• 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.

Clearing Up The J/P Myth

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
What I am saying is that the end result of action depends on your type, but the type itself does not manifest itself across a full range of behaviours.
You continue to corroborate her assessment, but find it necessary to argue a moot point in her delivery, and the assumption that everyone should be cognizant of the points being made. However, we both know this to be untrue in reading posts on forums. The article should be redundant and common knowledge, yet this being one of many fallacies that continue to be misinitepreted on the forums.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
You continue to corroborate her assessment, but find it necessary to argue a moot point in her delivery, and the assumption that everyone should be cognizant of the points being made. However, we both know this to be untrue in reading posts on forums. The article should be redundant and common knowledge, yet this being one of many fallacies that continue to be misinitepreted on the forums.

I am not agreeing with her - don't take my politeness in how I'm saying it to mean that I'm in agreement. Let me make this clear:

She's wrong. She's wrong about the tendecy to be on time and she's wrong about the tendency to be orderly. She is wrong to phrase it in absolutes and she is wrong to make a false argument about it. And it is also wrong to take her rant literally and to repost is seperate from the original issue. It makes it look like there is no difference between Js and Ps for those two traits. I don't want to take it out on her because she obviously was ranting against something specific.

Since they are actual measures on many MBTI tests (short forms, hybrids, I don't know about Step II for sure), it is talked about in MBTI papers and even mainstream correlations between MBTI and FFM, these factors are a part of the J/P divide.

In case I'm not clear with what I disagree with, this is exactly why I have an issue for it

? said:
Other than that, cleanliness and being on time has no bearing on the J/P dichotomy.

This is both logically and demonstrably false and I don't want people to walk away from the original post, or the follow up, thinking this. The fact that MBTI is a preference system doesn't mean "not all" can become "no bearing".
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
I am not agreeing with her - don't take my politeness in how I'm saying it to mean that I'm in agreement. Let me make this clear:
You base your response on how the dichotomies should work in theory, not on how they apply to real life situations. So, we will have to agree to disagree, since I know too many SJs who are ruthlessly messy and consistently late for appointments.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You base your response on how the dichotomies should work in theory, not on how they apply to real life situations. So, we will have to agree to disagree, since I know too many SJs who are ruthlessly messy and consistently late for appointments.

I'm confused. Aren't you agreeing with him now?
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
I'm confused. Aren't you agreeing with him now?

I share the sentiment... :huh: so is typology nothing more than a theory that tries to capture the general trends in behaviour of people? In this case, division of J/P should only be determined by need for closure vs openness? Then the rest about organization, being on time is just typically tendencies associated with J/P. That has always been my take on this.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
I share the sentiment... :huh: so is typology nothing more than a theory that tries to capture the general trends in behaviour of people? In this case, division of J/P should only be determined by need for closure vs openness? Then the rest about organization, being on time is just typically tendencies associated with J/P. That has always been my take on this.

Type is a cognitive theory which leads to behaviour. They test behaviour to try to determine type.

J/P is defined by the five main traits;

Systematic
Planful
Early Starting
Scheduled
Methodical

The logic goes that these are the traits that make up the J/P divide, which makes up the attitude of the other functions (Ti vs Te).

The problem is that the world isn't just in our minds - we grow up with other pressures and we do react differently. Even assuming that we can say people are J or P absolutely, the end result is that they grew up different and apply it differently. So the behaviours are seperated into groups of questions that lead to a +/- for each of the 5 main traits, which are then measured to get the J/P divide.

One of the questions to determine J/P (where it fits in nowadays, I don't know... Step II breakdowns are hard to find) is if you are organised and if you are generally on time (I believe they fit into systemic and scheduled respectively). So effectively, yes - they are just behaviours that will typically be associated with J/P, since answering "yes" to either one increases the "J" factor (and negatively means "P" factor)... within the scope of the test itself, anyway.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Pgatsby, are you of the mind that the auxiliary function may take more time to develop (if ever) than the theory proposes? Your thoughts remind me of the personalitypage.com growth theory, in that if the auxiliary function does not emancipate itself, then it will remain a slave to the dominant function. As a result, IJs will painfully take on perceiving type traits.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Here are some very brief remarks on the J/P discrepancy...

Js are left-brained in a vernacular sense of the term... so they tend to take it one thing at a time... whereas Ps are right brained and dive right into the midst of things..

Notice how SPs work experientially with tools (physically) whereas SJs (also in affinity with the physical world) tend to be more detached from the object..and how in school SPs do better with hands on activities..

NPs and NJs have the same kind of a relationship... NPs imagine themselves in the entity that they are learning about and explore ideas... whereas NJs first chart the course and then go at it..when a J(stereotypical J ) writes a letter... they'd first sit back to think things through and write when they know exactly what they are going to write about...whereas Ps would dive right into it and figure it out on the fly..

