Subjectivity and Objectivity in Type

[benos]

First, I'd like to thank the forum owner (or owners) for a great forum and resource. I recently found Typologycentral when searching for the relationship between insecurity and Type.

I've been interested in and studied MBTI for about 30 years, every since I was first introduced to MBTI by a friend.

Some years ago I stumbled across this... Associating the qualities of Subjective ("S") or Objective ("O") with each of the sixteeen MBTI temperament categories helps me more easily understand behavior. For example:

E=O (Prefer being around people)
I=S (Prefer being by myself)

S=O (Aware of immediate environment)
N=S (Often in dreamland)

T=O (Decisions made objectively)
F=S (Decisions made subjectively)

J=O (Do what "should be" done)
P=S (Do what I feel like)

An "extreme" Temperament Type example may help the associations make sense. Take an INFP for example. Written with S's and O's, they're all Subjective: SSSS. With all mental and behavioral qualities subjective in nature, it's easy to understand why it's tough for them to live in a world run by Extroverts.

A slightly looser but similar relationship exists between Subjectivity and Objectivity and the 4 MBTI categories. The mental qualities - S,N,T,F - are more subjective in nature than the more outwardly oriented behavior qualities -E,I,J,P.

Writing the Types with S's and O's, it also helps me more quickly grasp a Type's tendencies by slightly rearranging the order of the four letter designations. Putting both mental qualities (S/N_T/F) first and the the two behavioral qualities (E/I_J/P) last, visually (formatting-wise), makes sense to me.

Considering the above, and re-writing an ENFJ with S/O's: SSOO (SN/SF/OE/OJ), makes the intuitive, feeling, outgoing, responsible planner's Temperament more obvious at a glance.

Make sense, thoughts?
benos

 

[Eric B]

That sounds like this: http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...ces/10920-thought-objective-2.html#post417057 (my idea) you're thinking of. (Though I had reduced it to three letters for each function, omitting J/P, and put them together into a new six letter code consisting of only S/O).

 

[VagrantFarce]

I think it was Lenore Thompson that described the extraverted functions as objective, and introverted functions as subjective - the idea being that extraverted reason and perception can be experienced by everyone, whereas introverted reason and perception is only experienced by the individual. It's a nice way of telling the difference between the extraverted and introverted forms of each function.

 

[Eric B]

Well, Jung is the one who first associated introversion with "the subjective factor", and extraversion with "the objective factor". O/S has simply been extended to the other dichotomies (I'm not sure who associated T/F with it; may have also been Jung).

 

[benos]

That sounds like this: http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...ces/10920-thought-objective-2.html#post417057 (my idea) you're thinking of. (Though I had reduced it to three letters for each function, omitting J/P, and put them together into a new six letter code consisting of only S/O).

I came upon the S/O realization about 10 years ago. At that time I had been interested in MBTI for about 20 years. For most of that time, I felt something was "missing" from everything I'd read. (Never read Jung.) The when the S/O relationship hit me, I realized that's what I'd been looking for.

Then shortly later, since subject and object define each other, I realized neither exists (apart from its opposite). Which, whle searcing for post titles containing subjective or objective, I found echoed here. But still, for understanding behavior, the S/O approach is helpful.
benos