• 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.

Is it better to be well-rounded in function use?

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
From some of the posts made in the Fi, Ti and INxP threads, it seems to me that being a strong user of a certain function by itself is neither good or bad since it mainly indicates preference, not skill in applying the said function.

Please be patient now as I try to make an analogy :)

Let's say there is a tennis player who is naturally tall and has a strong right arm. As such, he has a powerful serve. Now, if he just works on his serve and puts it into play a high percentage of the time, he's going to win a lot of points and matches. He might be too one-dimensional to be world number one or win Grand Slams, but he will still be a good tennis player. Yes, he could work on other portions of his game like groundstrokes and volleying, but his serve will still be the main weapon that he depends on.

Now let's take another player who is not tall and not as strong, but has great foot speed and court coverage. Again, he can work on his serve of course but he will never be as good as the big serve-dom :) Would you expect the coach to tell him to stop trying to run around but instead to go hit the gym and build up his arm strength?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while it might be optimal to be an all-round player, not everyone can be a Federer or Nadal. Is working on your strengths a better way to success than trying to improve your weaknesses? If you could only choose one, which would it be? Not really looking for a definite answer, but would love to hear others' thoughts.
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
If you have already established a particular skill and have strengthened it to reach its maximum potential, why would you not move on to a new skill? The ability to adapt and solve challenges is one the most important things in life, and you cannot possibly solve every single challenge from the same approach.

What happens when your tennis player faces an opponent who can return his serves? His weapon essentially becomes nullified. If the tennis player had worked more on his backhand, spiking, and footing, he'd be more likely to win the game. If you have a particular natural talent, there's nothing wrong with working on it in order to enhance it, but that shouldn't be the end-all be-all. You never know what other skillsets will aid in your original natural talent or just open completely new doors for you.

Most of the people with personalities that are hard to deal with are seriuosly unbalanced in terms of function use.

Introverted judging functions are headstrong and unyielding when they are not balanced by some perceiving function or some Je.

Strong extroverted judging functions can cause one to completely lack an internal value system, so Je needs some serious balance with Ji to make them a bit more ethical or reasonable. Otherwise you're left with a person who has hardly any real "self."

Strong extroverted perceiving functions can cause one to be too impulsive and disorganized and require some sort of introverted function for more grounding and analysis.

Strong introverted perceiving functions can make one totally detached from society, resulting in aloofness and apathy. They also require some sort of extroverted function to help them better interact with the world.

Balance is key, as you can't expect the people around you to always be in tune with your strongest function. It's important to be able to adapt and use other functions, so you can communicate with others and interact with the world effectively.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Balance is boring. There are pros and cons to it, but I think the people who indulge in their strengths, rather than try to compensate for their weaknesses, do better in life.

If Einstein had a more well-rounded and balanced Ti we might not have had E=mc2.... etc. etc...
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Balance is boring. There are pros and cons to it, but I think the people who indulge in their strengths, rather than try to compensate for their weaknesses, do better in life.

If Einstein had a more well-rounded and balanced Ti we might not have had E=mc2.... etc. etc...

Actually Einstein's Ti was very well-balanced by his Ne. He was practically an xNTP, as his Ti/Ne were perfectly complementary. If there were no balancing act in his cognitive pathways, his theory of relativity would have been permanently halted by applying Ti-overanalysis to the roadblock he reached in attempting to define "light" (a definition he never really settled on, btw, and just decided to treat with more of an inconclusive "intuitive hunch" approach).
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I think balance means developing your weaker areas, but accepting that your natural strengths will always take the lead (not forcing yourself to be something you're not). That doesn't mean writing off your flaws and not seeing a need for self-improvement.

