[INTJ] imagine you are a intj in middle ages

[kidom]

that the glorious alpha male combo NI-TE
STP dont exist

NTJ are rich, if i go in middle age now, let me one month and im the king of this world

 

[kidom]

living in the middle age is probably the most easy thing

i dont why people think that was hard

the middle age was the only time when intelligence had its importance

 

[kidom]

that was i like middle age, they have no rule, you create it, you create everything in the middle age beacause nothing had been created yet
no society, nothing was defined, all that bullshit just make this world fun

you use your brain and that it, you free, you can go everywhere you want, become everything you want

 

[Obfuscate]

you have to be kidding me... you need to read some history...

 

[chubber]

everything should be so easy and so fun, OMG !!!

now everything is hard and not fun for genius

Good question, I also might not have been an INTJ then. Different environment, different upbringing for my parents, different life. Don't have a clear answer.

 

[Litvyak]

Not to be a Debbie Downer (yet again), but I don't think it's reasonable to assume INTJs, or any other type, existed in the Middle Ages. Personality is shaped by socioeconomic factors. One can dream, I guess.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Not to be a Debbie Downer (yet again), but I don't think it's reasonable to assume INTJs, or any other type, existed in the Middle Ages. Personality is shaped by socioeconomic factors. One can dream, I guess.

Obviously there were no personality categories like that, but different cognitive styles would have existed in people.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

that was i like middle age, they have no rule, you create it, you create everything in the middle age beacause nothing had been created yet
no society, nothing was defined, all that bullshit just make this world fun

you use your brain and that it, you free, you can go everywhere you want, become everything you want

Are you a fucking idiot?

 

[Litvyak]

Obviously there were no personality categories like that, but different cognitive styles would have existed in people.

You mean cognitive preferences? Sure, I mean, people were inclined to think and see the world in certain ways, but it's even more of a black box than the contemporary subject. The question projects a Jungian type 800 years in the past, which is unreasonable/uninteresting even for a thought experiment.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

You mean cognitive preferences? Sure, I mean, people were inclined to think and see the world in certain ways, but it's even more of a black box than the contemporary subject. The question projects a Jungian type 800 years in the past, which is unreasonable/uninteresting even for a thought experiment.

You said personality was shaped by socioeconomic factors. If that were the case, wouldn't everyone born into a particular class or status have identical personalities?

 

[Forever]

The personality types have been always independent of time. It didn’t just come up when Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs came.

What kind of silly thinking is that?

*covertly drinks a concoction only found in the 20th century to keep my Ni running*

 

[Litvyak]

You said personality was shaped by socioeconomic factors. If that were the case, wouldn't everyone born into a particular class or status have identical personalities?

No, I said shaped, not determined. The extent to which this takes place is debatable, but the idea that predespositions towards certain ways of thinking ("function stacks") are heavily influenced by these factors seems obvious to me. It's also very difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain how a certain form of life correlates to a certain function stack, the only thing that seems to be clear is that types are not supra-historical...

... or, if you prefer a weaker argument, it is impossible to prove they are. The op can simply assume that they are and play with the idea of taking the 16 types back to the Middle Ages, sure, but I don't see any merit in that other than producing a few clichés like "ISTJs would be historians" or "ENTJs would rule".

- - - Updated - - -

The personality types have been always independent of time. It didn’t just come up when Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs came.

What kind of silly thinking is that?

I sure hope you're being ironic. Difficult to say, I'm not a native speaker.

 

[Coriolis]

The personality types have been always independent of time. It didn’t just come up when Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs came.

As it see it, the preferences that the types are attempting to describe seem part of the human condition, just like handedness or sexual orientation. People have always had to take in information and make decisions, which is what the dichotomous scales are meant to characterize. I suppose the distribution of preferences may have evolved with time, especially if we think they are partly the product of nurture rather than hardwired. Recent research suggests that at least some of it is hardwired. So, I agree that what the types try to categorize is timeless, though the various systems we use to do that are certainly not.

 

[kidom]

okay so you think middle age was hard because what ???
use your brain and you win every situation, black plague, angry dictator,ect.. really easy situation to win

that bad you can not put me in situation, i would have shown you how a real ni-te does

 

[Forever]

As it see it, the preferences that the types are attempting to describe seem part of the human condition, just like handedness or sexual orientation. People have always had to take in information and make decisions, which is what the dichotomous scales are meant to characterize. I suppose the distribution of preferences may have evolved with time, especially if we think they are partly the product of nurture rather than hardwired. Recent research suggests that at least some of it is hardwired. So, I agree that what the types try to categorize is timeless, though the various systems we use to do that are certainly not.

Well yes, it’s more of how the functions are being applied today is what is different. Back then, we didn’t have the whole 9-5 job system or schools where we sat for 8 hours being taught and doing schoolwork. I just think it’s foolish if someone said somehow cognitive preferences were prehistoric before our time which is absurd. So yes, nurture and the environment certainly does matter to how it’s used and health of it. Carl Jung commonly typed as INFJ, had the belief that Ni doms saw value in timeless things that held true no matter what. And I don’t think his findings in psychological types were just modern. In fact, the whole book he goes throughout many time periods of the functions in introverted and extroverted fashion.

Anyone who is no stranger to Carl Jung knew what he said goes as early humans.

Sure the P + J dimension as just a preference is more suited to our times than before. But still doesn’t demean perceiving functions and judgment functions. I know you didn’t say anything against that exactly, just wanted to clarify further.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I don't know about the middle ages. But if I had to pick one period in history to live in based on maximum number of ideal conditions, I'd probably choose either classical Greece or Rome, or the eastern roman empire during the late antiquity period.

 

[kidom]

classical Greece or Rome, antiquity, it the same of middle age


tv or internet dont exist = middle age

 

[LittleCat]

classical Greece or Rome, antiquity, it the same of middle age


tv or internet dont exist = middle age

I can’t agree with that definition of the Middle Ages, but not sure there’s any point in trying to explain.

 

[kidom]

explain what ?

i do not need to explain it, youre supposed to understand for yourself

 

[notmyapples]

classical Greece or Rome, antiquity, it the same of middle age


tv or internet dont exist = middle age

The middle ages ended in the 15th century, television was invented in the 1920s. Anything after the 15th century is the modern era.