Are there really 24 types?

[Elfboy]

Are Introversion and Extraversion really a choice between one or the other? many people on this forum are apparent ambiverts. perhaps there should really be an A option for the first dichotomy that would display traits of both the E and I types it shared the other letters with. for example an STJ could be an ESTJ an ISTJ or an ASTJ. Several ENFPs (in fact, the majority of them I've met), ENTPs and ENTJs in particular are just not very extraverted while several I types like ISTJ, ISFJ, INFJ and ISTP are often times not very introverted.
my ENTJ best friend for instance can sometimes spend several days away from anyone and just study for 10-12 hours a day )only stopping to eat. he usually enjoys this and says that he just need to get away from people for awhile.
I'm an ENFP and I feel stressed and crammed if I don't have 3-5 a day to myself listening to music and web browsing. I also score Introverted on just about every MBTI test I've taken, but I feel like an ENFP simply because their behavior, communication style and cognitive ordering fits me more
my brother is an ISTP and he gets bored easily and is constantly out with his friends doing things while I would rather stay home and drink tea quietly for several hours (I get very cranky if my tea time is disturbed lol)
and i know several more examples like this. perhaps the first dichotomy needs an A as a middle option for those in the middle as introversion/extraversion is a spectrum as opposed to one or the other like thinking/feeling sensing/intuition and perceiving/judging

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I would say you could easily tell and E from an I simply by watching the endurance level between the two. Introverted functions can't be shown to the world, otherwise they become extraverted. For example and INTJ will show the world their Te, but only when necessary because they can't keep the energy up where as an ENTJ (If strong enough Extraversion) could organize all day if they wanted too. Ambiverts usually get an 'X'.

 

[highlander]

I wouldn't look at things this way (extravert or introvert). All people do both. We prefer a dominant function that is extraverted or introverted. There are degrees of preference. The rule is that I have to prefer one over another. That's what MBTI and functions are all about.

 

[garbage]

depends on how finely grained you want it.. you could have a sliding scale with infinite precision for each dichotomy if you were so inclined

a course classification system is not going to describe individual members to 100% accuracy, and a fine classification system will have too many types for a typing system to even be meaningful

pick your poison


there was some thread that gave good descriptions for "middles" for each dichotomy.. someone should go dig that up

 

[KDude]

there was some thread that gave good descriptions for "middles" for each dichotomy.. someone should go dig that up

There's also subtype theories in Socionics, which partly applies. Except it's 28 subtypes.

I would easily fall somewhere inbetween perceiver/introverted judging, but it's just not me to engage like an extrovert. I would seem more extroverted in smaller groups and preferably, with people I'd choose to be that with (or could be that way with). Heh. Which defeats the whole purpose of calling myself E.

 

[Athenian200]

there was some thread that gave good descriptions for "middles" for each dichotomy.. someone should go dig that up

Mondo posted this idea before:

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/mbti-tm-other-personality-matrices/7087-ambiverts.html

And here was my reply:

I feared Mondo had opened up the door for this kind of thinking when he introduced the idea of dynamic type.

If you want me to offer my version of this, I guess I'll play too. Presuming I believed in dynamic type (which I am not saying I do one way or the other, I'm just accepting the assumption for the purposes of description), this is how I would go:

I/A/E (Introverted, Ambiverted, Extraverted)

N/R/S (iNtuitive, Realist, Sensor)

F/B/T (Feeling, Balanced, Thinking)

J/M/P (Judging, Malleable, Perceiving)

Thus (as examples using I-N-F-J as the potential statics in each position, and assuming Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, Inferior ordering):

ARBM -- Xx, Xx, Xx, Xx (Everything is subject to change completely, although the functions are in an unknowable specific pattern at any given moment. Worst case scenario.)

IRBM -- Xi, Xe, Xi, Xe (Well, the I/E is static... everything else is dynamic.)

INBM -- Xi, Xe [N], Xi, Xe (We know one in the first block is N, and one in the second block is S, but we don't know what kind or where... and it can change.)

INFM -- Xi, Xe [NF], Xi Xe [ST] (We now know this is an INF with an EST shadow. However, the functions are subject to change, except that the first block contains some form of Feeling and Intuition, and the second block contains some form of Thinking and Sensing.)

ARBJ -- Xx, Xx [Je Pi], Xx, Xx [Ji Pe] (We only know that this type has Extraverted Judgment and Introverted perception in the first block, and Introverted Judgment and Extroverted perception in the second block.)

IRBJ -- Pi, Je, Ji, Pe (This is an IJ type. They use some form of Introverted perception as a dominant function, and some form of Extroverted Judgment as an Auxiliary. The specifics are subject to change.)

INBJ -- Ni, Je, Ji, Se (This is an INJ type. They use Ni and have inferior Se, and use some kind of Aux. Extroverted judgement and Tertiary Introverted Judgment that is subject to change.

