• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • See https://www.intpforum.com/threads/upgrade-at-10-am-gmt.27631/

MBTII re-mastered.

higs

Omg wow imo
Local time
Today, 07:41
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
1,998
Location
Armchair
Correct me if I'm wrong, mighty INTPforum:
As far as I know, Carl Jung is responsible for creating/discovering/labelling the cognitive functions, and it's Myers-Briggs who created the system where each type has four functions arranged in a particular manner, you have an introverted function and an extroverted function and the dominant one determines whether you are an introvert or an extrovert (according to the P and J letters, which have nothing to do with Carl Jung). So an Ni-Ti or Ne-Te type doesn't technically exist. Upon studying the functions and what each of them are as a thought process, I came to the conclusion that my dominant function was Ni, followed by Ti. which makes my type "INT" (I am very introverted.) I guess I could also be Ti-Ni tbh, but anyway, moving on to the point I'm trying to make.

I see no reason why you couldn't have a person who uses two introverted thought processes or two extroverted ones as their dominant functions? I think that the MBTI, whilst not being a scientific tool does have good elements to it as a system and could do with being developped and complexified. Why not add more types? Why are their only sixteen ways of arranging the functions? Why is it deemed that only those combinations are possible?

Hope you're all having a nice day.
 

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Local time
Yesterday, 19:41
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
8,524
I swear I'm the only one on the entire internet that takes note of WHY typology exists.

It's a mostly arbitrary classification system, it's no more meaningful then any other personality test out there, or it is at absolute best slightly more accurate, at least in terms of determining what kind of job you're most appropriate for.
 

higs

Omg wow imo
Local time
Today, 07:41
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
1,998
Location
Armchair
I swear I'm the only one on the entire internet that takes note of WHY typology exists.

Herro :D
No you're not, I don't take the MBTI particularly seriously myself. It is vague (and definitely not falsifiable) and it is hard to prove that any two people in the world have an identical thought process that can be named "Ni" or "Se" or whatever. If there was a way of determining and defining exactly what each of the functions are and do, then the system would not be entirely arbitrary.

I agree it's not a science and no personality test can ever hope to describe and categorise something as complex as a person's nature and way of thought, but that doesn't mean that it's not possible to build a system that accurately categorises different tendencies in people according to some similarity in their thought processes. I change my opinions all the time, but right nowI think it would be very interesting to refine and develop the MBTI system.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,933
Location
germany
Carl Jung himself came up with the 16 types, by stating that the auxiliary function would be of opposite nature (judgement/perception) and opposite version (i/e). He also stated that a conscious function would evoke a very specific shadow response (same nature, opposite variant, opposite version) from the unconscious, meaning the dom evokes what mbti calls the inferior and the aux evokes what mbti calls tertiary.

you may be TiSeNi, etc ... it's easy for introverts to be ignorant about their extroverted functions. (and don't fall for the retarded bullshit cliches of mbti flatland, wherein "intuitive" is handled as synonym for 'capable of theoretical or abstract thought' - this is a fallacy wherein typology and developmental psychology are confused, because people are blind to developmental factors. sensors are perfectly capable of theoretical and abstract cognition)


One difference between mbti and jung is, that jung didn't insist on people being differentiated completely. he didn't spell it out like this, but incomplete differentiation could imply that someone might have a clear preference for a dominant function, but does not have a clear preference for an auxiliary function. this must have been what prevented him from throwing the number 16 around like a dogma. he would usually present 8 types, defined by their dominant functions, and think of further types as possible subtypes, defined by different auxiliary preferences. theoretically this would imply 8+16 possible types. 8 half differentiated ones, 16 fully differentiated ones. but the distinction wouldn't be categorical.
 

higs

Omg wow imo
Local time
Today, 07:41
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
1,998
Location
Armchair
Carl Jung himself came up with the 16 types, by stating that the auxiliary function would be of opposite nature (judgement/perception) and opposite version (i/e). He also stated that a conscious function would evoke a response (shadow) from the unconscious, meaning the dom evokes what mbti calls the inferior and the aux evokes what mbti calls tertiary.

you may be TiSeNi, etc ... it's easy for introverts to be ignorant about their extroverted functions. (and don't fall for the retarded bullshit cliches of mbti flatland, wherein "intuitive" is handled as synonym for 'capable of theoretical or abstract thought')
:o I have been lazy in my research and I am also guilty of falling for the retarded bullshit MBTi cliché you mention (on occasions). How do you define "intuitive"?
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
it's no retarded bullshit cliché - it's an inevitable consequence of typological definitions. to circumvent it, you have to invoke incoherence. that would be actual retarded bullshit, i'm afraid.

