Question for sensors?

[ptgatsby]

But what you can't say is that you prefer I-N-T-P and and use Fe-Si-Ne-Ti in the order of your functions.

Well, no... That's logically impossible using the system they use;

Fe = F + J
Si = S + J
Ne = N + P
Ti = T + P

However, it is not impossible for the following functions to supersede core functions;

Fi = F + P
Se = S + P
Ni = N + J
Te = T + J


As in my OP, the top four functions are logically sequenced based on the test (it doesn't validate the test or the functions, however it is logically impossible to have Fe higher than Ti since it is doubly anti-correlated). Likewise, it is impossible to say that Ti-Ne is a functional order from INTP since N could test higher than T, meaning that the function set TiNe should logically be NeTi (if we assume dominance matters in the function set, which it may not).

In short, the only way one can believe in the hierarchy is if one... believes in the hierarchy. There is no particular validation - it's all theory.

In effect, when this discussion comes up... you are either copying and pasting MBTI theory, Jung theory (Ti-Ne-Se-Fe), Socionics, Beebe as an answer.

But your original question was what value the INTP letters meant otherwise - which is to say, they mean exactly what they say. You don't need any functional background to make use of the 4 letters.

[SolitaryWalker]

Okay, we base this on Beebe's theory. As I initially quoted, depending on which theory you prescribe to. In this case, SPs still have Ni higher than NPs.

No... your N...either one...if intuition is your tertiary function will not be higher than someone who has it as a secondary or primary..

["?"]

No... your N...either one...if intuition is your tertiary function will not be higher than someone who has it as a secondary or primary..

Okay, I guess I have to change my sig again, and input a disclaimer for people to state when they are arguing their opinion, in lieu of facts. You are arguing your opinion because anyone versed in this subject has an idea of how the function orders go, as do you Blue. Face it, the entire thread begs an erroneous question and you know it.

["?"]

But your original question was what value the INTP letters meant otherwise - which is to say, they mean exactly what they say. You don't need any functional background to make use of the 4 letters.

Uh, no the question was asked of me, and you answered it. Your response is something that everyone should be aware of P. Nevertheless, we are completely off topic, because the entire point is that sensors do think into the future, using their Ni, and depending on which hierarchy you prefer, one group of sensors will have Ni higher than NPs.

[ptgatsby]

Uh, no the question was asked of me, and you answered it. Your response is something that everyone should be aware of P. Nevertheless, we are completely off topic, because the entire point is that sensors do think into the future, using their Ni, and depending on which hierarchy you prefer, one group of sensors will have Ni higher than NPs.

I was referring to this post;

It has to be that way, otherwise what would be the use of a four letter codes? Any type could use any of the eight functions as dominant, auxilary and so on....

And why it's relevent is that there is an underlying assumption that traits are absolute (ie: S only exists in the moment). One has to accept the theory at face value, regardless of other interpretations of behaviour, in order to create an 8 function hierarchy.

However, it is logical that there will be no defined hierarchy for the 8 functions - the 4 functions are logically possible, if viewed in pairs - but the set 8 are not.

You can see one of the effects of assuming absolutes in personality, functions and hierarchies with the way SW/Blue posed the first question. That's why it bothers me. It's like asking an introvert "What's it like having no friends?". Then we get into "but you are an introvert, you aren't capable of having friends!"... then someone says "I'm an I, and I have friends"... and you get the response "Well, you only think you have friends, You are an introvert, you don't have any". It's very... irritating.

[Zhash]

The big problem is that the type descriptions are written by intuitives. So they are hugely negative towards sensors. Some of the sensor type descriptions are downright insulting,and poor reflections of the rich multi faceted nature of many sensors that I meet and have the pleasure of working with and spending my free time with.

Seriously, I know that I seem to always be ranting and raving about sensory types. When I meet someone, I always give them the benefit of the doubt and try hard to communicate in a very kind way. I'm often disappointed and wonder what's with these people. It's not so much that sensory people have tunnel vision but some sensors always seem to have something mean-spirited to say about another and it's often based on their own value judgment. It bothers me. Many don't talk about new ideas and I find that they have an aversion to abstract thoughts. I find (and I'm generalizing) that many just talk negatively about people. Yet, they are the first to claim to be Christian and "all holy" and they don't know a thing about introspection. I truly do accept all kinds of people but I sometimes get frustrated with some of the conversations that I'm exposed to.

They don't suffer with tunnel vision, they don't have an inability to use their imagination.

You're right. I hate to say this but I find that many are very insecure, too. If you discuss any kind of great achievement to them about another person, the first thing that comes out of their mouths is that this one is a snob or that one's bragging. I've even heard words like "Oh, that family is wealthy so they can afford it". Believe me, there's opportunity out there for everyone and you don't have to be wealthy just creative in how you seek it. Instead of celebrating an achievement with that person, many tend to find something mean-spirited to say. I know I'm generalizing and all sensors are not like that but I've heard it so many times when socializing with people. I must say that I've experienced it right on this forum when I've shared parts of my own life.

