Typology, Jungian Functions, MBTI, catchall

[Joseph Maynor]

5 minutes ago, Joshe said:

How to distinguish between Ti analysis and Te analysis? 

I could be wrong but someone like Emerald seems Ti to me. And keep in mind, Ti is 3rd in the stack for an INFJ. Some will have it more developed than others. 

I don't know her type, but I generally look at the first 2 cognitive functions to assess type.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

3 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Yeah, that seems right. I've probably mixing up Ne for Ni. INTP it is! Mark it @Carl-Richard

I see jumping between conceptual domains, generating analogies, alternative interpretations. Lots of hodge-podge combining of alternate ideas and holding space for concepts/thoughts without an immediate commitment. Carl also has a habit of distinguishing the model from the thing being modelled. Always taking a topic and opening the concepts out to a big tree of branches. I am no typologist, these are just the things he does by default  

I find it fun to rub brains with his flavour of Ne! @Carl-Richard

[Joshe]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I don't know her type, but I generally look at the first 2 cognitive functions to assess type.  

That's often enough, but not always. You can have a very analytical INFJ. 

If you look at what Emerald does, she's tending to the tribe and cares more about that than she does analysis. INTJ doesn't do that. 

[Joshe]

4 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I see jumping between conceptual domains, generating analogies, alternative interpretations. Lots of hodge-podge combining of alternate ideas and holding space for concepts/thoughts without an immediate commitment. Carl also has a habit of distinguishing the model from the thing being modelled. Always taking a topic and opening the concepts out to a big tree of branches. I am no typologist, these are just the things he does by default  

I find it fun to rub brains with his flavour of Ne! @Carl-Richard

Yeah, it's almost like he values Ne just as much Ti. 

[Carl-Richard]

14 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I see jumping between conceptual domains, generating analogies, alternative interpretations. Lots of hodge-podge combining of alternate ideas and holding space for concepts/thoughts without an immediate commitment. Carl also has a habit of distinguishing the model from the thing being modelled. Always taking a topic and opening the concepts out to a big tree of branches. I am no typologist, these are just the things he does by default  

I find it fun to rub brains with his flavour of Ne! @Carl-Richard

😁

 

@Joshe @Natasha Tori Maru But what about the F's? 🤔

Edited 5 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Joseph Maynor]

14 minutes ago, Joshe said:

That's often enough, but not always. You can have a very analytical INFJ. 

If you look at what Emerald does, she's tending to the tribe and cares more about that than she does analysis. INTJ doesn't do that. 

I don't see Fe which is my helping function as "tending to the tribe".  It is more like feeling energy or vibe of people and situations in the world.  This is why it is important for me to know what someone looks like or see them in person.  My Fe wants to know the energy or vibe of someone or a group in order to help my Ni.  It definitely is feeling (energy communication more generally), and it is directed outward.  This is great for talking to everyone, which I enjoy a lot.

[Joseph Maynor]

Jung would spend a lot time with someone before considering typing them.  It is hard to type others, but some people are better at this than others.  If I met someone in person I could probably type them.  

[eos_nyxia]

@Joshe @LordFall @Natasha Tori Maru

Thanks for the suggestions and insights everyone! You've given me a lot to mull over.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I don't see Fe which is my helping function as "tending to the tribe".  It is more like feeling energy or vibe of people and situations in the world.  This is why it is important for me to know what someone looks like or see them in person.  My Fe wants to know the energy or vibe of someone or a group in order to help my Ni.  It definitely is feeling (energy communication more generally), and it is directed outward.  This is great for talking to everyone, which I enjoy a lot.

By "tending to the tribe", I mean getting your cues from the tribe, pinging off them, taking them into consideration. The tribe is the main reference point for Fe user behavior. And that's because extroverted feeling is feeling outwardly, not inwardly, and the only thing to feel against outwardly is other people.

Why do you think you want to know what is going on with people? Why does your Ni need that? What is so important about that data? Something is being served.

So, tending to the tribe doesn't necessarily mean taking care of them, although that is an Fe thing, but it's more so that Fe is pinging off the tribe to feed Ni, so it can know what to do and munch on what it considers important, which is derived from the Fe data. 

That's my understanding anway. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Joshe

[eos_nyxia]

@Joshe This chart is a good example of why I find I find the functions confusing, haha. Because you really have to strongly prefer one mode over the other, right? I still have my native personality fluency, but genuinely they have changed quite a bit, and genuinely my preferences have both become much more broad and also adaptable (minus the introversion bit, arguably I've gotten "worse" as an adult).

If I had been typed in my teens and 20s, I would definitely skew more toward native INTP/Ti-Ne characteristics without a doubt, but as of now (based on one of the charts you posted):  

This probably requires some explanation (or like, a whole ass legend)... 

yellow = #1 priority    blue = #2 priority  (in terms of how much I tend to value one thing over another, or absolute value preference) 

an equal sign  = I value both equally (in an absolute value sense), likewise: > or < to denote preference 

The arrow means I prioritize doing one thing first, and then the other thing second, usually for a very specific reason. For example, for point 4, I consider it absolutely essential to do both, and I consider it to be the best and most balanced cognitive-centered approach. Cast your net as wide as you can within a legible time period in a way that you can manage to the best of your ability, otherwise you are working with a much more narrow range of experiences or data.... on purpose. And that is never a good thing, to have an overly narrow view of yourself and the world. Now you now have to defend your model or take the time and energy to keep adjusting your working models of the world. 

