T9 I use questioning to uncover premises and logical thought patterns of others
-The next time someone makes a statement that seems illogical, ask questions until it does seem logical
-If something a person says is confusing, ask questions to clarify. Go deeper into the concept, challenge person's facts assumptions or logical connections
F6 I attempt to connect with other people's points of view in order to maintain relationships
-Look for areas of agreement. Show how you can modify your position to match their's.
-Gently correct in critiquing (e.g. "My experience is..." "Have you considered"?)
-In a conflict situation, look at what your values are and other person's values. Look for ones you both believe in, then talk about differences.
-Recall some people in your life with whom you have not had as much contact as you would like. Find out how to spend time together to reconnect
Clearly, that is the language of Thinking vs Feeling.
Of course there is no absolute "rule" that it is always like that, and let's not forget that each person whill have both judging functions in the primary range (though with the attitudes reversed).
But perhaps these definitions are not looking at when a value is violated. Most profiles and descriptions I see will give "basic descriptions" under normal circumstances, and stuff like "when a value is violated" (as well as shadows and such) are treated as "special circumstances". That is a basic description. It is not an exhaustive coverage of every aspect of the type under every circumstance."Accommodating:
When using the accommodating skills people handle differences of opinion by gently correcting, not by direct questioning. They place a premium on harmony, so they tend to find a way to let the other person's position stand rather than disagreeing. They believe compromises are more useful than disagreements."
Whoever wrote that must pretend to ignore that introverted feeling's stance on dissagreements is 'my way or the highway' if an important value is at stake. If an important value is not at stake, an introverted feeling type MIGHT be very accomadating OR they might criticize through extraverted thinking. OR a million other options. There are real behaviors that you can relate to type, but 'accomadating' vs. 'questioning' is not one of them.
Well, NP's with their Ne preference also have Si at the other end of the arm or spine, and that will be where the desire for "familiarity" comes from. Se types will probably have less of a need for familiarity. But then that is still an S/N difference, and all that was said was the FFM "Oppenness" corresponded to the perception area."Which? Let's look at all of those words:
appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience.
These can be found in S/N descriptions. It's about concreteness vs abstract.
a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behaviour.
These are found in J/P or Cooperative/Pragmatic descriptions
Energy, positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency to seek stimulation and the company of others.
These can be found in I/E descriptions
A tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others.
These can be found in T/F descriptions, and by implication, directing/informing (when you look at definitions of alternate labels such as "responsive" or "people-focus"). Again, don't look at that word "cooperative" here and assume that is the "other" dichotomy. Cooperative can refer to different aspects of behavior.
A tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability; sometimes called emotional instability.
These are the definitions of Comfort/Discomfort"
Bullshit! In the *visceral realm* (can't think of a better way to describe it) __NPs are cautious and conservative, and have a tendency to seek familiarity. When they do play sports they are focused and technically conservative (I was on a ski team in high school, and the improvisors were the daredevils, and could also ski a much greater VARIETY of slopes than I could... obviously!). __NPs have very little oppenness to new sensing experiences. No, the first of the five factors is not even about S/N.
Again, appreaciation of art is perception, and that would be covered in the "Openness" area. Everyone appreciates art, but some people's appreciation is concrete, some are abstract. It's still the same area being covered. They seem to be interpreting concrete focus as supicious of art, but then the FFM apparently does not differentiate between introverted and extraverted attitudes of the functions and recognize the spines and arms where each person uses both functions in one or the other attitude. Again, nobody said it matched perfectly. Still, the areas being covered (perception, judgment, etc) do correspond.I mean, c'mon! Everybody appreciates ART. How in the world does that have anything to do with any of the MBTI dichotomies?
That's not necessarily a "value judgment" there, though it may be phrased in a way that gives that appearance. Nothing is said about "better" That's perhaps your Fi projecting that. Though I'll grant you that the difference here is that FFM is apparently more like Enneagram and FIRO in having a bigger focus on the negative aspects of personality that MBTI, which I had always noticed focused almost purely on the positive. This is one thing that makes comparisons between MBTI with both FIRO and Enneagram so difficult. Likewise, Horney's scales (which the "directional theory of Enneagram" uses) and expanded Type A theory suggest "one healthy type out of four". These both use expressive-responsive type scales (similar to E/I-D/Inf) and conclude that only the "high" expressive and responsive (corresponding to a "Sanguine") are "healthy". They move "with" people, rather than "against" or "away". Likewise, Eysenck's "Neuroticism" in which only the Sanguine and Phlegmatic are considered low on Neuroticism. This is the last factor of FFM, and is imported into MBTI's Type Differentiation Indicator as "Comfort/Discomfort". In fact, the reason apparently C/D was suppressed was because the people working with Myers feared it was too negative.Thinking types and directing types are not suspicious and antagonistic. That reminds me, I told you before that FFM is irrelevant because each of the dichotomies contains an obvious value judgement about which side is the better one to be on. is 'suspicious and antagonistic' enough evidence for you?
Oh, and yes, Extraversion obviously DOES relate to E.I SOMEWHAT. INtrovert's don't have less posative emotions than extraverts.
So that doesn't mean there is no correspondence between the two systems. They are only looking at the same things from different perspectives. Directing indicates both "task-focus" (rather than people-focus) and [thus] "less responsive" (according to Berens), and antagonism and suspicion are the negative extremes of this. MBTI and KTT/BTT do not emphasize this as much, but the other instruments do.
And it is not a value judgment, because most of these theories that portray directives that way will also point out that if you want something done efficiently, the task-oriented person will more likely get the job done. People-oriented and/or extroverts will likely either get caught up in socializing, or allow themselves to be distracted or swayed by others. They are often tagged with "irresponsibility". That is the negative side of their personality. Unfortunately, some of the theories use terms that seem to favor one side of each scale. But properly understood, it is not really a value judgment against anyone, and the scales in the two systems are covering roughly the same areas of cognition and behavior.
So your first complaint is that these theories are without any sort of data; but then when the data is provided, you just dismiss it as "coincidence", "falsified", and "self-fulfilling prophecy". :rolli: Then how can we know any of this is true, then? Most of this stuff; the original MBTI included, are based on that sort of data. Oh, but then you keep repeating this other theory about some other factor, basically, that is supposed to be known from data (that is not even being given) plus personal experience.I don't give a shit what the results of the MBTI and FFM study were. It's obviously a coincidence and means nothing, and it's very easy to see how it could have been falsified. _SPs (very high on 'openness') are very likely to be mis-typed in the MBTI as having a preference for intuition. So the MBTI step II, through it's rediculous-and-untrue-to-the-reality-of-the-function-attitudes S/N 'facets', ends up mis-typing a big bunch of *high-open-ness* __S's as having a preference for intuition, and then also mis-types some of the more traditional N's as S's. Then that distortion shows up on the MBTI and FFM study. It's the perfect self-fullfilling prophecy.
Me, I'll stick to the 8 cognitive processes, thank-you-very-much.
The part about confidence is also easily backed up by information about the cognitive processes, and the qualities of the dominant function (and the other function-roles)... and by real life, if you arent' blind.
You might as well just say you don't like Step II or FFM because you just prefer Step I and leave it at that.