• 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.

[Jungian Cognitive Functions] Objective Personality

GavinElster

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
233
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just to give one example, Jung's take on NTFS and the MBTI's are pretty different, yet they're both describing things that have been studied with rigor

MBTI's N has very little to do with the actual concept of intuition. Intuition, meaning, preconscious cognitive processing of a more associative than logical sort. Other psychometric instruments study this sort of thing.

There are many NTFS's not one, basically
 

jdempcy

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
11
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
There is a thread on the Unofficial Objective Personality Facebook Group talking about this thread: Unofficial Objective Personality Study Group Public Group | Facebook

I would urge the original poster and any other interested parties to join the group there, if they are so inclined.

Funny enough, many people in the Objective Personality group thought that I was the original poster, here, because apparently I have made similar criticisms. I don't think this is the case, but I do agree with some things that the original poster said, and I have been highly critical of very specific parts of Objective Personality while also being supportive of most of the rest of it. The things I have been critical of are Dave Powers's seeming obsession with being "the alpha," including idolizing pick up artists, motivational speakers, get-rich-quick people, and various internet celebrities that he has chosen as role model alphas. That, and some philosophical discussions about methodology and objectivity. And perhaps the biggest one, a walled garden style refusal to allow cross-pollination with a deferral to "language problems" rather than actually discussing theoretical differences. For instance, someone in the OP group have told me it is possible I "really am" an INTJ in MBTI while also "really" being an ENFP in Objective Personality. I find this laughable.

I was also told that Cognitive Type has different definitions of the functions from Objective Personality, thus it is possible that when Cognitive Type assessed Dave Powers as Te/Si that it could still be correct, even though he identifies as Ni/Fi (a subtype of INTJ) in his system. Well! This is also disingenuous and flat out wrong, because when Dave and Shannon looked at Cognitive Type, they pointed out some people who were assessed correctly and others who were assessed incorrectly. That is, say Cognitive Type identifies someone as an Fe/Si type (ESFJ), and Dave and Shannon also identify that person as Fe/Si, they would say that Cognitive Type is correct. Or if Cognitive Type identifies that person as Fe/Si with Ne subtype, and Dave and Shannon identify that same person as Fe/Ne, they would agree that Cognitive Type got the typing assessment accurately in that case. See what I'm saying? It's totally disingenuous for someone to claim that CT could be right about Dave Powers being Te/Si in their system, while Dave could also be right about himself being a type of INTJ in his system. It's intellectually dishonest.

Anyway. Those are my main complaints about Objective Personality: 1.) The inferior Se idolization of PUAs, motivational speakers, finance coaches and celebrities; 2.) Their methodology and claim that they are doing double blind objective typing; 3.) The refusal to engage in conversation with any other typology systems whatsoever (insularity). That about sums it up.
 

brightflashes

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
32
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The inferior Se idolization of PUAs, motivational speakers, finance coaches and celebrities

I'm in their class and in the fb groups. This is particularly unsettling for me and gives me pause. While I think there is some merit there, Shave's inability to cite their sources and provide direct references to pieces of these people's ideas is unhelpful. The idolization really is on out-of-control levels, though. Even though I know it doesn't meet the definition in many other (more important) ways, the "worship" of certain figures feels a bit like a cult to me.

However! I am still taking and enjoying their class. I really enjoy learning new theories and perspectives and I find their system compelling and insightful in many ways.
 

Peter Deadpan

phallus impudicus
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
8,883
So I'm not in the class yet, but I plan on signing up this week sometime. I have however watched all of the videos on their YouTube channel (since updating their approach) and perused through their website and Facebook page. Here's my quick and dirty breakdown:

- They approach typing:
* in an educated manner (they've been around for years and took a long hiatus, from what I can tell, to work out the kinks and develop a strategy)
* objectively, meaning from a verifiable 3rd party angle (obviously there is some room for advancement here since they only have 2 instructors, but give it some time), there are static and strict guidelines for assessing type (clear stripped down definitions and a consistent process with linear steps), results are peer reviewed (again, room for eventual improvement via broader scale)
* honestly and ethically by sharing their knowledge and strategies for a relatively affordable price (compare them to the Fauvres and you'll see there is a lot more transparency and availability, and frankly they come across as less intellectually arrogant, which is impressive)

I actually have no problem with there being 500-and some odd types because people are fucking nuanced as hell and it was brilliant to divide into subsequent (not the word I want but it'll fucking do) groups of two.