Ps tend to have a strong sense of inner purpose(introverted judgment)... Js not so much... their purpose is externally focused and this is why they tend to be good finishers because they assess their progress based on external benchmarks..and not internal and derive their sense of competence not from internal extrapolations but by how they are judged by the external standard..
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Pgatsby, are you of the mind that the auxiliary function may take more time to develop (if ever) than the theory proposes? Your thoughts remind me of the personalitypage.com growth theory, in that if the auxiliary function does not emancipate itself, then it will remain a slave to the dominant function. As a result, IJs will painfully take on perceiving type traits.


It is true that IJ's superior function is a perceiving function, but we should note that it is also left-brained, and in this regard it relates more pertinently to the conventional judging functions than to the conventional perceiving functions.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
NPs and NJs have the same kind of a relationship... NPs imagine themselves in the entity that they are learning about and explore ideas... whereas NJs first chart the course and then go at it..when a J(stereotypical J ) writes a letter... they'd first sit back to think things through and write when they know exactly what they are going to write about...whereas Ps would dive right into it and figure it out on the fly..
Blue Wing, we seem to prescribe to similar studies, Lenore Thomson and Linda V. Berens. I agree with your thoughts, however, ISTP also has a "chart the course" interaction style. For that reason, I think the type resonates more with IJs than IPs in general. I do agree that perceiving types prefer experiential and hands on learning, which in simple terms is body based. I learn better from hands on experience as opposed to reading. I am comfortable with theory, but like all SPs, it must be applicable. I understand INTJs feel the same way.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Blue Wing, we seem to prescribe to similar studies, Lenore Thomson and Linda V. Berens. I agree with your thoughts, however, ISTP also has a "chart the course" interaction style. For that reason, I think the type resonates more with IJs than IPs in general. I do agree that perceiving types prefer experiential and hands on learning, which in simple terms is body based. I learn better from hands on experience as opposed to reading. I am comfortable with theory, but like all SPs, it must be applicable. I understand INTJs feel the same way.

Perhaps the common factor here is Introverted Intuition which is the ISTP's tertiary function?

INTJs and ISTPs have an intense need to apply theories for different reasons.

INTJs because their judgment is extroverted and ISTPs mostly due to the Se. Albeit the tertiary Ni is also a factor. Ni demands that its visions be made a reality and Fe, being the inferior function tends not to have a voice of its own, so it just cheers the Ni on. But again ISTPs need practical applications because of their Se, which is the hallmark of 'SPness'.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Blue Wing, I have attempted to respond to your response on a number of occasions, however my post continues to get cut off.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Perhaps the common factor here is Introverted Intuition which is the ISTP's tertiary function?
I see why you would believe this, however Ni is almost non-existent for ISTP at the teritary level. It would make for something totally different than being in the dominant function. I attempted to locate a good description, however MBTI seems to still be lacking on providing good information when it comes to teritary. I attempted to paste an example from Lenore Thomson's Wiki site, but the description was bit over the top.
INTJs and ISTPs have an intense need to apply theories for different reasons.

INTJs because their judgment is extroverted and ISTPs mostly due to the Se. Albeit the tertiary Ni is also a factor. Ni demands that its visions be made a reality and Fe, being the inferior function tends not to have a voice of its own, so it just cheers the Ni on. But again ISTPs need practical applications because of their Se, which is the hallmark of 'SPness'.
Your example for why INTJ has a need seems to be lacking. Again, I attempted to locate a good description of how Te works as an auxiliary function, however Lenore Thomson does not even offer one, which is surprising since she is an INTJ. Nevertheless, Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi gives some good insight as to why ISTP closely resembles INTJ (and to some extent INTP):
ISTPs have a Chart-the-Course Interaction Style, which goes with a desire to enter a situation with some sort of course of action in mind. It doesn’t have to be a detailed plan and ISTPs often seem planful as they analyze a situation in anticipation of what is likely to happen. ISTPs and INTJs share this Interaction Style and so would look alike in that way.

