• 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.

Please help type me.

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
Yet NF and SJ are so clearly dichotomized as to have nothing in common to be confused about.

But that's using keirsey temperaments, which are very separate from MBTI, or JCF.

What he talks about could most readily be defined as social roles and persona, it has nothing to do with the whole of personality or cognition.

As I said in my thread on his work, his definitions are so concrete and absolute that they would be difficult to apply to people as individuals.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Basically im unsure of my understanding of the functions. I dont really relate to any individual type description, (although this is not where my perception of description's faults comes from), this means I often turn for outside help which so far is divided on Ni and Si much as I am.

I doesn't help that people often misunderstand Si and sensing in general.

I'm saying you should look at this from a different angle instead of focusing on functions all the time. I find them equally confusing so I have mostly abandoned them.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
But that's using keirsey temperaments, which are very separate from MBTI, or JCF.

What he talks about could most readily be defined as social roles and persona, it has nothing to do with the whole of personality or cognition.

As I said in my thread on his work, his definitions are so concrete and absolute that they would be difficult to apply to people as individuals.

Well good. I see no problem with concrete and absolute. It seems that the problem has been the very lack of concrete and absolute.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The MBTI tries to pin me down to ONE TYPE. That seems a bit restrictive. And yet I have chosen INTP although it doesn't define who I am.

They are all restrictive and absolute. But they could stand to be a bit more concrete sometimes.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I'm saying you should look at this from a different angle instead of focusing on functions all the time. I find them equally confusing so I have mostly abandoned them.

Ya I am wearing your same shoes, where I act most like INTP, but based on functions could get typed ISTP or INTJ, but INTP balances those anyway. Jung cognitive functions is a bullshit theory lol.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
Ya I am wearing your same shoes, where I act most like INTP, but based on functions could get typed ISTP or INTJ, but INTP balances those anyway. Jung cognitive functions is a bullshit theory lol.

So would you say outward behaviour is better then?

Well good. I see no problem with concrete and absolute. It seems that the problem has been the very lack of concrete and absolute.

Normally id agree with you because that's how I like things, but unfortunately people themselves are not concrete or absolute, even the most clearly defined person in the world is filled to the brim with contradictions and variables.

And people do, (for want of a better word), change all the time, maybe not at the core of who they are, but they do adopt persona's and different behaviours for different situations. How does one differentiate between the most re-occuring to those that are just occasional?
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
So would you say outward behaviour is better then?

I'll put in my 2 cents here and say that I would look at outward behavior as the best rule of thumb because that's all we have with other people. Of course it helps if they reveal some things to you. But you can't deny it's obvious concreteness in opposition to vaguely defined things in the mind.

Normally id agree with you because that's how I like things, but unfortunately people themselves are not concrete or absolute, even the most clearly defined person in the world is filled to the brim with contradictions and variables.

And people do, (for want of a better word), change all the time, maybe not at the core of who they are, but they do adopt persona's and different behaviours for different situations. How does one differentiate between the most re-occuring to those that are just occasional?

Preferences. Self-knowledge.

Take this "test question" as an example.

Rate on a scale from 1 - 7, with 7 being the most: "I prefer the company of others to being alone."

I'm thinking that sometimes I like the company of others. It all depends. And I have social skills which I have developed over the years. But in truth, I don't like to be around people much, and I tire of it quickly. Socializing takes too much energy and time. So I'll say 3.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I'll put in my 2 cents here and say that I would look at outward behavior as the best rule of thumb because that's all we have with other people. Of course it helps if they reveal some things to you. But you can't deny it's obvious concreteness in opposition to vaguely defined things in the mind.

This is true to an extent, but whatever else personality might be, it is intangible. How do you apply concreteness to intangibility? Of course this makes MBTI and Jung in general sound like a mere belief, which perhaps it is.

Preferences. Self-knowledge.

Take this "test question" as an example.

Rate on a scale from 1 - 7, with 7 being the most: "I prefer the company of others to being alone."

I'm thinking that sometimes I like the company of others. It all depends. And I have social skills which I have developed over the years. But in truth, I don't like to be around people much, and I tire of it quickly. Socializing takes too much energy and time. So I'll say 3.