Self-typing is incredibly inaccurate for many reasons. People are limited to assessing only their ego unless they have really looked in the mirror and spent y e a r s deeply introspecting and crawling through the spider-infested nooks and crannies of their cellars, accessible only through a sketchy locked door that exists outside of the comfort of their home, and generally speaking... people only do this when a major fucking storm threatens to send their world crashing to the ground.

There is also too much room for misunderstanding and personal interpretation for question-and-answer format testing. Being good at something and thinking you are good at something and wanting to be good at something are three different things. Plus, it's all too easy to read a question the wrong way.

As far as the whole "worship" of gurus, I say hogwash. Sure, intellectually speaking, it probably has little reason for being included, unless of course you take into account that it's beneficial to have real world examples of people overcoming their figurative demons when learning about a system intended to spark understanding and growth. Perhaps it'd be a good idea to sort of segregate that portion of the lectures, but I personally enjoy that it's included because I am a self-help whore (I own probably 30-ish self-help books and have finished precisely one of them, so I could certainly use a little focus).

Regarding cults and cult-like behavior, I would argue that ALL of typology is culty. And on that note, I leave you with this:
 

Turi

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
249
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
As far as the whole "worship" of gurus, I say hogwash. Sure, intellectually speaking, it probably has little reason for being included, unless of course you take into account that it's beneficial to have real world examples of people overcoming their figurative demons when learning about a system intended to spark understanding and growth. Perhaps it'd be a good idea to sort of segregate that portion of the lectures, but I personally enjoy that it's included because I am a self-help whore (I own probably 30-ish self-help books and have finished precisely one of them, so I could certainly use a little focus).

I for one don't get a "worship of gurus" vibe from them at all, rather they're just noting the sources they're taking inspiration from - some of which, are literally self-help gurus ie Tony Robbins (his Human Needs is a core part of the system, albeit in an adapted manner) etc but yes, there is the intent to use some guru-like people as examples of types conquering their demons etc - I can't confirm whether or not they actually go out looking for "guru" people as examples, or if those kinds of people just naturally overcome their demons as it's basically their job (ie, "look at this thing I accomplished ie the demon - and here's how you can to) so people doing it might be prone to becoming guru-like types after overcoming their demons, as they think it's something worth sharing as to them it's the biggest obstacle ever and they beat it.

I don't know, though - a fair chunk of the above just my perception.

Regarding cults and cult-like behavior, I would argue that ALL of typology is culty. And on that note, I leave you with this:

I would agree with this, it's something you can observe yourself, and if you're a member of any FB groups you'll really see just how cult-like MBTI specifically, actually gets.
 

pmj85

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
130
3.) The refusal to engage in conversation with any other typology systems whatsoever (insularity).

Incorrect.

They actually covered 'Cognitive Types' in one of their videos. They had a lot of good to say about the model and noted that they would love to exchange ideas.
 

Dashy CVII

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
105
MBTI Type
INTJ
People with dominant Ni are insightful, charismatic and great leaders. People love to follow them. But it’s important to remember that what they put out there as truth is their subjective understanding of things. Their opinions are fallible, just like anyone else’s.

Eh? This person's speaking about Ni? Subjective understandings? Charisma? Lol.

The cognitive function business is a lot easier than people tend to make it, due unfortunately to silly concepts from bad MBTI dichotomies, like one that really got me, Te being defined as "social / consensual thinking." You have to start understanding Thinking as actual thinking, Intuition as actual intuition, Xe in terms of conditions and externals, Xi in terms of reflections and internals, since these are the rightful definitions. What this site is trying to do is completely redefine these concepts using familiar words we already have definitions for. It just sounds bad all around.

Introverted Intuition is Introverted Intuition is Introverted Intuition. You will know it if you have it and who has it, if you've studied the actual etymology of these two words. Now if you want to define a function as charismatic insight, leadership, whatever the fuck you want to do, go for it. But use accurate terms. As for Introverted Intuition, I've personally written a lot on it.

