• 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.

Hap's Theory of Dynamic Type

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Once you change the system to incorporate all this stuff, you're done. There's nothing more the system can do.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
ok, then go on

Too much for me to take in
 

Simplexity

New member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
1,741
MBTI Type
INTP
To dissonance.

I was thinking about your spectrum idea for each of the four individual "functions" and are you saying that if you are closer to 50% you are equally adept at both with a limiting factor in overall strength, or does it imply adept at both with no limiting factor in strength.

For example T N S F with valuations for each of the four functions.

Does 60/40 in Terms of T mean

Ti Te

or does it mean

Ti -----Te
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Yes of course, but you cant change a system again and again and again. Then it was flawed from the beginning.

Why do writers edit their work?

Because it was flawed from the beginning. If there's still an interesting idea or particularly good bit of prose, though, the story may be worth the editing. Just because something starts out flawed doesn't mean there was nothing good in it in the first place and that it cannot be fixed.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Why do writers edit their work?

Because it was flawed from the beginning. If there's still an interesting idea or particularly good bit of prose, though, the story may be worth the editing. Just because something starts out flawed doesn't mean there was nothing good in it in the first place and that it cannot be fixed.

Forgive me. I am an engineer. I like when thinks work. And after things did work. I do not like to change things. Flaw of my nature I guess
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
To dissonance.

I was thinking about your spectrum idea for each of the four individual "functions" and are you saying that if you are closer to 50% you are equally adept at both with a limiting factor in overall strength, or does it imply adept at both with no limiting factor in strength.

For example T N S F with valuations for each of the four functions.

Does 60/40 in Terms of T mean

Ti Te

or does it mean

Ti -----Te

Ah. Well I guess there have to be two variables attached to each function, one for amount of usage, one for introversion/extroversion value. Then maybe there should be an extra variable in the system for ratio of judging to perceiving.

With all those variables, you have all the information the system can carry.

Edit: I just realized I made that more complicated than it had to be...

Variables --
For Thinking - introversion/extroversion
For Feeling - introversion/extroversion
For Sensing - introversion/extroversion
For Intuiting - introversion/extroversion
For Judging - ratio of thinking/feeling
For Perceiving - ratio of sensing/intuiting
Extra - ratio of perceiving/judging
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
It's already hard enough to grasp the MBTI fully from the beginning. And if then it's all mixed up again and again, you really do not know what to believe in anymore.

Then you reach the point when you say to yourself. Fuck em all, one day they talk that and the other day they talk this. Do they really know what they are talking ?
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Ah. Well I guess there have to be two variables attached to each function, one for amount of usage, one for introversion/extroversion value. Then maybe there should be an extra variable in the system for ratio of judging to perceiving.

With all those variables, you have all the information the system can carry.

Why must the system be so complicated? What's wrong with the simple 8 functions? :huh:
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Forgive me. I am an engineer. I like when thinks work. And after things did work. I do not like to change things. Flaw of my nature I guess
No, no, this opinion is so justified it hurts. The system discussed in this thread has no practical use. It's only valid as a subject of contemplation.

The underlying thesis is "There are too many types of people to describe with sixteen types. We should attempt to describe them all." It's worse than the confusing mess that is Jungian functions.
 

Simplexity

New member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
1,741
MBTI Type
INTP
Well if your issue is whether there should be separate Extroversion/Introversion directions for the four main functions, would this not be wise to contemplate?

Do you think there is no distinction?

Do you propose new definitions?
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
No, no, this opinion is so justified it hurts. The system discussed in this thread has no practical use. It's only valid as a subject of contemplation.

The underlying thesis is "There are too many types of people to describe with sixteen types. We should attempt to describe them all." It's worse than the confusing mess that is Jungian functions.

ok thanks for the clarification, I just needed the validation from the outside to see if my thinking is correct.

I will try to follow you and give you a GOOD opinion on things, if I can. I myself have a hard time to synchronize MBTI with my own ideas. It did fit so far very well and specializations on the topic, I see sense in.

I did see sense in hap's specialization of the topic now aswell. It's just it's too much. I need to figure that out now for myself really.

And most of all, I need to do this sober :D
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I wish I knew visual C++ or something, I'd show you guys a sick idea I have for a visual representation of this system.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
if you need help with C let me now, there I am better :)
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
if you need help with C let me now, there I am better :)

I want to make something that looks kinda like volume control on windows...

Slidey thingos for value of introversion/extroversion for each function (4)
Slidey thingos for value of thinking/feeling and sensing/intuiting (2)
Slidey thingo for value of judging/perceiving (1)

Then I want the letters for MBTI type on the top that switch when you pass midpoints of the spectrums.. (it would have to calculate relative values of usage for each of the "eight functions" before being able to determine type. and you'd have to program in arbitrary weights for how the spectrums affect each other to figure out those values.)
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
The continuum with extroversion/introversion of functions is not so specifically I/E but rather whether one uses N, S, T, or F 'like a judger' or 'like a perceiver.'

So, in this system, unlike Jack's, N and S are not exclusively 'perceiving' and T and F are not exclusively 'judging.'

So most of the differences between the 'variations' have to do with people favoring a certain aspect of MBTI besides 'perceiving/judging,' like introversion, extroversion, or a particular function.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
So, in this system, unlike Jack's, N and S are not exclusively 'perceiving' and T and F are not exclusively 'judging.'
You're taking the error further than Jung did (He included elements of both input and processing in several P and J functions).

You can call a cat a dog, but it doesn't make it true, and only ends in an increase in incorrectness, and therefore a lack of understanding.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
The continuum with extroversion/introversion of functions is not so specifically I/E but rather whether one uses N, S, T, or F 'like a judger' or 'like a perceiver.'

So, in this system, unlike Jack's, N and S are not exclusively 'perceiving' and T and F are not exclusively 'judging.'

Just on this topic... is it even possible to have judging without perceiving? Might be better off having them paired... perceiving plus judging (Pi + Je vs Pe + Ji)?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
You're taking the error further than Jung did (He included elements of both input and processing in several P and J functions).

Um, what? Which judging function has elements of input? And perceiving does not technically mean input anyway. Only sensing literally takes in information.

Judging/Perceiving does not make the split between input/processing. It makes the split between conscious and unconscious.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
You can call a cat a dog, but it doesn't make it true, and only ends in an increase in incorrectness, and therefore a lack of understanding.

And there you go with your Ti again.

If you call a cat a dog, and everyone believes you, then for all intents and purposes, the cat is a dog. 'Dog' will begin to refer to the similarities between what was formerly known as 'cats' and 'dogs' rather than your preconceived concept of 'dog.' It is therefore no longer incorrect but merely a change of terminology.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
And there you go with your Ti again.

If you call a cat a dog, and everyone believes you, then for all intents and purposes, the cat is a dog. 'Dog' will begin to refer to the similarities between what was formerly known as 'cats' and 'dogs' rather than your preconceived concept of 'dog.' It is therefore no longer incorrect but merely a change of terminology.

High five!
 
Top