Sometimes I see my 4 functions like a traditional family. Fi is the dad (or mom) and wears the pants & makes the decisions, Ne is the supporting spouse (defers to Fi), Si is the big sis, and Te is the little bratty brother. Even as Si and Te grow up, they still aren't the dad and mom of the family. In order to have harmony in the family, Fi and Ne need to maintain their authority, as they will always have the advantage of being more mature. Most likely, Si and Te will never grow up fully & will always be dependent, but Fi and Ne still need to reach a level of maturity & harmony with each other to keep them in check and to take the lead. :cheese:
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Actually Einstein's Ti was very well-balanced by his Ne. He was practically an xNTP, as his Ti/Ne were perfectly complementary. If there were no balancing act in his cognitive pathways, his theory of relativity would have been permanently halted by applying Ti-overanalysis to the roadblock he reached in attempting to define "light" (a definition he never really settled on, btw, and just decided to treat with more of an inconclusive "intuitive hunch" approach).

Practically xNTP?? wtf, better not try to make a grab for Einstein, he's ours!

Introverted thinking, which he had to totally delve into just as an entry requirement for the type of work he was doing, was much more central. Along with good aux Ne use.
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
I think balance means developing your weaker areas, but accepting that your natural strengths will always take the lead (not forcing yourself to be something you're not). That doesn't mean writing off your flaws and not seeing a need for self-improvement.

Agreed. Well-said.

Sometimes I see my 4 functions like a traditional family. Fi is the dad (or mom) and wears the pants & makes the decisions, Ne is the supporting spouse (defers to Fi), Si is the big sis, and Te is the little bratty brother. Even as Si and Te grow up, they still aren't the dad and mom of the family. In order to have harmony in the family, Fi and Ne need to maintain their authority, as they will always have the advantage of being more mature. Most likely, Si and Te will never grow up fully & will always be dependent, but Fi and Ne still need to reach a level of maturity & harmony with each other to keep them in check and to take the lead. :cheese:

This is a great analogy. You're cool when you use Ne ;)

Just don't forget that as the kids grow up, the parents may learn something from the process of raising them or simply from their children surpassing them in certain arenas.
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Practically xNTP?? wtf, better not try to make a grab for Einstein, he's ours!

Introverted thinking, which he had to totally delve into just as an entry requirement for the type of work he was doing, was much more central. Along with good aux Ne use.

Aka balance. :hi:

I'm not trying to stake a claim on Einstein; don't worry. He was definitely an INTP in terms of an MBTI personality categorization, and I bet Ti came a lot more naturally for him. However, his Ne and Ti were just so well balanced that it's hard to even say which one was always dominant in the area of his scientific work. His accomplishments reek of Ne-filtered Ti as well as Ti-filtered Ne.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Aka balance. :hi:

I'm not trying to stake a claim on Einstein; don't worry. He was definitely an INTP in terms of an MBTI personality categorization, and I bet Ti came a lot more natural to him. However, his Ne and Ti were just so well balanced that it's hard to even say which one was always dominant in the area of his scientific work. His accomplishments reek of Ne-filtered Ti as well as Ti-filtered Ne.

Well, his Fe was notoriously weak. And he was a complete sensotard. Intensely introverted.

If you just rely on Ti to the extreme and then Ne, and everything else is weak or not used, that's unbalanced.
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
If you have already established a particular skill and have strengthened it to reach its maximum potential, why would you not move on to a new skill? The ability to adapt and solve challenges is one the most important things in life, and you cannot possibly solve every single challenge from the same approach.

If one has reached its maximum potential then I agree, but I believe that we are always learning and developing ourselves. Is the effort of being good at another skill that the person is not naturally adapt in worth it, especially if it means sacrificing time/effort to work on his/her strengths? I'm all for being adaptable and having multiple tools you can use to complement your strength, but if you take twice or X amount of time and effort on improving speed vs strength...
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Balance is boring. There are pros and cons to it, but I think the people who indulge in their strengths, rather than try to compensate for their weaknesses, do better in life.

If Einstein had a more well-rounded and balanced Ti we might not have had E=mc2.... etc. etc...

