Fortunately, it was resurrected, so I didnt have to look for it.
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2017436#post2017436
Honestly, I don't find these debates very useful. It kind of gets crazy when people start to make silly pronouncements about which function a person MUST be using because they are X type. It completely undermines the usefulness of the theory. And let's not forget, it is only theory. Real people / data invalidate theories, not the other way around.
Really? That? I did that test. And like every other MBTI test online it doesn't mean that you have 'Fi'. It clearly states the certainty level you have either Fe or Fi. Considering this is an online test, people could have experience biased and you don't know what process the tester uses to identify with functions, it could have its loopholes. Other than that, it's understandable that most INTPs may get Fi over Fe, because Feeling is inferior to their cognitive processes so it's their least identifiable.
Functions determine the X type. Well THAT is Jungian Cognitive Functions Theory, whether you like that or not.
A single incidence of a "confusing result" says more about taker (or interpreter ) than test.
.
- you posted this on the thread. which seems hypocritical to you now saying 'people invalidate theories' and not the 'other way around'.
No, it's not. Quite the opposite.
According to one thread's view of an online testing (which you probably don't know the true mechanical processes behind)? With participants who, judging by their activity in forums, probably aren't even sure of their type (the fact that it is by Nardi is more reason to say the participants may* actually be the type the test listed instead of the types they think they are)?
Ti and Fi do not share a "circuit" in Nardi's work. Not that this proves anything, just that if you are reading it that way, you are reading it wrong. His argument is that the functions occupy the same regions in every brain, not that they are overloaded in some way. My speculation was that overloading might be a handy explanation for mutual exclusivity, but there is nothing that points to this model as being the way brains actually work. I wasn't making a case for it, I think you picked me up wrongly.
I wasn't reading it that way. I didn't even say it was in the "same circuit"?
I said in the same brain region, as you are saying ... now... I think you're reading my post wrong. That is now your speculation, I think that's an interesting speculation. I wouldn't say that is a reason to say Fi>Fe (IN THEORY) like you did earlier.
First of all, we don't have a conflict, we have a difference of opinion. No offence, but I'd say my opinion of my own function use trumps your speculations about how this stuff is supposed to work.
I don't buy into the "Ti+Fe simulates Fi" equation either. That doesn't make sense.
Ti users can simulate Fe, however (chameleoning). It's much more likely that an introvert would simulate an extroverted function, in order to get by in social situations - much as Aspies have to learn the rules of social engagement which others seem to pick up without effort - than that they would simulate an introverted one. I mean, what would the point of that be? Who would you be kidding? Yourself?
I know when I am simulating Fe (I don't do it often because it feels like I need a long shower afterward) vs when I am being guided by Fi. It's impossible to conflate the two. They are usually diametrically opposed.
The thing that you just said after saying this wasn't a conflict was that our ideas clash - which is a conflict of ideas. Which is the conflict I'm talking about. Since you want me to be specific, - for no reason at all, since you don't know whether it has affected me deeply or if I'm just jolly enough to have an intense talk. (I prefer the latter)
These were my speculations and my reasons/evidence as you asked. You didn't provide any irrefutable evidence to back your point (Fe>Fi in INTPs), so it wasn't this absolute truth like made it appear as before (when you said that I had no "evidence" to prove that INTPs have 'better conscious use of Fe'... btw, when it clearly states in MBTI theory that the inferior function usually develops in later life, and activates in to handle 'stress' situations.. the funny thing is I didn't even say it was irrefutable - I just said it cause - that's what I know and people prefer to communicate).
And yeah I would say it creates an appearance of 'Fi', but that's the Ti-Fe connection. Not necessarily Fi. And if you use it to 'get by in social situations' it is actually your Fe - as Fi is a solitary function. As an INTP, you repress Fi, just as you repress some things in your perception - Fi supposed to be one of them. Anima-Animus - that's pretty much the elaboration of it. In theory, the idea that you have Fe is due to the INTP repressing Fi. If this isn't true, as you say, there would be no reason for INTP's counterpart being the ENTJ, who uses Fi as an inferior function.
And if you feel personally that you use Fi (and you use it to get by in social situations), then you may actually be ENTJ rather than INTP. If I were to use the logic of online testing, - since you're not "open" to "debate" "any further" - then you must not be INTP (this I'm guessing, you don't agree with - well why do you agree with the testing so evidently?).
And IMHO, the only reason you're replying to my posts is because you want the 'last word' and to say "no. no.". If you have any evidence to throw at my original post (INTPs have a better conscious use of Fe) then please show me that information, without denying my every "opinion" (as you said) with your speculations (as you said).
), so can't say it is much of an arguement. But for INTP's, it seems to me that if you're not careful, Fi can end up becoming an immature shortcut to some issues Ti has trouble with. Often leading to dellusional and whack opinions. Wether or not Fi is the source, I do not know though.