intuition is abstraction. intuitive people, if they exist, are clearly better at handling abstractions. just like Si's are better at believing stupid rules and Se's are better at handling soccer balls.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,933
Location
germany
a definition is always misleading, like saying the sky is "grey and mostly irrelevant to my interests" - either you discover the territory first and understand what is said about it later, or you come up with a very false imagination based on what has been said ("sky must be some kind of chewing gum").

my best best experimental way of narrowing it down into words is this:

intuition deals with process, by forming comprehensions of change, it sees change as if change were an object. sensation deals with the static, it looks at what remains the same and forms comprehensions or subjective objects based on this. a preference is sometimes reflected in language which means in abstraction. sometimes we have favorite topics that are telling or rather the way we define or favorite topics are telling. health and vitality would seem like a comprehension of the physical as if it is a static state and growth or transformation would seem like more of a process based understanding of the physical. both are obviously highly abstract and theoretical ideas.
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
a definition is always misleading, like saying the sky is "grey and mostly irrelevant to my interests" - either you discover the territory first and understand what is said about it later, or you come up with a very false imagination based on what has been said.

my best best experimental way of narrowing it down into words is this:

intuition deals with process, by forming comprehensions of change, it sees change as if change were an object. sensation deals with the static, it looks at what remains the same and forms comprehensions or subjective objects based on this. a preference is sometimes reflected in language which means in abstraction. sometimes we have favorite topics that are telling or rather the way we define or favorite topics are telling. health and vitality would seem like a comprehension of the physical as if it is a static state and growth or transformation would seem like more of a process based understanding of the physical. both are obviously highly abstract and theoretical ideas.
so intuition is, according to your definitions, a meta perspective on sensing objects. it considers them more broadly and allows more complexity, perhaps missing individual details. however you phrase it, this lines up with abstraction and theoretical reasoning.

imo
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,933
Location
germany
no, that's not what i said, if you think about it more exactly. both functions form novel/original perceptions/objects. by comprehending/interpreting the underlying vanilla substance of energy in different ways. they are complementing each other. cognition of reality, as we know it, must include comprehension of what is and comprehension of what might possibly become in equal measure. both comprehensions are equally "meta" to what is available pre cognition. of course on higher levels of comprehension, the more abstracted simplified comprehensions of both domains will relate to each other and conflicts will arise from how partial they are at this point, hence a typological preference is bound to arise. or mind, striving for simplification and fearing the state of contradiction will on occasion ignore one aspect of reality in favor of another. the intuitive will indulge into possibilities that are not actually possible, because they are removed more than one step from what is, such as science fiction, tantra or enlightenment of the human race, the sensor may indulge in what is and what is one step away from what is and another step and so on (career, sex life, medicine), he is patient with the mundane and ignorant about the "possibilities" of aliens being our ancestors and similar explorations of the possible. it's like we have a rail in the world of associations that we cling on and it goes off in different directions, the further we follow it, the more obvious the distinction of where we end up.
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today, 02:41
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,988
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
I think it would be very interesting to refine and develop the MBTI system.
I would put it this way. What if the MBTI system like the idea of determining the position and velocity of a particle at the same time* can't be done? That is, what if we can understand the MBTI system better but but can't refine it because we can't define human nature? Have read only up to here, so can come back to this later.

*Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today, 02:41
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,988
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
@nanook
a definition is always misleading, like saying the sky is "grey and mostly irrelevant to my interests" - either you discover the territory first and understand what is said about it later, or you come up with a very false imagination based on what has been said.

my best best experimental way of narrowing it down into words is this:

intuition deals with process, by forming comprehensions of change, it sees change as if change were an object. sensation deals with the static, it looks at what remains the same and forms comprehensions or subjective objects based on this. a preference is sometimes reflected in language which means in abstraction. sometimes we have favorite topics that are telling or rather the way we define or favorite topics are telling. health and vitality would seem like a comprehension of the physical as if it is a static state and growth or transformation would seem like more of a process based understanding of the physical. both are obviously highly abstract and theoretical ideas.
These are good thoughts. Can we say intuition involves change which settles on a broad view? Can we say it generalizes by abstracting from various places, giving it a dynamic aura, yet it could be fixed in its manifestation? Can we say "health and vitality" are intuitive concepts made conscious from a history of now unconscious sensual specifics?