For the sake of writing something new however, some very Ni movies I happened to watch this week were Blade Runner 2049 and Beauty and the Beast (1991). The majority of the main characters are Ni dominant, mostly in the form of effectless mental wandering that doesn't attach to anything but the inward world of shaders and combinations. There are no "subjective understandings" nor slight glimmers of "charisma," it's literally the opposite. Introversion doesn't orient to external conditions, it mirrors reality where it can get the best subjective advantage with its function. So because Ni is perception, its home base isn't anything related to what that post just said. Ni is one of the two brands of introversion + perception, due to its abstract and nonsensate nature its nothing short of noncharismatic and exotic.

I can understand how some extraverts mistype as Ni dom due to MBTI's misunderstanding of I/E, where their version of Ni orients to externals? to external conditions? "I'm nonsocial therefore I'm an Introvert." etc. That's not how the word is defined. Fi types can often be charismatic like Fe egos. Feeling is the function you're looking for here, the function of relateable human convictions, why we can't form function understandings from bad MBTI dichotomies. We get bad info on the true manifestation of Introverted Intuition in human beings. It's best to first understand Ni in terms of the "holistic IP type", since that's what it is.
 
Last edited:

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
I'm laughing my ass off at the non-Jungian misunderstanding of introversion + perception. ...

"I'm nonsocial therefore I'm an Introvert." No. That's not how the word is defined.

Here's Mr. Jung hisself, from Chapter X of Psychological Types:

[Extraverts and introverts] are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. Everyone knows those reserved, inscrutable, rather shy people who form the strongest possible contrast to the open, sociable, jovial, or at least friendly and approachable characters who are on good terms with everybody, or quarrel with everybody, but always relate to them in some way and in turn are affected by them.​
 

brightflashes

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
32
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yeah, I think I might have misspoke when I mentioned cults. I don't know how to say it without sounding super weird. There are certain techniques cult leaders use to brainwash people. I'm not saying that they are doing this on purpose, but some of these things are:

- Forget everything that you think you know
- You actually have no clue what the truth *really* is, but we can show you
- You can attain the position that we are in, but you have to put years into it

etc

Seriously, it's just something that I have (comedically) noticed that are similar between cult leaders and them. It really doubt that it means anything. In one of my jobs, I was trained rigorously to notice these sorts of patterns and it carries over into my personal life. While yes, I recognize the cult-like behavior on MBTI (and agree that it's much worse than anything on OP), I actually meant it in a more technical way than just throwing out the word to voice some sort of disapproval or however it may have sounded.

I just want to reiterate for intellectual honesty: I actually really enjoy their classes and I find their methods and approach refreshing and far superior to the bulk of methods I have encountered within personality psychology elsewhere, including University.
 

Peter Deadpan

phallus impudicus
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
8,883
Here's Mr. Jung hisself, from Chapter X of Psychological Types:

[Extraverts and introverts] are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. Everyone knows those reserved, inscrutable, rather shy people who form the strongest possible contrast to the open, sociable, jovial, or at least friendly and approachable characters who are on good terms with everybody, or quarrel with everybody, but always relate to them in some way and in turn are affected by them.​

Are you also on the flat Earth bandwagon?
Better be careful or you might drive right off the edge.
 

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
Are you also on the flat Earth bandwagon?
Better be careful or you might drive right off the edge.

Do you actually have any substantive issue with my post? If so, let's hear it.

In any case, have fun with SuperDuperDave.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Website looking for cash said:
The strongest thing we track is what people fear and blame

I doubt people wish to discuss their childhood at length.

Website looking for cash said:
The selfish person can't hide that they fear tribe retaliation. The factual person can’t hide that they disrespect the abstract.

Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.
— Confucius
 

Turi

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
249
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Ah, well, I'm always happy to clear up a simple misunderstanding. Yes, I value advancement in knowledge.

I might be missing something - but if this were the case, why did you refer to Jung, and not to more modern understandings of introversion and extroversion?
It's possibly the only facet in all of personality theory that has any kind of credibility behind it - and it goes beyond surface level traits such as those you quoted, and into the mechanics of how our brains are wired (see: The Introvert Advantage by Dr. Laney).

If I recall correctly - I believe most people that are "Highly Sensitive People" according to Dr. Aron also believe themselves to be "introverts" - so again we're seeing more modern understandings of introversion and extroversion here, I don't feel we need to refer to Jung on this, as I believe we've advanced beyond his work here - though, of course, we haven't advanced past his theories, as he predicted this was the case).
 

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
I might be missing something - but if this were the case, why did you refer to Jung, and not to more modern understandings of introversion and extroversion?

