Division of the type?

[alcea rosea]

I started to think abou this yesterday after the N-S thread and after all of those feeler-thinker conversations. I started to think that the function based grouping of types might sometimes be more useful than the keirsey's ones NF, NT, SP, SJ or the MBTI one of NF, NT, SF, ST.

In this logic of mine the first letter tells about extroversion - introversion. The second the primary function and the third the second funciton. P or J is unnecessary. A person can decide of their P'ness or J'ness by the first extroverted function of their personality type even if primary can be introverted function and different than the traditional MBTI P or J "sign" in the personality type. So, example INTP, the first function is judging Ti but because it's inwardly focused, the MBTI chooses to use the percieving function Ne in the personality type code, so it's described as INTP instead of first judging function it would be called INTJ.

So, here it goes:

A "group" of primary thinkers:
iTS (ISTP: TiSe)
iTN (INTP: TiNe)

eTS (ESTJ: TeSi)
eTN (ENTJ: TeNi)

A "group" of primary intuitives:
eNF (ENFP: NeFi)
eNT (ENTP: NeTi)

iNT (INTJ: NiTe)
iNF (INFJ: NiFe)

A "group" of primary sensors:
eST (ESTP: SeTi)
eSF (ESFP: SeFi)

iST (ISTJ: SiTe)
iSF (ISFJ: SiFe)

A "group" of primary feelers:
eFN (ENFJ: FeNi)
eFS (ESFJ: FeSi)

iFN (INFP: FiNe)
iFS (ISFP: FiSe)

So, when talking about thinkers, we could refer to the thinker group of 4 and so on. It's all generalization so probably as good as other generalization or as bad as any other generalization. But, still a new (?) way of looking at things? Or not?

What do you say about this division or grouping or generalization? Is it used in some theory already?

 

[Lady_X]

i like it.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I've thought of this before (though there probably isn't a system of grouping I haven't thought of yet) and for whatever it's worth, it's definitely 100 times better than Keirsey's temperament system.

In general, I've also decided that the standard code labels for the MBTI, like ESFJ and INTP, are crappy, opaque, confusing things. It would be a lot better if people just went by FeSi and TiNe, etc.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

In fact, why not check this out?

I wrote it for myself and not public consumption, so it won't be the nicest thing you've seen, but it was a file in which I was writing down different manners of quatering the 16 types.
____________________________

Attitude based quadrants.

1st letter and 4th letter: X__X
EP, EJ, IP, IJ.

EP: NeTi, NeFi, SeTi, SeFi.
EJ: TeNi, FeNi, TeSi, FeSi.
IP: TiNe, FiNe, TiSe, FiSe.
IJ: NiTe, NiFe, SiTe, SiFe.

Pattern: All types within a X__X group have the same preference for Extraversion and Introversion, and Judgement and Perception. For example, as shown above
, all EPs use a form of Pe first and Ji second. All IPs use a form of Ji first and Pe second.


4 different processes within each quadrant.
4 different functions within each quadrant.
1 E/I order.
1 J/P order.

----------------------------------
Function based quadrants.

2nd letter and 3rd letter: _XX_
NT, NF, ST, SF.

NT: TiNe, NeTi, TeNi, NiTe.
NF: FiNe, NeFi, FeNi, NiFe.
ST: TiSe, SeTi, TeSi, SiTe.
SF: FiSe, SeFi, FeSi, SiFe.

Pattern: All types within a _XX_ group have the same perceiving function and the same Judging function. For example, as shown above, all NTs use a form of
N and a form of T. All SFs use a form of S and F.


4 different processes within each quadrant.
2 different functions within each quadrant.
2 different E/I orders.
2 different J/P orders.

----------------------------------
Perception process based quadrants.

2nd letter and 4th letter: _X_X
NJ, SJ, NP, SP.

NJ: NiTe, NiFe, TeNi, FeNi.
SJ: SiTe, SiFe, TeSi, FeSi.
NP: NeTi, NeFi, TiNe, FiNe
SP: SeTi, SeFi, TiSe, FiSe.

Pattern: All types within a _X_X group use a certain, exact perceiving process, and a judging process of the opposite attitude. For example, as shown above,
all NJs use Ni and some form of Je. All SPs use Se and some form of Ji.


3 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
2 different E/I orders.
2 different J/P orders.

----------------------------------
Judgement process based quadrants.

3rd letter and 4th letter: __XX
TJ, FJ, TP, FP.

TJ: TeNi, TeSi, NiTe, SiTe.
FJ: FeNi, FeSi, NiFe, SiFe.
TP: TiNe, TiSe, NeTi, SeTi.
FP: FiNe, FiSe, NeFi, SeFi.

Pattern: All types within a __XX group use a certain, exact judging process, and a perceiving process of the opposite attitude. For example, as shown above,
all TJs use Te and some form of Pi. All FPs use Fi and some for of Pe.


3 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
2 different E/I orders.
2 different J/P orders.

----------------------------------
Perception/-version based quadrants.

1st letter and 2nd letter: XX__
EN, ES, IN, IS.