The Chart-the-Course style often seems like the Strategic intelligence that is an important aspect of the Rational temperament pattern and ISTPs often relate to the description of the Rational temperament over the Artisan temperament. This is especially true when the Artisan description focuses too much on freedom and spontaneity.
There are some tell-tale differences at the temperament level:
Differentiating Artisan versus Rational is key. Artisan desire for skillful performance often leads ISTPs to identify with the Rational’s core need for competence. In presenting the two temperaments, it helps to contrast the difference between skillful performance as a value and competence as a core need. For the Artisan skill often comes from the drive to action and they hate being clumsy or awkward. They get involved in an activity, get caught up in the pure joy of doing, and thus become skilled. Rationals need to feel competent and often want a measure of competence before they even do something. To practice or “do” means failure and that often can strike at the core need.
Another difference would be in how the two communicate. I was recently accused of not communicating, on this forum, like a SP, instead sounding more intuitive:
It helps to listen for the concrete language of the ISTP, which often creates a picture in the listener’s mind. Such language is likely to be full of specific examples and stories. INTP and INTJ language tends to reference abstract concepts with a focus on precision. ISTPs often get at the essence of something rather succinctly, whereas, INTPs and INTJ go into more depth.
Since ITPs share the same dominant function, ISTPs think more like INTPs, than INTJs. ISTPs analyze; INTJs conceptualize:
ISTPs and INTPs have the same Leading Role process (dominant) of introverted Thinking and are likely to approach situations with an analytical perspective and like to know the principles of how things work. The difference shows up in their Supporting Role processes (auxiliary). An INTP described his preferred work style as exploring problems and sub-problems (Ne), while his ISTP colleague described a tactical trouble shooting approach with a focus on getting the task done (Se).
I don't know, it's too close to call whether I am INTJ or ISTP, but still leaning toward ISTP. Berens/Nardi does provide a brief example of the Ni for ISTP:
Also, ISTP’s frequently engage their Relief Role process (tertiary) of introverted iNtuiting and enjoy looking at whole systems and patterns and getting a sense of what will happen in the future.
However, without further understanding I am unsure how that role plays out.
 

girlnamedbless

New member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
186
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Well said. The main difference I've noticed is that Ps are more open to trying out new things, while Js are more decided and tend to be more stubborn.
 

Gabe

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
590
MBTI Type
ENTP
whoa! Did you say stubborn? i know percieving types who are way more stubborn than "J"'s (I do consider myself extremely stubborn). In fact, introverted judgement (a preferred process for all percieving types) is a form of stubbornness if there ever was any.
 

Mycroft

The elder Holmes
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
1,068
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
You base your response on how the dichotomies should work in theory, not on how they apply to real life situations.

I don't think he's done that at all. PT has simply pointed out that MBTI outlines 5 determining factors in its definition of "J", and that things like punctuality and neatness are indicative of one being J.

One is a J or a P regardless of how neat or messy one is, but as these are traits with a tendency to be indicative of whether one is in fact a J or a P, they cannot said to be completely useless in determining type.
 

Gabe

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
590
MBTI Type
ENTP
Yes, but the author is pointing out that messiness-or cleanliness or in general organized-ness (by the way, my ESFJ ex is extremely disorganized, she just could get away with it because she still knew exactly where all her stuff was)
it's not a USEFULL indicator, because it's not accurate. The only reason people overuse this one is because it's easy, like say, claiming that "all ___types wear hawiian shirts." Of course, actually figuring out peoples types is not that easy.
 

wildcat

New member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,622
MBTI Type
INTP
What are you saying differently than her point? The only tell-tale difference is that J's like structure and P's like open end. However, I would not even go that far because ISTPs in general like working in structured environments and needing order. They just want to have room to maneuver within the structure. As for your list, I resonate with all your J descripton, except being all that methodical. In fact, anyone who prefers Chart the Course or In Charge interaction styles would resonate with your list for Js, including both STP types.
What you have you do not need.
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
the thing is "?", if you reject generalisations, then you reject MBTI. I can accept contradictions within MBTI and use basic common sense, ie not every J will be 100% J at everything they do, T's have feelings, F's can think, I's can have friends etc. - but once you dispute the general framework, you discredit the concept of MBTI. I mean, you call yourself ISTP, but if you reject the conventional descriptions of the functions, then to what extent are you an ISTP? Wouldn't you be better off not typing yourself if you want to reject generalisations?
I agree. The OP made me feel the exact same way.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
So what does that mean, bearing in mind that you then went on to question even this vague description?

MBTI tests ask about behaviour. Most literature on the J/P axis, just like literature on the E/I and T/F axes, describes behaviour as well as motivations. So I don't know why the author of this article thinks she is qualified to re-write type theory and present it as unquestionable fact, especially when her descriptions are so vague as to be of little or no help.
Not to point you out specifcally Morto, but to the entire forum, do any of you actually read up on this subject or do you take bits and pieces and form opinions? I would really like for someone to point out in her book Gifts Differing that Myers-Briggs ever alludes to cleanliness and tidiness is determined by the J/P factor.

The theme of her theory is covered in the first sentence of the chapter, "The judging types believe that life should be willed and decided, while the perceptive types regard life as something to be experienced and understood. Thus, judging types will like to settle things or at least to have things settled, whereas perceptive types prefer to keep their plans and opinions as open as possible so that no valuable experience or enlightenment will be missed." (pg.69) So she is not rewriting it as you put it. If anything, anyone that claims she said Js are clean and Ps are messy are rewriting. Even many descriptions claim that INFJs can be consistently messy. Read folks!
 
Top