Thus intuition and sensation are dependent on each other, one being conscious while the other is laid low to the unconscious.
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today, 08:41
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
nanook: isn't it enough to say that there's an unwarranted bias in favor of abstraction over concretion? i wouldn't agree with that either - i'd argue that abstraction really is better - but at least it's not self-contradictory.

your conceptual investigation is intriguing but not convincing. also very INFJ.
 

higs

Omg wow imo
Local time
Today, 07:41
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
1,998
Location
Armchair
In any case refining the MBTI so that it's more precise would perhaps tell us whether or not it's completely arbitrary bs or actually touching on something real, the system as it is now is too vague. I ought to read more C. Jung though.
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today, 02:41
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,988
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
In any case refining the MBTI so that it's more precise would perhaps tell us whether or not it's completely arbitrary bs or actually touching on something real, the system as it is now is too vague. I ought to read more C. Jung though.
I'd say it's something between arbitrary and real. Lots of problems with vague definitions of behavior. Lots of terms not precisely defined. Let me give you an analogy about such difficulties and then you can find a better analogy:

Suppose we ask, how much is an orange different from an apple? For sure they are different, but equally for sure they have things in common. But the question is not, "what are they"? The question is "how much?" We can make a long list of orange and apple attributes, but have we defined, "how much"? Okay. Now look for a better analogy.
 

Ex-User (8886)

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today, 07:41
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
620
Human brain (mind) can't be packed into 16 types. MBTI is just approximation, and everything is possible. I don't feel being INTP at all, because I have some characteristics from INTJ (as you). My INF friend told me, that for him P or J isn't important. This last letter don't change a lot (I know that there functions, but for me everything is flexible, it's just humans narrow everything in simple schemes).
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today, 02:41
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,988
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
@higs
Upon studying the functions and what each of them are as a thought process, I came to the conclusion that my dominant function was Ni, followed by Ti. which makes my type "INT" (I am very introverted.) I guess I could also be Ti-Ni tbh, but anyway, moving on to the point I'm trying to make.
What brings you to believe you have Ni as an dominant or even auxiliary cognitive function?

I see no reason why you couldn't have a person who uses two introverted thought processes or two extroverted ones as their dominant functions?
Good question. This is not something I thought of, but others say one has to have a cognitive function inside/outside opposite to their main function as support. Elaborating, if you start with internal functioning, you have to support that with external data to continue internal functioning. If you start with external functioning, you have to support that with internal processing to make sense of it.



Hope you're all having a nice day.
I can't speak for the others, but my day is just starting so I can't tell if your hope will be realized.:D I hope you are finishing up a nice day but if not you can always bring us a report.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Local time
Today, 00:41
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
I swear I'm the only one on the entire internet that takes note of WHY typology exists..
No others have done so

It's a mostly arbitrary classification system, it's no more meaningful then any other personality test out there, or it is at absolute best slightly more accurate, at least in terms of determining what kind of job you're most appropriate for
I don't think so. Gender is a "mostly arbitrary classification system" too, which has a profound effect on one's life. The difference being it's easy to tell the difference between males and females.

MBTI is NOT arbitrary, in that if you changed the system you would get different conclusions. Compare Enneagram or Pod'Lair which are quite different takes on the same material, and go in very different directions.

It's usually easy to tell an Introvert from an Extravert, a Thinker from a Feeler, and even a Sensor from an iNtuitive. Judging/Perceiving is more difficult usually for various reasons, but could an ESTJ CEO be anything else?

What confuses people is not deeply understanding themselves (this comes with time) or MBTI. The psyche is an evolving, complex entity.
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today, 02:41
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,988
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Nice post Architect.
No others have done so
I will avoid a joke here.


I don't think so. Gender is a "mostly arbitrary classification system" too, which has a profound effect on one's life. The difference being it's easy to tell the difference between males and females.
Easy? I we threw a burka over each and every male and female, how would we tell the difference?


MBTI is NOT arbitrary, in that if you changed the system you would get different conclusions. Compare Enneagram or Pod'Lair which are quite different takes on the same material, and go in very different directions.
Agreed.


It's usually easy to tell an Introvert from an Extravert, a Thinker from a Feeler, and even a Sensor from an iNtuitive. Judging/Perceiving is more difficult usually for various reasons, but could an ESTJ CEO be anything else?
The latter requires experiencing them more I guess.

What confuses people is not deeply understanding themselves (this comes with time) or MBTI. The psyche is an evolving, complex entity.
It always take experience to understand definitions no matter how primitive.
 
Top Bottom