[MBTI General] Missing Axis?

[Siúil a Rúin]

Do you think there are more axis fundamental to personality systems beyond the F <--> T, S <--> N and their internal introverted <--> extroverted versions?

Sometimes I'll notice that any personality category feel similar to if there were only judging functions without any perception, so that all INFJs and INTJs were considered the same, all INFPs and ISFPs were the same, etc. Within the category you would get a sense of similarities, but you would also consider there is some type of fundamental differences as well. I've been wondering if this is the state the system is currently in. If there is another fundamental breakdown within each of the 16 categories.

Do you think this is plausible? And if so, what do you think the additional axis would be? I have some ideas, but it would be interesting to hear more.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

This may be related to something like the Big 5, but there is an aspect to personality involving ego strength and/or certitude that doesn't seem entirely accounted for in the MBTI system, even with the different judging preferences. I know that Ps are stereotypically less decisive than Js, but it applies more to specific areas of certitude. In purely online discussions I can't see any difference in certitude between Js and Ps. It seems like some are intensely certain, moderately so, and tend towards ambivalence among Js and among Ps. There is a huge difference between an ENTJ or an ISFP who is high in certitude/ego-strength (that may be the wrong word) and one who is softer in that area. I've been noticing it in INFP discussions in which some individuals tire of the gentler stereotypes because of being more willful and certain. I could easily see two subcategories for each type. The words I'm using may not be the right one, but within each type some people are very certain, assertive, decisive, (other words for it?) about ideas and choices and others are not. I also notice it in discussions of Ni where for some it is a distilling process that creates a singular vision and for others it opens a door to endless internal possibilities. Perhaps people would ascribe that simply to Ni vs. Ne, but I'm not convinced that's it. I keep getting this feeling that there are at least two versions of each function - there are two versions of Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, etc. It's also why it's easy to either feel mistyped oneself or to see others as mistyped for being so unlike ourselves.

It can also seem like there is something not quite accounted for in term of structure or chaos, but that isn't entirely clear enough to me to put into words because I know it is partly addressed with P and J, but it still doesn't seem to account for how it plays out.

Anyone want to play with this idea?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

The certitude <--> questioning axis (which I'm still trying to find the correct words for because it's different from J and P) does appear to completely transform a personality. It isn't just personal confidence which is why ego strength is probably the wrong word. It may relate to enneagram, but if it is significant enough as a personality component, then shouldn't it be included in MBTI? For example, the really aggressive INTPs are fundamentally different from the more open ones, and while they would have different enneagrams to explain it, the contrast actually feels like it should be fundamentally different categories. They are every bit as different from each other as Sensors and iNtuitives or Thinkers and Feelers. The assumptions that blur when they are in the same category creates a lot of erroneous assumptions. It is the same for all the functions, and I think an area that causes a lot of frustration.

It also has to do with the force with which a person needs to impact the world. It applies to Ji with their ideas with as much contrast as it does with Je. Fe is an excellent example because there are some people strong in Fe that are very pleasant and accommodating as a result, while others are capable of imposing force onto the world. It isn't the same thing and the same person is not capable of both. It may be more mutually exclusive than the other categories.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I think about this too. A lot of discrepanices I account for with the pairing of a thinking and feeling type (INFP e9). It gets even sweeter when you add tritype (INFP 937). But there's a wiggly feeling I have too about what you're saying, there's something dimensional that's lacking, a sense of agency perhaps. I will add more to this thread as I ponder your posts.

As for the following: "I've been noticing it in INFP discussions in which some individuals tire of the gentler stereotypes because of being more willful and certain."

That person is probably mistyed. Not saying that to be contentious, but to me their thought patterns don't appear to follow an INFP thinking pattern.

 

[Shaedow]

With MBTI I though the J/P dimension included the aspect of decisive/openness?

The difference between each type could come down to which dimension of the facets are preferred for each dichotomy.
https://www.opp.com/en/tools/MBTI/MBTI-Step-II-facets

For example a thinking type who is logical, reasonable and questioning but also has more feeling traits of tenderness and an accepting nature.

This could be the axes you are noticing.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

With MBTI I though the J/P dimension included the aspect of decisive/openness?

The difference between each type could come down to which dimension of the facets are preferred for each dichotomy.
https://www.opp.com/en/tools/MBTI/MBTI-Step-II-facets

For example a thinking type who is logical, reasonable and questioning but also has more feeling traits of tenderness and an accepting nature.

This could be the axes you are noticing.

That could be it. The contrast in certitude is just so pronounced among people of each group. Go to any single type forum and there is a distinct contrast between the aggressive/decisive/absolute approach and the more passive/questioning/open approach. I noticed it on the INTJ forum where some people are very open and questioning and others have a singular vision that is absolute. I see it in every category including extroverts. I don't expect that the system is complete. I don't see a reason why Jung alone and then groups of people building off of his ideas would necessarily figure out all the parameters. It's possible there is a way to explain it with what is already in the theory, and what I've read suggests hints of it, but it seems like it goes beyond it. It feels like placing all Ni-doms as a single personality type and then explaining the reason that some are rationalistic by saying they focus on their Ti. Yes, that kind of explains it, but in reality there is a different category - the INTJ that explains the contrast more effectively.