• 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.

Originators of MBTI and Temperaments

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
Temperaments theory was developed by an INTP.
MBTI was developed by an INFP.
Temperament and MBTI are signigicantly different.
I haven't read Kiersey's books, but I've heard that he focuses more on traits and behaviors.
Whereas, MBTI is about cognitive processes.

How do you think the types of the respective originators influenced the two systems?
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Temperaments theory was developed by an INTP.
MBTI was developed by an INFP.
Temperament and MBTI are signigicantly different.
I haven't read Kiersey's books, but I've heard that he focuses more on traits and behaviors.
Whereas, MBTI is about cognitive processes.

How do you think the types of the respective originators influenced the two systems?

I thought that Isabel Myers was an INFJ. Where do you get that she was an INFP?

Anyway, it would seem to me that Keirsey's approach was more generalized and archetypal, while MBTI's approach was more systematic and lent itself to being metricized in various ways.
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
I've seen Myers listed as an INFP in various INFP descriptions such as Type Tango. I assume its correct because I've seen it listed that way in more than one place. Where have you seen her type as being INFJ?
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Temperaments theory was developed by an INTP.
MBTI was developed by an INFP.
Temperament and MBTI are signigicantly different.
I haven't read Kiersey's books, but I've heard that he focuses more on traits and behaviors.
Whereas, MBTI is about cognitive processes.

How do you think the types of the respective originators influenced the two systems?
Temperaments were around long before Keirsey. They go back as far as Plato and Aristotle. Meyers and Socionics merely expounded on Jung's work.
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
Temperaments were around long before Keirsey. They go back as far as Plato and Aristotle. Meyers and Socionics merely expounded on Jung's work.

Yes, I understand this. However, I believe it was Gianninni who said that Kiersey had altered the original Temperaments a great deal. And Myers definitely systematized Jung's ideas in a manner he didn't wish to do and in a manner quite different than what the originator of Socionics did with it. Kiersey and Myers made each of these systems very much their own. A different type might have done something quite differently. Also, there is the question of why they were attracted to these systems in the first place.

I realize it may not have anything to do with type at all. I was just curious to hear what others thought.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
...I realize it may not have anything to do with type at all. I was just curious to hear what others thought.

I don't remember whether Isabelle covered any of this is her book.

It seems clear that Keirsey did a lot of theoretical work with his system, typical for INTP, in the development of it. It seems mostly theory driven.

On the other hand, Myers took a lot of surveys to create and support her ideas, reminiscent of when INFP uses Te effectively. (I've seen other INFPs in tech fields and they do actually enjoy an organized process that gives validity to their work in a way that INTPs do not usually care about.)

In religious circles there are "spiritual gifts" tests. Those are also impacted by the people who developed them: Instead of observing people and coming up with gifts, they started out by going through the Bible and listing anything Paul mentioned as a gift, then asking questions to place people into those categories. So in this case again, the test developers found a process and outcome that worked for them, that Myers or Keirsey would not have found acceptable themselves.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Yes, I understand this. However, I believe it was Gianninni who said that Kiersey had altered the original Temperaments a great deal. And Myers definitely systematized Jung's ideas in a manner he didn't wish to do and in a manner quite different than what the originator of Socionics did with it. Kiersey and Myers made each of these systems very much their own. A different type might have done something quite differently. Also, there is the question of why they were attracted to these systems in the first place.

I realize it may not have anything to do with type at all. I was just curious to hear what others thought.
Keirsey did not alter the temperaments, he simply gave them new names and made a comparison to Meyers' work instead of keeping his types independent of MBTI. They do not correlate exactly to MBTI anymore than the enneagram types.

I don't think that Meyers systemized Jung's work, but simply devised an assessment to determine Jung's prototypes. We could have done okay without having the J/P dichotomy because in the end I prefer Ti-Se by Jung's standards, no matter if I am reading MBTI or Socionics.

If anyone systemized the work, I think that was Lenore Thomson and John Beebe. Since then, Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi have been able to make it more applicable and easier to determine your best fit type, in my opinion, far more than Meyers-Briggs work. They are all great contributors.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
... If anyone systemized the work, I think that was Lenore Thomson and John Beebe. Since then, Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi have been able to make it more applicable and easier to determine your best fit type, in my opinion, far more than Meyers-Briggs work. They are all great contributors.

As an aside, what did you think of Duniho's DDLI test, which includes additional validation of function sets (i.e., two functions that work in tandem)?
 

snegledmaca

New member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
145
As an aside, what did you think of Duniho's DDLI test, which includes additional validation of function sets (i.e., two functions that work in tandem)?


I'm not question mark but judging from the results from this site the test has a bias towards the Ti + Fe & Ne + Si function sets.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
As an aside, what did you think of Duniho's DDLI test, which includes additional validation of function sets (i.e., two functions that work in tandem)?
I like the test questions. Some of the results were a bit confusing, but overall it was a good test.
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
Keirsey did not alter the temperaments, he simply gave them new names and made a comparison to Meyers' work instead of keeping his types independent of MBTI. They do not correlate exactly to MBTI anymore than the enneagram types.

I really don't know temperaments well enough to know, but I was merely passing on the assessment of Gianninni in his book 'Compass of the Soul'. He has 22 pages in this book where he discusses his criticisms of Kiersey, Bates and Berens. I'll come back to this thread later and summarize what he said. I would like to know what others think about his view.