ARFJ -- Xx, Xx [Fe] Xx, Xx [Ti]. (This type uses Fe in the first block and has a Ti shadow somewhere in the second block, however the specific location and accompanying functions are subject to change.)

IRFJ -- Pi Fe Ti Pe (This is an IFJ type. They have some Introverted perception as dominant, Fe auxiliary and Ti tertiary, and then Extraverted perception as a shadow.)

ANFJ -- Xx, Xx [Ni Fe] Xx, Xx [Ti Se] (This is an NFJ type. They have either Ni or Fe as dominant, and the other as auxiliary, but which is subject to change. The same applies to their shadow.)

ANBM -- Xx, Xx [N] Xx, Xx (I/E not static, otherwise same as INBM.)

ARFM -- Xx, Xx [F] Xx, Xx [T] (J/P not static, otherwise same as ARFJ. Somewhere in first block is Fe or Fi, somewhere in second is Ti or Te. Exact position subject to change.)

Anyway, this should give you an idea of what we've opened up here with permitting dynamic type... we need to use these models to figure out which functions are possible for each position with each letter of certainty. I don't want to try it with every letter combination, of course.

This complexity, unfortunately, does not mean such dynamic type isn't the case, however. Some people may have significantly higher degrees of neuroplasticity than others, and this may be the best they can do.

Do you see how annoyingly complicated this makes things?

 

[skylights]

^ yes. O_O;

i don't have any problem with the idea of an additional letter, but i don't really find it necessary, either. part of the whole reason the system works is because it does force you to choose sides, even though you may in truth be very very close to the middle. but that's true for everyone... some ENFPs are ENfp, some EnfP, some eNfp, etc. like others have pointed out, we could add many more letters, but the system is a fairly balanced set of dichotomies as it stands.

personally i just tend to think of it as cognitive, rather than social, extraversion, and it makes things much easier. i also have always scored I in tests but upon learning the functions, identified as a Ne-dom almost immediately.

anyway in my mind it works like this:

EJ : Extraverted ; Judgment extraverted : JePi

emphasis on prioritizing info outside the mind ; secondary emphasis on collecting info inside the mind​

EP : Extraverted ; Perceiving extraverted : PeJi

emphasis on collecting info outside the mind ; secondary emphasis on prioritizing info inside the mind​

IJ : Introverted ; Judging extraverted : PiJe

emphasis on collecting info inside the mind ; secondary emphasis on prioritizing info outside the mind​

IP : Introverted ; Perceiving extraverted : JiPe

emphasis on prioritizing info inside the mind ; secondary emphasis on collecting info outside the mind​

i think part of the problem that we run into is that extraverted Perceiving is a bit of an odd notion, because it is extraverted, but Perceiving is really a somewhat passive activity. (no wonder we can seem lazy...!)

so that helps see why an EP might seem less extraverted than an IJ, because EPs don't tend to prioritize externally. unlike Je types we don't generally seek to prioritize our environments, even though we are focused on gathering information from them. so we may tend to act outwardly less, even though we do tend to express outwardly. whereas an IJ with an external agenda is going to seem more extraverted. and then of course having S, especially Se, adds a grounded depth that can make those types seem more classically extraverted than their N partners as well. T, with its rooting in objectivity, also seems to lend more groundedness than F.

we are also going to retain some of the "contradictory" characteristics of our secondary process - i have also noted the "time away" that ENxJs seem to need, and i very much suspect that is characteristic of Ni processing.

 

[Elfboy]

it's true that their are balanced people of every type, but for I/E it's not as black and white. a T/F balanced ENFP is still Ne, Fi, Te, Si a P/J balanced ENFP will share NONE of the functions with a balanced ENFJ, thus a middle letter for N/S, T/F and P/J is unfeasible.cognitively, an ANFP would simply be Ne=Fi, Te=Si as opposed to Ne>Fi>Te>Si. being A would merely close the preferential gap between the functions 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, and 7 and 8. most scientists agree that simply saying one is an introvert or an extravert is highly oversimplified.

 

[highlander]

an ANFP would simply be Ne=Fi

Think about how rare something like that would be though - for a dominant and auxiliary function to be exactly equal. I guess it's theoretically possible but not worth changing the model for. There is also the concept of balance.

You're right about saying one is an introvert or an extravert is highly oversimplified. I think a lot of people with a dominant introverted function seem like extraverts (layman definition of that word).

It might be more helpful to look at a different system like Enneagram and combine that with MBTI or Cognitive functions. You then look at the overlaps and differences between the characteristics of each. Between those two things, you have an extremely rich framework for understanding.

 

[Elfboy]

Think about how rare something like that would be though - for a dominant and auxiliary function to be exactly equal. I guess it's theoretically possible but not worth changing the model for. There is also the concept of balance.