EN: NeTi, NeFi, TeNi, FeNi.
ES: SeTi, SeFi, TeSi, FeSi.
IN: NiTe, NiFe, TiNe, FiNe.
IS: SiTe, SiFe, TiSe, FiSe.

Pattern: All types within a XX__ group use the same perceiving function, and have the same preference for Introversion and Extraversion. For example, as
shown above, all ENs use an Extraverted process first, and some form of N. All ISs use an Introverted process first, and some form of S.


6 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
1 E/I order.
2 different J/P orders.

----------------------------------
Judgement/-version based quadrants.

1st letter and 3rd letter: X_X_
ET, EF, IT, IF.

ET: TeNi, TeSi, NeTi, SeTi.
EF: FeNi, FeSi, NeFi, SeFi.
IT: TiNe, TiSe, NiTe, SiTe
IF: FiNe, FiSe, NiFe, SiFe.

Pattern: All types in a X_X_ group use the same judging function, and have the same preference for Introversion and Extraversion. For examples, as shown
above, all ETs use and Extraverted proces first, and some form of T. All IFs use an Introverted process first, and some form of F.


6 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
1 E/I order.
2 different J/P orders.

----------------------------------
Secondary Function based quadrants.

All but one letter appears. (this group has more than two letter variations between members in the code label)
No F, No T, No S, No N.

No F: NeTi, NiTe, SeTi, SiTe.
No T: NeFi, NiFe, SeFi, SiFe.
No S: TeNi, TiNe, FeNi, FiNe.
No N: TeSi, TiSe, FeSi, FiSe.

Pattern: all types in this group have the same preference order for judgment and perception, and use the same secondary function.


6 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
2 different E/I orders.
1 J/P order.

--------------------------------
Primary Function based quadrants. (this group has more than two letter variations between members)

No T: FeNi, FiNe, FeSi, FiSe.
No F: TeNi, TiNe, TeSi, TiSe.
No S: NeTi, NiTe, NeFi, NiFe.
No N: SeTi, SiTe, SeFi, SiFe

Pattern: all types in this group have the same preference order for judgment and perception, and use the same primary function.

6 different processes within each quadrant.
3 different functions within each quadrant.
2 different E/I orders.
1 J/P order.
____________________________

I do believe the sixth set is the one you are suggesting, Alcea.

 

[Matthew_Z]

While it is an effective grouping, it doesn't take into account how different perceiving/ judging functions are.

An alternative division:
xNxP (Those who use Ne)
xNxJ (Those who use Ni)
xSxP (Those who use Se)
xSxJ (Those who use Si)

I prefer this grouping of perceiving functions because tend to perform more on the unconscious level and are thus tend to be closer to the person's true self. (and are less affected by outward change) In my experience, judging functions are simply easier to learn and develop.

 

[alcea rosea]

Magic - I'll have to study your theory before I'll respond to it.

While it is an effective grouping, it doesn't take into account how different perceiving/ judging functions are.

An alternative division:
xNxP (Those who use Ne)
xNxJ (Those who use Ni)
xSxP (Those who use Se)
xSxJ (Those who use Si)

I prefer this grouping of perceiving functions because tend to perform more on the unconscious level and are thus tend to be closer to the person's true self. (and are less affected by outward change) In my experience, judging functions are simply easier to learn and develop.

Percieving and judging functions arent' important in this division. You can read from the "code" about the function.

Thiking and feeling are judging (J) "functions".
iNtuition and Sensing are percieving (P) "functions".
So you can see from the first extroverted funciton the J-P preference how it is presented in the MBTI theory.

 

[Requeim]

While it is an effective grouping, it doesn't take into account how different perceiving/ judging functions are.

An alternative division:
xNxP (Those who use Ne)
xNxJ (Those who use Ni)
xSxP (Those who use Se)
xSxJ (Those who use Si)

I prefer this grouping of perceiving functions because tend to perform more on the unconscious level and are thus tend to be closer to the person's true self. (and are less affected by outward change) In my experience, judging functions are simply easier to learn and develop.

i very much agree with this

 

[Llewellyn]

While it is an effective grouping, it doesn't take into account how different perceiving/ judging functions are.

An alternative division:
xNxP (Those who use Ne)
xNxJ (Those who use Ni)
xSxP (Those who use Se)
xSxJ (Those who use Si)

I prefer this grouping of perceiving functions because tend to perform more on the unconscious level and are thus tend to be closer to the person's true self. (and are less affected by outward change) In my experience, judging functions are simply easier to learn and develop.

I like it too.

Then you also get around the 'rational' and the 'dreamy' etc, whatever those are.

Edit: I also still like the INXX grouping (the 'romantics' according to someone).

 

[hommefatal]

I think there's no better grouping than NF.

 

[Athenian200]

What do you say about this division or grouping or generalization? Is it used in some theory already?

I do like it.

Jungian Psychological Type

The notation you're using is the same (or a similar one) to what's used in Jung's way of presenting the theory.

 

[Eric B]

It's also basically the same principle Socionics uses for their three letter codes. (LII, etc)

I would favor using the three letter codes as it is much simpler, yet we have gotten so much into temperament and Interaction Style groups, which depend on the J/P scale, and are very hard to outline in this system where the fourth factor basically becomes the order of the second and third letters.