S
Society
Guest
How would you regroup the types if it wasnt the NT/NF/SJ/SP? why? What would you name each group?
What do types visibly share with their mirrors?
ohh I missed the names aspect.
FP - expressers (Fi)
FJ - caretakers (Fe)
TP - analyzers (Ti)
TJ - producers (Te)
Iunno, I guess they aren't very flattering.
I kinda like the "interaction styles" grouping too - "chart the course" etc. I think it's valuable to group the types in all sorts of ways, actually - the "best" grouping depends on the context, I think.
Been trying to name those for the longest. Was just today thinking about it again.Something I came up with awhile ago that might be useful for you to find it:
Function commonality:
SiNe: Collectors
Connecting new information & patterns to the existing collection.
NiSe: Streamers
Connecting new information & patterns within its own stream.
FiTe: Projectors
Projecting internal values & plans outside.
TiFe: Reflectors
Reflecting upon external information inside.
Something I came up with awhile ago that might be useful for you to find it:
Function commonality:
SiNe: Collectors
Connecting new information & patterns to the existing collection.
NiSe: Streamers
Connecting new information & patterns within its own stream.
FiTe: Projectors
Projecting internal values & plans outside.
TiFe: Reflectors
Reflecting upon external information inside.
Ah a much much better word. I was trying to find a word similar to strategic yet has a different meaning. Do you have a better word than strategic? Focused maybe? Hmm.. I always remind enfps to use the quote function and now ...^ Tactful? I could see "exploratory" maybe.
The problem I have with grouping the opposing functions is just that - they're oppose.
You mean tactical?Ah a much much better word. I was trying to find a word similar to strategic yet has a different meaning. Do you have a better word than strategic? Focused maybe? Hmm.. I always remind enfps to use the quote function and now ...
I meant tact. I wanted to use imrovising initially. Tactical is a big too long term. Tact the nfps wouldn't like and intps I haven't met who are good at. So my initial wordings are wrong I must confess.You mean tactical?
The only change I would be satisfied with is by putting the nps and njs together. NP - Tactful and bigger picture in mind. SP - Tactful with immediate results in mind. NJ - Strategic with bigger picture in mind. SJ - Strategic with immediate picture in mind. The word gradual and urgent could be used as subsitutes for bigger picture and immediate picture.
The problem I have with grouping the opposing functions is just that - they're opposed.
I think these make sense when applied to someone using them as the aux/tert, ie. an ENTP is TiFe. But when it's the dominant/inferior, then you have too much conflict to combine the two as if they work in tandem. The relationship between them in a person's psychology is more antagonistic, IMO.
Also, it's about grouping the types, so even if the inferior is still unconscious, it's still on the "ego-syntonic" side, and will figure in the type's nature.They arent, not quite imo, each pair is the same cognitive mechanism used in apposing ways.
I also think there is an internal repression mechanism involved in the process of repressing the processing of one rather then the other, a resolvable one.
Also, it's about grouping the types, so even if the inferior is still unconscious, it's still on the "ego-syntonic" side, and will figure in the type's nature.