STs and SFs

[Moiety]

Why are Idealists/Rationalists grouped together using their core functions "NF"/"NT" (respectively), and the Artisans and Guardians aren't??

This is probably a common question but I haven't seen it explained anywhere.

 

[Eric B]

Keirsey tried to map the ancient temperaments to the MBTI types, and since temperament theory and type theory had different frameworks, they did not map symmetrically (such as them agreeing on the factors of S/N and T/F, or J/P, so that temperament would always match either core functions, OR function attitudes, which is the case for SJ and SP.

Temperament is behavioral, while type theory is cognitive (perception and judging, somewhat like input and output on a computer), and behavior will be shaped differently depending on the preferred mode of perception.
So the sensing or "concrete" temperaments are determined by the attitude of Sensing (i or e, determined by J or P). iNtuitive or abstract temperaments are determined by the judging function intuiting is paired with.

 

["?"]

Why are Idealists/Rationalists grouped together using their core functions "NF"/"NT" (respectively), and the Artisans and Guardians aren't??

This is probably a common question but I haven't seen it explained anywhere.

Actually Myers-Briggs does group them as ST-NT-SF-NF in her book “Gifts Differing”. Keirsey’s work is an expansion of the centuries old theory on temperament, combined with his study of Myers-Briggs’ work.
Something of interest is the next time you look at Keirsey’s descriptions for the SPs, in particularly the introverts, compare them to the descriptions for the other introverted types in particularly INT and INF. Notice that he describes the former using their auxiliary function and the latter using their dominant function although ISPs and INPs both use the same respective dominant functions(Ti/Fi).

 

["?"]

Temperament is behavioral, while type theory is cognitive (perception and judging, somewhat like input and output on a computer), and behavior will be shaped differently depending on the preferred mode of perception.

Yet as I just noted in my previous post, Keirsey attempts to describe his introverted types by using their cognitive function, however describes SPs by their auxiliary function. I have not looked at whether he does the same for SJs.

 

[Eric B]

I just ran by a few on keirsey.com, and what it looks like he's doing, is for S types, focusing on the judging function aspects, because that's where the four types of each temperament are distinct from eath other. After all, they agree in their perception preference, which determines the temperament.
For N types, it seems INTJ-Te; ENTJ-Te; INTP-Ti, ENTP-Ne, NF's-more balanced between both preferred functions. Of course, Keirsey by that time no longer believed in the functions, but the basic descriptions of the types remained the same.

 

["?"]

I just ran by a few on keirsey.com, and what it looks like he's doing, is for S types, focusing on the judging function aspects, because that's where the four types of each temperament are distinct from eath other. After all, they agree in their perception preference, which determines the temperament.
For N types, it seems INTJ-Te; ENTJ-Te; INTP-Ti, ENTP-Ne, NF's-more balanced between both preferred functions. Of course, Keirsey by that time no longer believed in the functions, but the basic descriptions of the types remained the same.

When you say “S” types and judging, I am assuming that you mean Si types? Clearly descriptions for ISPs has the same flavor as that of ESPs from his descriptions. Look at the depiction of Keirsey on ISTP and ISFP:

Like all the Artisans, Crafters are people who love action, and who know instinctively that their activities are more enjoyable, and more effective, if done impulsively, spontaneously, subject to no schedules or standards but their own. In a sense, Crafters do not work with their tools, but play with them when the urge strikes them. Crafters also seek fun and games on impulse, looking for any opportunity, and just because they feel like it, to play with their various toys: cars, motorcycles, boats, dune-buggies, hunting rifles, fishing tackle, scuba gear, and on and on. They thrive on excitement, particularly the rush of speed-racing, water-skiing, surfing. And Crafters are fearless in their play, exposing themselves to danger again and again, even despite frequent injury. Of all the types, Crafters are most likely to be risk takers, pitting themselves, or their technique, against chance or odds.

Although Composers often put long, lonely hours into their artistry, they are just as impulsive as the other Artisans. They do not wait to consider their moves; rather, they act in the here and now, with little or no planning or preparation. Composers are seized by the act of artistic composition, as if caught up in a whirlwind. The act is their master, not the reverse. Composers paint or sculpt, they dance or skate, they write melodies or make recipes-or whatever-simply because they must. They climb the mountain because it is there.