You're right about saying one is an introvert or an extravert is highly oversimplified. I think a lot of people with a dominant introverted function seem like extraverts (layman definition of that word).

It might be more helpful to look at a different system like Enneagram and combine that with MBTI or Cognitive functions. You then look at the overlaps and differences between the characteristics of each. Between those two things, you have an extremely rich framework for understanding.

it's true. I'm a 7w8 which seems like it would be a fairly extraverted type, but self preservation 7w8s (especially sp/sx) often exhibit quite introverted behavior. many of them enjoy spending lots of time at home and their pleasure seeking nature takes a much more introverted and low key form. for even the most extraverted Enneagram and MBTI types, a self preservation dominant person is always going to be at least somewhat solitary and may have a propentensy toward hoarding/storing. with self preservation 7s with self preservation 7s, this takes a rather domestic form, building up a respectable (and often quite glamorous and elegant) wardrobe, purchasing comfortable furniture/home appliances, investing money in multiple income streams, investing lots of money in health/physical appearence and probably spending a fair on a hobby or pass time. a perfect example of a self preservation 7w8 would be Lucille Bluth from Arrested Development, and she's not really that extraverted.

 

[Elfboy]

Think about how rare something like that would be though - for a dominant and auxiliary function to be exactly equal. I guess it's theoretically possible but not worth changing the model for. There is also the concept of balance.
You're right about saying one is an introvert or an extravert is highly oversimplified. I think a lot of people with a dominant introverted function seem like extraverts (layman definition of that word).

It might be more helpful to look at a different system like Enneagram and combine that with MBTI or Cognitive functions. You then look at the overlaps and differences between the characteristics of each. Between those two things, you have an extremely rich framework for understanding.

you are correct in your assertion that the 1st and 2nd functions are rarely going to be exactly equal, but I do think that often the difference in preference isn't enough to make a significant diffence. if one uses Ne 40% of the time, Fi 37% of the time and other functions 23% of the time, I would consider that pretty ambiverted. on a scale from -100 (introverted) to 100 (extraverted) I would consider those who score between -20 and 20 to be true ambiverts with -30 to 30 being fairly ambiverted (assuming there was an accurate means of obtaining this measurement)

 

[INTP]

if you want to do some 24 type typology, i suggest starting from scratches instead modifying jungian typology like that. naturally you could take some concepts from it, but you will need to modify its basics more for it to have any chance of being validate or it will be just mbti gone wrong.

 

[alcea rosea]

I see the E - I as a "line", where E is the other extreme and I is the other extreme. And people are situated differently in this "line", some are more extraverted than others, even inside one personality type. On the other hand, according to the theory, there are functions behind the 4 letters. So, actually, E nor I in the type doesn't tell anything about a person but there are functions behind them. Like with ENFP, The E only means, that the primary function (iNtuition in this case) is extraverted function. So, if a person would be "A", then what would be his/hers primary function or does it mean that her/his first 2 functions are as strong, othe being extraverted function and the other introverted function? And if a person is really extraverted, does it mean that s/he has several extraverted functions before any introverted functions in his/hers function order?

But, I think that MBTI tells only so much about people, it doesn't include everything. People inside of the same MBTI type can be quite different in other things than what is "measured" in MBTI. And on the other hand, I see the function definition in MBTI "theory" very problematic, because it seems that people inside of the same personality type has actually quite different function orders. Only few first functions seem to be similar with people who have same MBTi type (but it's not always so).

So, actually, there are as many personality types as there are people in the world, some have certain features that are incommon but even iside of the same "feature" we are all different. MBTI type doesn't include everything and people inside of one personality type have only so much in common but mainly people are still very different even inside of one type.

 

[highlander]

you are correct in your assertion that the 1st and 2nd functions are rarely going to be exactly equal, but I do think that often the difference in preference isn't enough to make a significant diffence. if one uses Ne 40% of the time, Fi 37% of the time and other functions 23% of the time, I would consider that pretty ambiverted. on a scale from -100 (introverted) to 100 (extraverted) I would consider those who score between -20 and 20 to be true ambiverts with -30 to 30 being fairly ambiverted (assuming there was an accurate means of obtaining this measurement)

Ok, so if you create a new system then, with primary and auxiliary being "roughly close" representing an "A" vs "E" or "I", then you need to draw the line to say someone is in the middle. It's less about I or E and more about Fi vs Ne. So you'd need to say the two would be within 5 percentage points (or something). Then you would have the additional complication of confusing the function order for the tertiary and the inferior, which is not a trivial part of the model.