The post I replied to criticized the purportedly "non-Jungian" association of E/I and sociability, and my reply just corrected that misunderstanding.
 

Dashy CVII

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
105
MBTI Type
INTJ
I think these are the same people who to the most comparative extent, say Te/Fis don't do their own thinking, nor do they care about others' values over their own values. They didn't really plan out their strategy or brainstorm better type combinations, nor seem to have an extensive knowledge on meaningful variations in human psychology, but went with the most basic approach they were familiar with. This is of course layered with just as many problems brushed under the rug as the next theory, at least, I know of theories with many less problems, like The True Types of Carl Jung which takes much more depth of understanding. I mentioned in another thread, that the majority of Ns I've studied relate to both Objective Personality's Ti and Fi definitions (being Ti-Fi types, not Ti-Fe or Fi-Te types) however shallow these definitions are. I haven't really gotten any psychological use from Objective Personality's understanding on MBTI, their relational theory seems out the window, however, there are many better systems out there for understanding the functional groupings of people, more useful galleries and definitions on relational chemistry if your preference is for accuracy > ease of understanding.

This is about as catchy and pop-psychology as standard Keirsey when realistically compared to what's been achieved. There is a correlation between extraversion and sociability, but that's not its, nor Jung's, complete understanding and substance on the issue. Its definition and etymology are "outward-turning" or "outward-referencing," and are the benchmarks which Jung and Socionics used to draw these correlations, that MBTI avoided and skipped over. One thing however that MBTI and Socionics have achieved over Jung's understanding is the simple realization that all people dominantly Value and feel emotions, that F is much more related to a preference for Ethics and People Concerns > Logic and Reason.

If our human values were a function, they would be primary / #1. On a real test which tests for reasons and values, no one will obtain the former result, unless programmed by the likes of Hitachi Robotics. Even so, we're testing for what we indeed value: our own reasoning (T) or the opinions and concerns of others (F). MBTI was unknowing that their function system falls apart with these goofy Jung functions, like Fi equaling "personal values," which is hopefully something we all have, and it seems that, with all the good bits from each typology, Objective Personality / Dave has taken the worst bits from each theory.

I give the work overall a 3/10, I think that's fair. To each his own however.
 

Peter Deadpan

phallus impudicus
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
8,883
This article is dated right after this thread, but I'm just finding it today. Interesting!

A Critique of Objective Personality - Greg Kennedy - Medium

This mostly just sounds like someone who lacks Sleep and is therefore lacking in the looking-in department. :coffee:

Seriously though... while there are some valid points of interest here, I must say that it is overall a pretty shallow analysis of a complex (in breadth) system. It's also pretty silly to criticize any personality system for being unscientific because as it stands, all personality theories are pseudoscientific. I do think it's possible to get to a scientific point one day, and I think Dave and Shannon have that in mind as an ultimate goal, but I don't even think they expect it to get there in their lifetime. It is difficult to concretely define something as abstract as a personality, so other metrics need to be introduced in a way that will overlap with the system (DNA may need to get to a point where it can identify personality traits in a way which aligns with objective analysis of the functions, animals, modalities, or whatever).

I think to get all bent out of shape about such an abstract and fresh system is a little silly on a fundamental level, and it seems to me that the writer is mostly concerned with it being more of an inspirational capitalistic cult, which I must confess was a thought that nagged me a bit early on too. However, I find that people who resist being inspired to grow or change are oftentimes just not quite ready to truly face their demons.

I've since opened up to realizing certain weaknesses or downright shitty things about my personality that I couldn't quite see beneath my ego to the depths that I can see now, and I can genuinely say that there was value in some of the cheesier "Hero's Journey" stuff and I think it would have taken me much longer to see certain things had I not been exposed to some of these concepts. I have grown because of it and will continue to do so because even though it hurts, it also feels better to shed those scales.

There's just really no need to get all defensive about "inspiration"... that's something high schoolers who are trying to look cool do.

He's probably just someone who was typed as ESxP and got all salty about not being intuitive and then had to prove his typing correct by going over every sensory point and saying "tHiS DoESnt EveN MaKe sEnsE!" and "Don't control me, bro!" while being nearly unable to see the Ni implied future of the system. :shrug:
 

Peter Deadpan

phallus impudicus
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
8,883
I just think this is funny for some reason.

 
Top