Now compare this with his thoughts on types having identical dominant functions, but differing auxiliary functions. He seems to give way too much credence to the secondary function:

Architects show the greatest precision in thought and speech of all the types. They tend to see distinctions and inconsistencies instantaneously, and can detect contradictions no matter when or where they were made. It is difficult for an Architect to listen to nonsense, even in a casual conversation, without pointing out the speaker's error. And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage. Architects regard all discussions as a search for understanding, and believe their function is to eliminate inconsistencies, which can make communication with them an uncomfortable experience for many.

Healers have a profound sense of idealism that comes from a strong personal sense of right and wrong. They conceive of the world as an ethical, honorable place, full of wondrous possibilities and potential goods. In fact, to understand Healers, we must understand that their deep commitment to the positive and the good is almost boundless and selfless, inspiring them to make extraordinary sacrifices for someone or something they believe in. Set off from the rest of humanity by their privacy and scarcity (around one percent of the population), Healers can feel even more isolated in the purity of their idealism.

Again he shows a great imbalance in intuitive types being able to use their dominant function, but SPs being ruled by their auxiliary. I agree with you Eric that he definitely dismissed Jung’s cognitive functions at some point.

 

[Gabe]

When you say “S” types and judging, I am assuming that you mean Si types? Clearly descriptions for ISPs has the same flavor as that of ESPs from his descriptions. Look at the depiction of Keirsey on ISTP and ISFP:Now compare this with his thoughts on types having identical dominant functions, but differing auxiliary functions. He seems to give way too much credence to the secondary function:Again he shows a great imbalance in intuitive types being able to use their dominant function, but SPs being ruled by their auxiliary. I agree with you Eric that he definitely dismissed Jung’s cognitive functions at some point.

The funniest part is that the description of INTP is totally bogus!!

In another forum, Vicky Jo mentioned that she's NEVER seen Linda Berens debating, ever. And that definately matches my experience of INTPs. Reading that description, I keep thinking "no wonder so many INTJs think that they're INTPs".

The Hass+Hunziker description of "INTP language" also mentions them pausing and appearing to waffle in speach.

I also think John Kerry was an INTP. (he APPEARED to waffle, and the republicans took advantage of that)

"And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage"

...what a crock.

Anyways, I never thought about the temperment descriptions that way before, but the idea of Kiersey emphasizing the sensing functions for SJs and SPs makes perfect sense (although some of the descriptions don't even have relevant function-attitude information, instead they have some basic character caricature). Keirsey had a hammer and everything looked like a nail, so his descriptions really screwed the improvisors.

Of course, if we set the Kiersey caricatures aside, furtunately it's still easy to see how dominant functions still serve a temperment's *core needs*.

 

[redacted]

because keirsey is stupid.

if anything, the temperaments should be EJ, EP, IJ, IP. or maybe TJ, TP, FJ, FP.

the whole guardian, rational, idealist, artisan thing just leads to stereotyping.

 

[FDG]

There are 16 possible combination of the 4 letters (4^2). Each group can be quatrichotomized and described.

 

[redacted]

There are 16 possible combination of the 4 letters (4^2). Each group can be quatrichotomized and described.

be careful with that line of thinking. you lose information going from cognitive processes to that level.

 

["?"]

There are 16 possible combination of the 4 letters (4^2). Each group can be quatrichotomized and described.

Wow even FDG has returned. Now if Rocky shows up this will be a party..... except when are you going to return to your rightful place as ESTP?

 

["?"]

because keirsey is stupid.

if anything, the temperaments should be EJ, EP, IJ, IP. or maybe TJ, TP, FJ, FP.

the whole guardian, rational, idealist, artisan thing just leads to stereotyping.

I don't consider him stupid as much as I think that he may overstepped his boundaries attempting to correlate it with Myers-Briggs. It's temperament and as such he has good information regarding core values of the groups. However again Berens continues to work out the kinks to where both schools do merge.

 

[Jeffster]

because keirsey is stupid.

if anything, the temperaments should be EJ, EP, IJ, IP. or maybe TJ, TP, FJ, FP.

the whole guardian, rational, idealist, artisan thing just leads to stereotyping.