This is sort of what I was getting at. It's not directly applicable to how functions would work I guess, but here's another analogy. Sorry, can't help it, it's my prefered way of conveying ideas :)

If a student scores 70s in half the test and 50s in the other half, should she work on improving the 50s to 70s? Or should she keep the 50s there and improve the 70s to 90s?
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Well, his Fe was notoriously weak. And he was a complete sensotard. Intensely introverted.

If you just rely on Ti to the extreme and then Ne, and most everything else is weak, that's imbalanced.

Ok well now we are just defining balanced differently. I think no function can get along well without some balancing input from another function or function(s). You don't have to have good use of all functions to be considered "balanced." That's just "perfectly balanced", and I'll agree with you that Einstein was definitely no where near perfectly balanced. Perfectly balanced probably would be pretty boring, honestly. It'd be like mixing an equal part of every color when you're painting; then all you end up with is a dull, ugly brownish black.
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
This is sort of what I was getting at. It's not directly applicable to how functions would work I guess, but here's another analogy. Sorry, can't help it, it's my prefered way of conveying ideas :)

If a student scores 70s in half the test and 50s in the other half, should she work on improving the 50s to 70s? Or should she keep the 50s there and improve the 70s to 90s?

Well mathematically, both yield the same end result. What's your point here?
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
If a student scores 70s in half the test and 50s in the other half, should she work on improving the 50s to 70s? Or should she keep the 50s there and improve the 70s to 90s?

70s and 50s? Maybe this school thing isn't right for her altogether.
 

thisGuy

New member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,187
MBTI Type
entp
From some of the posts made in the Fi, Ti and INxP threads, it seems to me that being a strong user of a certain function by itself is neither good or bad since it mainly indicates preference, not skill in applying the said function.

Please be patient now as I try to make an analogy :)

Let's say there is a tennis player who is naturally tall and has a strong right arm. As such, he has a powerful serve. Now, if he just works on his serve and puts it into play a high percentage of the time, he's going to win a lot of points and matches. He might be too one-dimensional to be world number one or win Grand Slams, but he will still be a good tennis player. Yes, he could work on other portions of his game like groundstrokes and volleying, but his serve will still be the main weapon that he depends on.

Now let's take another player who is not tall and not as strong, but has great foot speed and court coverage. Again, he can work on his serve of course but he will never be as good as the big serve-dom :) Would you expect the coach to tell him to stop trying to run around but instead to go hit the gym and build up his arm strength?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while it might be optimal to be an all-round player, not everyone can be a Federer or Nadal. Is working on your strengths a better way to success than trying to improve your weaknesses? If you could only choose one, which would it be? Not really looking for a definite answer, but would love to hear others' thoughts.

i go for excellence, not success.

i would lie in the second category trying desperately to win
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
The function use divine interconnectivity theory? Bollocks.

You're the epitome of an arrogant Ti-er. I'd be a lot more impressed by you if you could push out some Ne every once in a while ;) A varied armory is a lot more impressive to any gun collector out there.

Though I bet you don't even give a shit about impressing anyone here (yay underdeveloped tert Fe!!), but it just makes you predictable and you probably rarely get laid. oh wellz!! at least you can fool yourself into believing that you're capable of developing something like the theory of relativity. but too bad that's already been done :doh:
 

Valiant

Courage is immortality
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
3,895
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Balanced people can connect the ends of everything better.
Seeing more of the whole picture is of course better. That's why i'm trying to improve even Fi.
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
70s and 50s? Maybe this school thing isn't right for her altogether.

Details, details... Focus on the big picture :tongue:
Make it 70s and 90s with an average of 80s if you want :)

teslashock said:
Well mathematically, both yield the same end result. What's your point here?

Average-wise it's the same and the student will pass all the same, but is it preferable to have a breadth of knowledge vs a depth of knowledge?
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Details, details... Focus on the big picture :tongue:
Make it 70s and 90s with an average of 80s if you want :)



Average-wise it's the same and the student will pass all the same, but is it preferable to have a breadth of knowledge vs a depth of knowledge?

Breadth and depth are both very important. Breadth adds to depth.
 
Top