His book is one of my favorite type books because he goes into depth about practically every type theory in existence. I came across some things in his book that I hadn't seen anywhere else such as Lowen's work.

Has anyone here read this book?

I don't think that Meyers systemized Jung's work, but simply devised an assessment to determine Jung's prototypes. We could have done okay without having the J/P dichotomy because in the end I prefer Ti-Se by Jung's standards, no matter if I am reading MBTI or Socionics.

If anyone systemized the work, I think that was Lenore Thomson and John Beebe. Since then, Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi have been able to make it more applicable and easier to determine your best fit type, in my opinion, far more than Meyers-Briggs work. They are all great contributors.

I agree with you. Myers didn't systematize Jung's ideas to the extent that others did, but she did make his ideas easier to understand.

I like the work of all of those theorists. Beebe in particular made me understand type more clearly. I doubt typology would be as popular if it hadn't attracted many other theorists. Kiersey definitely helped to popularize MBTI.
 

Jae Rae

Free-Rangin' Librarian
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
979
MBTI Type
INFJ
Giannini title

I really don't know temperaments well enough to know, but I was merely passing on the assessment of Gianninni in his book 'Compass of the Soul'. He has 22 pages in this book where he discusses his criticisms of Kiersey, Bates and Berens. I'll come back to this thread later and summarize what he said. I would like to know what others think about his view.

His book is one of my favorite type books because he goes into depth about practically every type theory in existence. I came across some things in his book that I hadn't seen anywhere else such as Lowen's work.

Has anyone here read this book?

I agree with you. Myers didn't systematize Jung's ideas to the extent that others did, but she did make his ideas easier to understand.

I like the work of all of those theorists. Beebe in particular made me understand type more clearly. I doubt typology would be as popular if it hadn't attracted many other theorists. Kiersey definitely helped to popularize MBTI.


No, but I'd like to. My library doesn't have it, but has a book about Intuition with the same title written by Lynn Robinson.

Where did you get your copy by Gianninni?

Jae Rae
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
No, but I'd like to. My library doesn't have it, but has a book about Intuition with the same title written by Lynn Robinson.

Where did you get your copy by Gianninni?

Jae Rae

I got my copy on Amazon.com which I found through an extensive search of type books. I've never seen anyone else mention the book on the forums. Its a thick book that is entirely about theory, and so maybe that is why its not overly popular. Its not the kind of book you turn to in order to easily figure out your type.
 

Jae Rae

Free-Rangin' Librarian
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
979
MBTI Type
INFJ
Cool, thanks for the information.

My library has Link+ which gives me access to a number of academic libraries, so I thought perhaps it was a foreign publication.

Jae Rae
 

JustDave

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
992
MBTI Type
xNTP
Personally I like the idea of temperament more than that of type.

For me it's difficult to determine if someone is an ISPF, ENFP, ISTJ OR ENTP yet much easier to say some is an Artisan, Idealist, Guardian or Rational.

Also, Keirsey's notion that you cannot truly understand the minds of others but you can type them based on their actions seems like an ingenius approach.
 

marm

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
134
MBTI Type
INFP
Personally I like the idea of temperament more than that of type.

For me it's difficult to determine if someone is an ISPF, ENFP, ISTJ OR ENTP yet much easier to say some is an Artisan, Idealist, Guardian or Rational.

Also, Keirsey's notion that you cannot truly understand the minds of others but you can type them based on their actions seems like an ingenius approach.

I could understand why you would like it for that reason.

My guess about why I prefer MBTI is partly because I learned about it first. On top of that, I like how the theories of Beebe and others have developed it into a very complex system.

I do see that MBTI includes both behavior and cognitive processes. If you look at MBTI Step II, you'll see what looks the same as behavioral traits in the Big Five. Thinking individually or Extraversion individually is a behavioral trait that groups closely related sub-traits. However, when we speak of Extraverted Thinking, we're speaking about cognitive processes. The MBTI, like any test, is forced to measure according to behavior, but the MBTI doesn't stop there. It uses the traits to figure out the cognitive processes.

I think Temperaments are initially easier to figure out, but I'm a person who enjoys complexity. If I wasn't a bit challenged in trying to understand MBTI, then it wouldn't have intrigued me enough to obsess over it as I have. I feel that once a person understands MBTI, then its as easy to use as Temperaments in determing the types of others. However, I suppose most people aren't willing to try to understand a system like MBTI. And that is where the whole type descriptions come in. Many people never go beyond reading some particular description that resonated with them, and that is probably good enough for basic purposes.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Personally I like the idea of temperament more than that of type.

For me it's difficult to determine if someone is an ISPF, ENFP, ISTJ OR ENTP yet much easier to say some is an Artisan, Idealist, Guardian or Rational.

Also, Keirsey's notion that you cannot truly understand the minds of others but you can type them based on their actions seems like an ingenius approach.

I don't think so. I feel like I have many traits of every temperament except Artisan. I don't see how it's easier rather than harder... I identify much more with INFJ and that functional order specifically than any temperament group. I don't necessarily relate to other Idealists considerably better than Rationals, for instance. (Although I do seem able to get along well with NFJ's well, NFP's are a little harder, almost like another group of people altogether.)
 
Top