What a massive overstatement. It can also (and has with me and many others) led to more understanding and communication in relationships, even among people who would never take the time to read about "cognitive processes."

 

[Jack Flak]

LOL "Keirsey is stupid." Crikey! I can't even hold a discussion if someone starts off like that.

 

[Eric B]

When you say “S” types and judging, I am assuming that you mean Si types? Clearly descriptions for ISPs has the same flavor as that of ESPs from his descriptions. Look at the depiction of Keirsey on ISTP and ISFP:Now compare this with his thoughts on types having identical dominant functions, but differing auxiliary functions. He seems to give way too much credence to the secondary function:Again he shows a great imbalance in intuitive types being able to use their dominant function, but SPs being ruled by their auxiliary.

Yeah, I was in such a rush to find the generalization. You're right that for SP's the descriptions focus on the Se. (I think it was the SJ's that were distinguished by the Judging functions). But Se is dominant for ESP, and aux. for ISP.
For the INTP, it is Ti characteristics that stand out, and in the section of the INFJ you quoted, you see the Fe, but I think later on, you do get a reference to Ni. That seems to be the way it was for the NF's.

 

[Eric B]

The funniest part is that the description of INTP is totally bogus!!

In another forum, Vicky Jo mentioned that she's NEVER seen Linda Berens debating, ever. And that definately matches my experience of INTPs. Reading that description, I keep thinking "no wonder so many INTJs think that they're INTPs".

"And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage"

...what a crock.

Well, according to her, (as well as your PM's), INTJ's aren't like that either! Who is, then? Only Feeling types?

Berens is one person, and since she is a teacher and professional, and running this as a business with all the conferences, lectures, etc. all over the country, who is she going to be debating with?
I'm sure if someone challenges her, and the person is talking "nonsense" as the quote says, she will at least have the ability to be "devastating", in pointing out the errors. (And again, the time limitation, etc). VJ once said something about learning something "the hard way" from Berens (in conjunction with correcting me about the way I was using the terms "directing" and "informing" --as nouns ending in "-ive", back then), and I wish I remembered that when she said Berens never debates or anything like that.

The Hass+Hunziker description of "INTP language" also mentions them pausing and appearing to waffle in speach.

I also think John Kerry was an INTP. (he APPEARED to waffle, and the republicans took advantage of that).

I don't deny that, but I would think it depends on the topic. If it's a subject of their expertise, and they're more confident about it, then they probably won't waffle as much. In writing, they don't seem to, and that's probably where they would be the most able to debate.

 

[redacted]

I don't consider him stupid as much as I think that he may overstepped his boundaries attempting to correlate it with Myers-Briggs. It's temperament and as such he has good information regarding core values of the groups. However again Berens continues to work out the kinks to where both schools do merge.

What a massive overstatement. It can also (and has with me and many others) led to more understanding and communication in relationships, even among people who would never take the time to read about "cognitive processes."

LOL "Keirsey is stupid." Crikey! I can't even hold a discussion if someone starts off like that.

i admit that his theories correlate to the truth. there are two problems, though:
1) he can't account for people on the border between temperaments (like me for example, lol). this will lead to putting people in boxes that they don't actually fit into.
2) his temperaments are not parallel, which is totally misleading. for example, ISFP and INFP are much more similar than ISFP and ISTP, but he groups the SPs together.

yes, some people who would not delve into the functions will gain some insight. but some of those some will get FALSE insight. allllllll bad.

listen, i learned about MBTI by reading his book. it took me months and months to UNLEARN the inconsistencies. i would rather have not even been exposed to his ideas.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

listen, i learned about MBTI by reading his book. it took me months and months to UNLEARN the inconsistencies. i would rather have not even been exposed to his ideas.

Preach, brotha'!

 

[mlittrell]

because keirsey is stupid.

if anything, the temperaments should be EJ, EP, IJ, IP. or maybe TJ, TP, FJ, FP.

the whole guardian, rational, idealist, artisan thing just leads to stereotyping.

explain...

 

[Jack Flak]

listen, i learned about MBTI by reading his book. it took me months and months to UNLEARN the inconsistencies. i would rather have not even been exposed to his ideas.

And I wish Keirsey had been first so "Function theory" would never have gotten so widespread. I disagree with a lot of MBTI and very little Keirsey. To each his own.