See now to me, I have no idea how someone could quantify that, I dont wish to be difficult and I respect that you can quantify it, but I would constantly be going over that, trying to get a 'feel' if you will for what seemed best. Locking it down into numbers makes little sense to me, it isn't like measuring cooking ingredients.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This is true to an extent, but whatever else personality might be, it is intangible. How do you apply concreteness to intangibility? Of course this makes MBTI and Jung in general sound like a mere belief, which perhaps it is.



See now to me, I have no idea how someone could quantify that, I dont wish to be difficult and I respect that you can quantify it, but I would constantly be going over that, trying to get a 'feel' if you will for what seemed best. Locking it down into numbers makes little sense to me, it isn't like measuring cooking ingredients.

The truth of it all doesn't matter; what the system can do for you is what matters.

I can tell you don't like absolutes, but these personality system authors are big on declaring their systems to be the Truth. Look at Riso, my all-time favorite. He is utterly dogmatic, so convinced of his system's superiority that he has forced other systems (such as the 7 deadly sins of his old church) to conform to its rules, even if he has to invent 2 more deadly sins to make it add up to the magic number 9. And yet identifying myself as a 4 was the most life-changing thing that I've done for myself, even though a month later I decided I was actually a 5w4.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
The truth of it all doesn't matter; what the system can do for you is what matters.

I can tell you don't like absolutes, but these personality system authors are big on declaring their systems to be the Truth. Look at Riso, my all-time favorite. He is utterly dogmatic, so convinced of his system's superiority that he has forced other systems (such as the 7 deadly sins of his old church) to conform to its rules, even if he has to invent 2 more deadly sins to make it add up to the magic number 9. And yet identifying myself as a 4 was the most life-changing thing that I've done for myself, even though a month later I decided I was actually a 5w4.

Well said actually. Especially the bolded.

This is something ive tried to think of myself, but maybe it just isn't that beneficial for me? Afterall im not very good at putting theories into practice, in terms of helping my relations towards others.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well said actually. Especially the bolded.

This is something ive tried to think of myself, but maybe it just isn't that beneficial for me? Afterall im not very good at putting theories into practice, in terms of helping my relations towards others.

I'm not either. These books assume we've all gone and determined our types professionally, and now we're applying this knowledge in our relationships. But nothing could be farther from the truth. The only typology help I've gotten in a relationship was put out by the APA, none of this stuff we talk about here.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Type yourself by behavior, not functions, to answer your question, but that is only my opinion.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Type yourself by behavior, not functions, to answer your question, but that is only my opinion.

I agree, because in all the time I've been here, I haven't seen anything good come from typing by functions. But it has made for a lot of confused discussion.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I agree, because in all the time I've been here, I haven't seen anything good come from typing by functions. But it has made for a lot of confused discussion.

All that is true, and emphatically acknowledged by Jung—One can never give a description of a type, no matter how complete, that would apply to more than one individual, despite the fact that in some ways it aptly characterizes thousands of others." - Daryl Sharp

What would your opinion be on this quote?
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
All that is true, and emphatically acknowledged by Jung—One can never give a description of a type, no matter how complete, that would apply to more than one individual, despite the fact that in some ways it aptly characterizes thousands of others." - Daryl Sharp

What would your opinion be on this quote?

Daryl is a hardcore skeptic.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'll go on to explain that with another quote from Daryl's book:

'Whether Jung's model is "true" or not - objectively true - is a moot point. Indeed, is anything ever "objectively" true?'

Hmmm, gee I don't know. Is it true that Daryl Sharp wrote a book. Is it "objectively" true that Daryl Sharp wrote a book?
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I'll go on to explain that with another quote from Daryl's book:

'Whether Jung's model is "true" or not - objectively true - is a moot point. Indeed, is anything ever "objectively" true?'

Hmmm, gee I don't know. Is it true that Daryl Sharp wrote a book. Is it "objectively" true that Daryl Sharp wrote a book?

Hah! Mind you ive never read the book it was merely a quote someone mentioned to me, although I dont necessarily agree with it.

Although I suspect that the context of that line is obvious.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Hah! Mind you ive never read the book it was merely a quote someone mentioned to me, although I dont necessarily agree with it.

Although I suspect that the context that that line is obvious.

The context OF that line? Which line?
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
*EDIT* Double posted somehow, dont know how considering I only clicked once.
 
Top