• 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.

The BEST descriptions of the functions

Clegane

New member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
178
MBTI Type
ISTP
I've read tons of descriptions but I ain't satisfied. Please, link me what you consider to be the best descriptions. Book suggestions would be great too. There are too many vague informations across the web.
 

Yama

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
7,684
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Best description of Si: my description. *shameless self-promotion* **actually I just really hate how online descriptions describe Si**

Si creates archetypes from personal experience and compares what it faces in the present to that archetype. This archetype is solid, unchanging, completely static; if archetypes could change or be altered and re-defined, then there is literally no point to there being an archetype. This is why Si doms may have a reputation for being stubborn or "stuck in their ways" depending on the archetype.

For example:

One Si dom's archetype of a chair is a seat that has legs and a back. Imagine this Si dom sees a barstool and someone calls it a chair. They argue with that perosn. No, it's NOT a chair. It doesn't have a back and all chairs have seats, legs, and backs. This item does not qualify as a chair because it does not meet a chair's archetypal qualities.

BUT, unlike Ni (which I think it more about universal archetypes), Si's archetypes, being based completely on past experience, are unique to the individual. One Si type's archetype may not match another's.

Let's imagine the person the Si dom from the argument above was arguing with--the one who called a barstool a chair. Maybe this person is also an Si dom, but their archetype of a chair looks different; to them, a chair need only have a seat and legs. Thus, a barstool qualifies as a chair to them, but not to the first Si dom. And neither of them are going to change their minds about who's right, ever. Because archetypes do not, cannot change, or else they lose all meaning.
 

Dreamer

Potential is My Addiction
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
4,539
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
794
I've read tons of descriptions but I ain't satisfied. Please, link me what you consider to be the best descriptions. Book suggestions would be great too. There are too many vague informations across the web.

Hopefully this thread proves fruitful. I've had to sort of make sense of the functions on my own because the online descriptions are so poor. They all tend to just focus on the external signals, without ever going into the "why?". That's what irritates me most about them is that whenever I learn something new, I am ALWAYS looking for the "why". The what is meh to me.
 

Agent Washington

Softserve Ice Cream
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
2,053
Being Salty Sensor (tm), I'm going to link you to Dario Nardi.

He's from UCLA, working with EEG, and I've read excerpts from "Neuroscience of Personality" (which, obviously, isn't enough to judge whether it's good - but the UCLA part seems cool, and EEG seems nice, and working with students sounds like a standard thing for psychological studies since, y'know, cheap blokes looking for $$ for a couple of hours), which seemed interesting enough in terms of descriptions and THIS description was concrete primarily because it is based on... the... physical. ...... ... *salty sensor mode*

Dario Nardi: "Neuroscience of Personality" | Talks at Google - YouTube
Google Talks (Not sure how good this is gonna be, havent watched it in full; feel free to watch it and tell me it's junk. or don't.)

Update: Actually, a quick glance at his AMA tells me his view on MBTI makes sense.
AMA with typologist Dario Nardi : mbti

...But IMO, if you want to know what it's like, phenomenologically, for somebody to use a function, your best bet is to just ask people and gather as many responses as you can, do some filtering based on some standards you've set (eg: this response may sound more like Si than, say, Ni, etc), and so on. I think talking to people is probably the best way to understand them. (I'm not going to because I hate people, but you can do it if you're into that sort of thing.)
 
Joined
Jul 23, 2016
Messages
432
Enneagram
9w1
Best description of Si: my description. *shameless self-promotion* **actually I just really hate how online descriptions describe Si**

well no wonder people often say MBTI Si translates well to Socionics Ti. Well everything except the fact that one is more sensory detail and the other is structural/logical detail
 

Korvinagor

Cyber Strider
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
762
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Best description of Si: my description. *shameless self-promotion* **actually I just really hate how online descriptions describe Si**

Mm, indeed. A lot of the Si descriptions boil down to 'remembering things well' or 'being detailed-oriented', which gets rid of a lot of the nuance and subtlety surrounding Si (at least, in my opinion).

What do you think of the TypoC wiki function descriptions [MENTION=28497]Clegane[/MENTION]?
 

Mayflower

King Ping
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Messages
701
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I covered the functions Here a while back. I tried, but I hope it helps.
 
Top