I'll give you a perfect example. I have an ESFP teacher friend (she's taught children for over 30 years) who is a wonderful loving human being. She has an NF son who is brilliant. He's in the top 10% of his senior class. She holds him back from everything and tries to poison him with all her fears. My ESFP friend and her husband just purchased a $300K beach house this year. They told their son that if he commuted to a local college, they would buy him a brand new car for saving them college tuition costs. As you well know, I'm an opinionated INTJ and place value on high achievement especially when it comes to educating our leaders of tomorrow. I also came from poverty. Why in the world would loving parents offer a top ranking child a new car that will depreciate in value rather than a top notch education that will never loose it's value. I don't see the logic. Now, I would never communicate this to my friend because I value our friendship and wouldn't want to rock the boat. However, having sent my children to the best schools that they could get into (and they received financial aid), sure as you know what, I heard negatives like "sounds like you're bragging or you must have money".

Part of the problem here is that intuitives will look at someone they don't like and attach a "sensor" badge to it, and this continues to colour their conception of other sensors. Despite the fact that many they don't like could be intuitives.

If you look at demographics, the majority of people are sensory. Like I said, I always give people the benefit of the doubt otherwise, it would be difficult to fit into society. We all need friends otherwise it would be a lonely existence. I enjoy many of my sensory friends and they enhance my life in a very special way. They invite me to all kinds of community events that I never bother to notice happening. It's just the way they do things that often bothers me. Here's another example: I recently attended a house tour with an ESFJ friend. The house was magnificent with sweeping views of the countryside and mood lighting that would blow you away. We left the house and she said to me, "Did you notice the vase on the baby grand piano". I said, "No, I didn't". I responded, "I was listening to pianist playing the Gershwin tunes and it reminded me of how my mom used to play those songs when I was growing up. She immediately said to me, "What the heck is wrong with you, how could you have missed seeing that fabulous vase", in the most condescending tone of voice. See what I mean? It's like we live on another planet.

Sorry for going on an on. I just wanted to make a point in this discussion. The world is full of all kinds of people and I find that you must be open to diversity of thought. I am but often times, I don't think sensory people are open to diversity.

[SolitaryWalker]

I was referring to this post;



And why it's relevent is that there is an underlying assumption that traits are absolute (ie: S only exists in the moment). One has to accept the theory at face value, regardless of other interpretations of behaviour, in order to create an 8 function hierarchy.

However, it is logical that there will be no defined hierarchy for the 8 functions - the 4 functions are logically possible, if viewed in pairs - but the set 8 are not.

You can see one of the effects of assuming absolutes in personality, functions and hierarchies with the way SW/Blue posed the first question. That's why it bothers me. It's like asking an introvert "What's it like having no friends?". Then we get into "but you are an introvert, you aren't capable of having friends!"... then someone says "I'm an I, and I have friends"... and you get the response "Well, you only think you have friends, You are an introvert, you don't have any". It's very... irritating.

Introvert means that your psyche is more adept at focusing more energy on the inner world than the outer and Intuitor on imagination than the senses. Finding balance is up to you. If you are under a strong Introverted type and your environment allowed you to function exactly as would be comfortable to you, you would not be far off from 'not having any friends'.

'Having no friends' is a description of one's personal life, it pertains to personality, not temperament, being an Introvert has nothing to do with this.

[SolitaryWalker]

Okay, I guess I have to change my sig again, and input a disclaimer for people to state when they are arguing their opinion, in lieu of facts. You are arguing your opinion because anyone versed in this subject has an idea of how the function orders go, as do you Blue. Face it, the entire thread begs an erroneous question and you know it.

INTP
Superior:Ti
Secondary:Ne
Tertiary:Si
Inferior:Fe

ISTP
Superior:Ti
Secondary:Se
Tertiary:Ni
Inferior:Fe

Leanor Thompson maintains that Ti/Ne/Fi/Se are right brained functions.

So INTPs have

Ti
Ne

and then the crow's nest functionss...

Fi
Se

And now the last two follow..

This doesn't make sense... because if then we compare the INTP to INTJ...

We get...

Ni
Te

and now in the crow's nest
Si
Fe



It actually follows from this that the INTP has a stronger F than an INTJ despite that the INTJ has F as the third function and the INTP as the fourth.

Same can be said for the INFPs having a stronger T than INFJs. And ENFJs than ENFPs...

Generally types that we deem as Unintutive are the ones with the inferior intuition. 'Unfeeling'--the ones with inferior Feeling. 'Illogical'---the ones with inferior Thinking.

But with this crow's nest theory, it follows that the 'unintuitive type', for some arbitrary reason is not the one with inferior intuition, but the one with tertiary intuition.

See my Review of Leanor Thompson's typology for more on this...


http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...wreply&p=16001

[Zhash]

INTP
It actually follows from this that the INTP has a stronger F than an INTJ despite that the INTJ has F as the third function and the INTP as the fourth.

Do you think it is because the INTP's F is Fe as opposed to Fi? I'm not sure if you can say they have a stronger F. I think it is a different F than the INTJ has. The INTP's, Fe seems to fit into society better than an INTJ's, Fi. The INTJ's Fi is very soulful whereas the INTP's, Fe is outwardly congenial. What do you think?

[SolitaryWalker]

I think that Fi is stronger than Fe, as analogously Ti than Te and Ni than Si and so on.

But this was not why Thompson would lead us to believe the INTP is more sensitive than the INTJ, has nothing to do with them having Fe rather than Fi. Its because she claims that Fi and Se are right-brained functions along with Ti and Ne, and therefore they actually go ahead of the Si and Fe that are left-brained.

So it is

Ti
Ne
Fi

and in affect the INTP has a stronger Fi than an INTJ. I don't think thats the case, there is no Fi behind the Ne, this is just the shadow of Ti working on issues that Fi is normally concerned with.