Funny. I have ISTP auntie that's a nurse and an ESFJ uncle (her husband) who co-owns and manages an earthmoving business. They're both pretty fantastic at their jobs too.SF-Nurses and Caregivers
ST-Truckers and Repairmen
I'll give it a go. This is a bit of ham-fisted attempt really, but it's not easy:
ST - practical, pragmatic, action-oriented people; possesses acuity of vision; prefer to speak and act directly, with minimal ambiguity; seeks to establish a functional environment; often irreverent about unworkable ideas.
SF - receptive, responsive, connection-oriented people; possesses acuity of impression; prefer to speak and act with mindfulness and appreciation; seek to establish agreeable and conducive environment.
I personally think these categories would be more accurate. Although both ESFP and ISTP still use Se and Ni, I can hardly imagine what would these 2 types really have in common on a deeper level of understanding.
I think this is a pretty good description considering you did it on the spot too. I wonder what it is SFs might be irreverent towards, along with NFs and NTs. This description seem to encompass all the qualities I associate with STs and SFs too.
Yeah, this is what I think too. I mean, although an ENFJ and I have completely different functional preference, I still would relate to them more than an INTP. I think the two middle letters cover a lot more ground than the 2nd and 4th.
Myers said:[The STs'] main interest focuses upon facts, because facts can be collected and verified directly by the senses. ... ST people approach their decisions regarding these facts by impersonal analysis, because of their trust in thinking, with its step-by-step logical process of reasoning from cause to effect, from premise to conclusion. In consequence, their personalities tend to be practical and matter-of-fact, and their best chances of success and satisfaction lie in fields that demand impersonal analysis of concrete facts, such as economics, law, surgery, business, accounting, production, and the handling of machines and materials.
Myers said:[The SFs] approach their decisions with personal warmth, because their feeling weighs how much things matter to themselves and others. They are more interested in facts about people than in facts about things and, therefore, they tend to be sociable and friendly. They are most likely to succeed and be satisfied in work where their personal warmth can be applied effectively to the immediate situation, as in pediatrics, nursing, teaching (especially elementary), social work, selling of tangibles, and service-with-a-smile jobs.
Really? Good.I think this is a pretty good description considering you did it on the spot too. I wonder what it is SFs might be irreverent towards, along with NFs and NTs. This description seem to encompass all the qualities I associate with STs and SFs too.
That's great. Thanks for that.Myers thought NT/NF/ST/SF was the most meaningful way to divide the types into four groups.
The second edition of the MBTI Manual (which she co-authored) described the STs as "the practical and matter-of-fact types"; and in Gifts Differing, Myers said:
That same edition of the Manual described SFs as "the sympathetic and friendly types"; and in Gifts Differing, Myers said:
Myers thought NT/NF/ST/SF was the most meaningful way to divide the types into four groups.
The second edition of the MBTI Manual (which she co-authored) described the STs as "the practical and matter-of-fact types"; and in Gifts Differing, Myers said:
That same edition of the Manual described SFs as "the sympathetic and friendly types"; and in Gifts Differing, Myers said:
Ah, very informative. Thanks for the info! never knew.
Do any STs/SFs wanna jump in?
[MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] [MENTION=13646]Haven[/MENTION] [MENTION=19948]Showbread[/MENTION] [MENTION=6109]Halla74[/MENTION] [MENTION=21822]Kyora[/MENTION] [MENTION=11928]Vetani[/MENTION]
Yeah I agree with this. I find 1st/2nd function groupings to be much more useful.I prefer grouping by dominant functions myself.
So:
ITP
ETJ
IFP
EFJ
ESP
ISJ
ENP
INJ
I know this doesn't solve or answer the temperament issue, and yes, I realize that some of the types which share dominant functions have very little in common temperamentally.
I'd rather they type via temperaments; i.e. EJ/EP/IP/IJ because they are more similar. An ISTP is going to be largely different from an ISTJ.
I prefer grouping by dominant functions myself.
So:
ITP
ETJ
IFP
EFJ
ESP
ISJ
ENP
INJ
I know this doesn't solve or answer the temperament issue, and yes, I realize that some of the types which share dominant functions have very little in common temperamentally.
Yeah I agree with this. I find 1st/2nd function groupings to be much more useful.
But then it's not as cool and organized as having the two letter groupings. haha
I get what you guys mean though. I'm sure [MENTION=20955]johnnyyukon[/MENTION] and I could go back and forth for ages with all the Ne. But definitely grouping by second function is very useful to (obviously I relate to ESFP a lot since I typed as it for a brief moment).
I do think SJ/SP/NJ/NP and ST/SF/NT/NF groupings are more useful and accessible to n00bs. It would be a terrible idea to throw function theory at people as soon as they take the test! And I think they all have their uses.But then it's not as cool and organized as having the two letter groupings. haha
I get what you guys mean though. I'm sure [MENTION=20955]johnnyyukon[/MENTION] and I could go back and forth for ages with all the Ne. But definitely grouping by second function is very useful to (obviously I relate to ESFP a lot since I typed as it for a brief moment).