Gingerly offering new Temperaments

[mlittrell]

Are you saying functions are useless to personality? That's like saying happiness is useless in examining the overall well-being of the person. I disagree. You must first understand the fundamental building blocks before you look at how they interact. Otherwise you're just making it harder on yourself when you don't have to.


Development of MBTI as a whole, yes. Furthering our understanding of the implications on the model, no.

no no noooo. functions are insanely useful. they are useless as individual ENTITIES. meaning by themselves. you must understand, the way Te is used in an ENFP (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) is completely different when used in an ENTJ (Te, Ni, Se, Fi) and even an ESTJ (Te, Si, Ne, Fi). you need to look at functions as a whole within a personality and not indiviually to know how they work. even Ne in an ENTP and an ENFP are used differently. believe me, functions are the second most important thing in MBTI imo. they are extremely helpful in so many different ways. BUT, you cannot look at Ne as just Ne or Ti as just Ti or Fe as just Fe or Se as just Se and so on. ya you can make some very vague generalities with an individual function but thats it. this is why you need to look at it as a team. even though every team might be similar, they way they operate is still going to be different between the types.

i would disagree with me too if thats the way i took it lol. and our understanding of the current model are already layed out. there isn't much more we can delve into without getting ourselves caught up into a technically logical system that has no application or point for that matter. MBTI is just a model for something we dont understand. we can use Si to explain something that happens in the brain but exactly what that is...?

 

[nightning]

no no noooo. functions are insanely useful. they are useless as individual ENTITIES. meaning by themselves. you must understand, the way Te is used in an ENFP (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) is completely different when used in an ENTJ (Te, Ni, Se, Fi) and even an ESTJ (Te, Si, Ne, Fi). you need to look at functions as a whole within a personality and not indiviually to know how they work. even Ne in an ENTP and an ENFP are used differently. believe me, functions are the second most important thing in MBTI imo. they are extremely helpful in so many different ways. BUT, you cannot look at Ne as just Ne or Ti as just Ti or Fe as just Fe or Se as just Se and so on. ya you can make some very vague generalities with an individual function but thats it. this is why you need to look at it as a team. even though every team might be similar, they way they operate is still going to be different between the types.

i would disagree with me too if thats the way i took it lol. and our understanding of the current model are already layed out. there isn't much more we can delve into without getting ourselves caught up into a technically logical system that has no application or point for that matter. MBTI is just a model for something we dont understand. we can use Si to explain something that happens in the brain but exactly what that is...?

Ah! I misinterpreted... I also see what your concerns are.

The thing is, I'm not proposing a substitute for the 16 types. Merely providing a finer grouping of the types using their dominant functions. Yes Ne is used differently by ENTP compared to ENFP, however the general approach on say problem solving in ENTP will be more similar to an ENFP than say a INTJ since they shared dominant Ne, where as an INTJ uses dominant Ni. Yet under Keirsey's temperaments, INTJs are group with ENTPs which suggests they're more similar to each other than ENFPs which is a bit misleading.

 

[Jack Flak]

Yet under Keirsey's temperaments, INTJs are group with ENTPs which suggests they're more similar to each other than ENFPs which is a bit misleading.

Hmm. In high school basically my two best friends were ENTP and INTJ, and we all had a great deal in common. If you were to show us an ENFP, we would say "This is an interesting anomaly," and I believe might have in actuality.

 

[edcoaching]

Hmmm...on some other thread I posted different rationales for different type groupings--and haven't quite figured out how to search for that stuff around here.

For communication, all NTs have a lot in common since they take in information and make decisions in the same way. But INTJ, ENTP, ENFP are all dominant N's and will therefore have similar strengths and blind spots--and have a lot of fun working together if it's an open-ended project where they can feed off each other's creativity yet work independently.

Kiersey's groupings weren't exactly based on Jungian type even though there are these strong correlations. I've always thought it was the most bizarre way to group but other people find it really useful, obviously...

 

[mlittrell]

Ah! I misinterpreted... I also see what your concerns are.

The thing is, I'm not proposing a substitute for the 16 types. Merely providing a finer grouping of the types using their dominant functions. Yes Ne is used differently by ENTP compared to ENFP, however the general approach on say problem solving in ENTP will be more similar to an ENFP than say a INTJ since they shared dominant Ne, where as an INTJ uses dominant Ni. Yet under Keirsey's temperaments, INTJs are group with ENTPs which suggests they're more similar to each other than ENFPs which is a bit misleading.

ahh ok true true. but that is all that new groupings accomplish. you could just say say (in conversation) "Ne in terms of an ENTP". which is quite a bit easier then having to explain your new groupings to someone.

 

[Eric B]

I had thought up some terminology to quickly indicate similarity of different types.

Types that use the same preferred perception functions only (such as ENTP/ENFP) are "perception compatible. They basically "'see' things the same way". Those sharing the same judgment functions are "judgment compatible. They basically judge things in a similar way.
Those who share the same primary axis, but in reverse order, are "reverse" perception or judgment compatible (ENFP: FiTe; INTJ: TeFi). Those sharing the same four primary functions, but in different order naturally, are just "fully ego-compatible", even though some things are reversed. All four opposite letters will be the first four in reverse order, and can be called simply "reverse compatible".

NF and NT temperaments, along with ST and SF are just "basic function preference compatible", with the most difference being the attitudes being reversed.

 

[Cimarron]

That's pretty good, Eric. There is a lack of cohesive terminology for most of the stuff we've been discussing in this thread, so this kind of thing would (theoretically) be very valuable.

 

[Kristiana]

I think it's a good idea, but I'd be more NP than TJ because my N is so dominant. I am definitely more intuitively observant/aware than I am a planner. So I'm unsure how accurate it is.

 

[mlittrell]

if you are an INTJ then your dominant function would be introverted intuition so your right, N would be dominant. just not directed outward. that being said, you might be right about the accuracy of your type.