every human must be in one side or the other. Hence, there is a "Hierarchy of Functions." Arguing that there are "special X" people is either the result of ignorance of MBTI or a new theory that suggests either the absolute, "there is no pattern in personality", or the idea that the patterns must consist of more than 16 personality types. In most cases, the former.
    Believe it or not most people are around that divide in T/F etc. not at the extremes. This is a major critism of MBTi. In this sense the x which I've seen used quite a bit, whether it was in the original or not, seems to serve a purpose in that it increases the accuracy of the description. I know it is inconsistent with functions, but so are most people beyond the secondary function. Once a boat has enough leaks, it's pointless being anal about one or two.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    In other words, If I'm understanding you correctly, my answer is: this problem is an illusion and is not the main fault of MBTI.
    Maybe. I was annoyed that your first assumption was ignorance rather than looking at different understanding of concepts or looking for joint enlightenment. Really that was the only reason I responded. If I'm being totally stupid I like to learn something from it to replace the stupidness with. I don't really mind losing the arguement if you teach me something new. If it's just how to stick to the rules which I've learn and unlearnt a million times, then I'm normally not sticking to them for a reason.

    p.s. thanks for the more detailed reply.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    Yes. Type Descriptions exist for simplification. Therefore, unwise to significantly rely on.


    It serves as a medium of misunderstanding.
    Already covered.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  9. #19
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    Agree with this. MBTi is not the be all and end all of anything, but neither was my post. I was just offering one or two suggestions and throwing out some anecdotal stuff from what I'd done. The OP was wondering about MBTi, so that was my focus.

    As above, why are omissions in a single post of a thread relevant. Can I chat and offer a little or is there a law which enforces complete descriptions of everything at all times?
    Indeed. Perhaps I should not have worked on this basis. Either way, there is still the "X" possibility, you incorrectly advised.

    Cognitive functions, like MBTi, have something to add to a persons understanding, but are also a distortion of it (IMO). No method of typology is superior to in depth study of one's self, and inserting self understanding into the structure of any typological theory would probably be detrimental both to one's objectivity and scientific approach.
    Perhaps.


    See plural. If you read enough descriptions and see enough members of a type you gain some understanding of which traits are persistent in the bigger picture. It is not the best method, but it can give a person a start, where theory can often be difficult to translate to an understanding of what one with those traits is really like. (see half the threads on TC)
    Indeed.


    I disagree that X=Y/Z, so the rest is irrelevant. There is little to no evidence that type can predict anything in reality, let alone reality itself.
    I disagree. Temperament plays a significant role in decisions and behaviors.


    Believe it or not most people are around that divide in T/F etc. not at the extremes. This is a major critism of MBTi.
    This is not "criticism" because Cognitive Functions is included in MBTI[not the simple one]. This "equilibrium" is expected and within the calculation.

    In this sense the x which I've seen used quite a bit, whether it was in the original or not, seems to serve a purpose in that it increases the accuracy of the description.
    In what way?

    I know it is inconsistent with functions, but so are most people beyond the secondary function. Once a boat has enough leaks, it's pointless being anal about one or two.
    I do not understand the bolded parts. Most people in the secondary function are inconsistent?

    Maybe. I was annoyed that your first assumption was ignorance rather than looking at different understanding of concepts or looking for joint enlightenment. Really that was the only reason I responded. If I'm being totally stupid I like to learn something from it to replace the stupidness with. I don't really mind losing the arguement if you teach me something new. If it's just how to stick to the rules which I've learn and unlearnt a million times, then I'm normally not sticking to them for a reason.
    I actually still believe in your ignorance.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    I disagree. Temperament plays a significant role in decisions and behaviors.
    I have a problem with this statement because it suggests that personality has a dependence on temperament, when temperament is a tool developed to try to understand personality. You've assumed that a theory is a reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    This is not "criticism" because Cognitive Functions is included in MBTI[not the simple one]. This "equilibrium" is expected and within the calculation.
    Yes, but the suggestion that a person is clearly one or the other doesn't really fit with this distribution. It more suggests people tend to be a mix.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    In what way?
    In that assuming one is part of the extreme and searching for careers in the area of only one type is less satisfactory for some people than looking at careers that overlap the two types they have covered with the X.


    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    I do not understand the bolded parts. Most people in the secondary function are inconsistent?
    Beyond the secondary function, ie. tertiary onward, people don't fit the regular option for a type as often. There are 16 types, which account for the possible permutations of the first two functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    I actually still believe in your ignorance.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

Similar Threads

  1. Am I ENTP or ENFP?
    By Tzatziki in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 03-09-2010, 04:32 PM
  2. I hate it when people do this. ENTP or ENFP?
    By BlahBlahNounBlah in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 12:33 PM
  3. Argh...ENTP or ENFP?
    By Synthetic Darkness in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-30-2009, 07:44 AM
  4. Mi novio: ENTP or ENFP?
    By ZiL in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-23-2009, 10:28 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Am I an ENTP or ENFP?
    By HeraldofHope in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-18-2008, 08:08 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