 

[slowriot]

Are Introversion and Extraversion really a choice between one or the other? many people on this forum are apparent ambiverts. perhaps there should really be an A option for the first dichotomy that would display traits of both the E and I types it shared the other letters with. for example an STJ could be an ESTJ an ISTJ or an ASTJ. Several ENFPs (in fact, the majority of them I've met), ENTPs and ENTJs in particular are just not very extraverted while several I types like ISTJ, ISFJ, INFJ and ISTP are often times not very introverted.
my ENTJ best friend for instance can sometimes spend several days away from anyone and just study for 10-12 hours a day )only stopping to eat. he usually enjoys this and says that he just need to get away from people for awhile.
I'm an ENFP and I feel stressed and crammed if I don't have 3-5 a day to myself listening to music and web browsing. I also score Introverted on just about every MBTI test I've taken, but I feel like an ENFP simply because their behavior, communication style and cognitive ordering fits me more
my brother is an ISTP and he gets bored easily and is constantly out with his friends doing things while I would rather stay home and drink tea quietly for several hours (I get very cranky if my tea time is disturbed lol)
and i know several more examples like this. perhaps the first dichotomy needs an A as a middle option for those in the middle as introversion/extraversion is a spectrum as opposed to one or the other like thinking/feeling sensing/intuition and perceiving/judging

I can see a point in this, if you take the type description on face value. And disregard the idea of a function order and functions. While only using the basic general definition of thinking, feeling, sensing and intuition, as Jung described them. And made a seperate description of perception and judging. Which would mean you'd have to change the already excisting type descriptions aswell.

Edit: the idea of a person using two functions equally would create mental instability. One would always need to be the ruling functions which would render the idea of an amibvert description worthless. In this regard. Not if you take out the functions.

edit 2: processes is the word, sorry...

 

[guesswho]

Oh my god not this again...

 

[Eric B]

^^^

I had tried to extend the types with third poles in the dichotomies, but had to set that idea aside for now. I was trying to make it match this system:
http://www.pastoral-counseling-center.org/Temperament-Area-Of-Inclusion.htm

The four blends down around the middle beginning with "Phlegmatic-" and blended with the other four temperaments are the "ambiverts". They "express" as a Phlegmatic, and "respond" as the other temperament. To express as a Phlegmatic means to express moderately, which is basically inbetween low expression (introversion) and high expression (extroversion).
But even then, they will still fall on one side or the other. A Phlegmatic Melancholy will be slightly on the introvert side, and Phlegmatic Choleric will be slightly on the extrovert side. Since the type code is based on "preference", then even such a slight preference would basically constitute a full-fledged I or E notation.

So I realized that trying to add a third pole in dead center probably was not worth the effort.
What I have found in using this system with people here, is that people who identify most with those moderate temperaments will often have ambiguity in the type letters. Like in this case, I/E. So there is a correlation; but just not any dead center "ambiversion" pole.

 

[funkadelik]

What I have found in using this system with people here, is that people who identify most with those moderate temperaments will often have ambiguity in the type letters. Like in this case, I/E. So there is a correlation; but just not any dead center "ambiversion" pole.

Right. By adding an "Ambivert" dimension to MBTI, you're asking that people show a preference for non-preference. It just doesn't fit well within the system. Yes, there are always going to be people who are undecided, but you can't adjust the framework to fit around those people. You have to build a whole NEW framework for that. Scientists before the theory of special relativity tried to do that with the concept of "the aether." It turned into a huge jumbled mess of hypotheses and speculation and people were so wrapped up with creating new parametres to explain why it wasn't working that they ignored all the evidence pointing towards the fact that there is no aether.

When you set out to bake a cake and you mess up the instructions, you can't just keep adding things to the batter to it to make it better. The best you can do is start over from scratch.

And yes, I am alluding to the idea that maybe the theory of MBTI is fundamentally flawed. But someone has yet to bake a better cake with similar ingredients so all we have in the line of Jungian function cakes is this one to enjoy and dissect the different flavours of.

 

[guesswho]

XNTP => Ne=Ti

How do we quantify Ne to prove that it is equal to Ti?

We can't, therefor we can't prove Ne=Ti.

Why are people taking the MBTI so serious..........

 

[Randomnity]

it's true that their are balanced people of every type, but for I/E it's not as black and white. a T/F balanced ENFP is still Ne, Fi, Te, Si a P/J balanced ENFP will share NONE of the functions with a balanced ENFJ, thus a middle letter for N/S, T/F and P/J is unfeasible.cognitively, an ANFP would simply be Ne=Fi, Te=Si as opposed to Ne>Fi>Te>Si. being A would merely close the preferential gap between the functions 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, and 7 and 8. most scientists agree that simply saying one is an introvert or an extravert is highly oversimplified.

Actually most "scientists" (I think you mean psychologists) agree that the MBTI system is fundamentally nonscientific.

And your argument only makes sense if you think function order is always exactly as described in the model (i.e. that it never goes Ne, Ni, Fi, Fe or something)....which seems unlikely to me.