It's just not very efficient.

The only other superior option IMO is to have intuition that is so honed and precise that you can use that instead of manually going through certain psychological processes over and over (as if you were running a program), which puts constraints on what can be done with a given amount of time and energy. I'll just call it bottlenecking. A good example of this in a more simple way: a child is naturally highly gifted at math and they have their own process of working out problems, so they can "intuitively" do multiple steps instantly or (or near instantly). They can then choose to write down all the steps manually or not. Writing down the steps did not help that child work out the answer. If they had written it down, it would have been much more effort for them because they are roleplaying a process which is not native to them. (Source: my husband, but also myself.) You can develop these types of qualities with focus and intention though, it's not just for "the gifted". 

Likewise, with 8), shouldn't I be focusing on models first and then definitions later? Seems like a waste of time otherwise. And with 17), I've mostly curbed the childhood tendency to daydream and build castles in my head. If I do it, it's very much on purpose.

Edited 3 hours ago by eos_nyxia

[Joseph Maynor]

19 minutes ago, Joshe said:

By "tending to the tribe", I mean getting your cues from the tribe, pinging off them, taking them into consideration. The tribe is the main reference point for Fe user behavior. And that's because extroverted feeling is feeling outwardly, not inwardly, and the only thing to feel against outwardly is other people.

Why do you think you want to know what is going on with people? Why does your Ni need that? What is so important about that data? Something is being served.

So, tending to the tribe doesn't necessarily mean taking care of them, although that is an Fe thing, but it's more so that Fe is pinging off the tribe to feed Ni, so it can know what to do and munch on what it considers important, which is derived from the Fe data. 

That's my understanding anway. 

A better way to think about the cognitive functions besides helping and dominant is -- introverted means looking inside whereas extroverted means looking outside.  I'm not disagreeing with you necessarily.  Fe means looking outside for feeling.  Ti means looking inside for thinking, etc.  Inner-focused vs. outer-focused for the i or e in cognitive functions.

Edited 3 hours ago by Joseph Maynor

[eos_nyxia]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I don't see Fe which is my helping function as "tending to the tribe".  It is more like feeling energy or vibe of people and situations in the world.  This is why it is important for me to know what someone looks like or see them in person.  My Fe wants to know the energy or vibe of someone or a group in order to help my Ni.  It definitely is feeling (energy communication more generally), and it is directed outward.  This is great for talking to everyone, which I enjoy a lot.

I relate to this strongly as well, but it's probably not a native personality function for me, but rather the result of compensating for what would otherwise be a massive social deficit, except that I started at very young age because I'm naturally super socially self-conscious. No child wants to be bullied. 

I feel like I easily get the energy or vibe of people remotely (not that it's not subject to my own biases and dirty, partial lens, at times), but in person is much easier. It's also just... different.

My least favourite scenario is talking to strangers and acquaintances over the phone. The worst of both worlds... literal torture.  

What is it about seeing what someone looks like that helps you in photos vs. in person? For me, it's always the expression in the eyes (or lack thereof), and the body language, including the choice of posing (or again, lackthereof). 

 

 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

@eos_nyxia  It is pretty obvious when you spend some time with someone what their type is.  I used to care about this more than I do now.  I don't even think about it now.  If MBTI is not a topic of conversation, I pay it no mind now.  

[eos_nyxia]

Actually, I have a question for everyone (or anyone). To what degree do you think your close/ formative relationships have affected your type/ function? 

For example, I'm quite sure my dad would have typed as an INTP type, and I'm also pretty sure that I picked up a lot of his personality traits, though many are probably inborn characteristics as well (as much as you could determine such a thing to be true). Would I still have a similar type if I had a completely different father? Maybe, but maybe less so? 

My husband originally typed as INTJ (and occasionally INFJ later), and as I wrote my above post, I realized that I had taken on a number of his constructive personality traits and he's taken on some of mine too. All and all, not a bad exchange. 

 

Both INTJs are INFJs as generalized personality types are great, by the way! (I just like them on a personal level.) 

[LordFall]

4 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I am only happy when the build is going as planned. Solutions are scrambles that just need to work and meet compliance - fuck all other details. 

@LordFall How do you feel when you cannot make sense of something?

I like to collapse the less relevant parameters to focus on the meat of the topic so that my brainpower is able to figure out the best answer and avoid inconclusive outcomes

Which is why I like the debate format of conversation so each person presents their strongest point and we get to the truth faster instead of proposing a bunch of random points that make life hard to understand. 

Edited 2 hours ago by LordFall

[Natasha Tori Maru]

15 minutes ago, eos_nyxia said:

I relate to this strongly as well, but it's probably not a native personality function for me, but rather the result of compensating for what would otherwise be a massive social deficit, except that I started at very young age because I'm naturally super socially self-conscious. No child wants to be bullied. 

I feel like I easily get the energy or vibe of people remotely (not that it's not subject to my own biases and dirty, partial lens, at times), but in person is much easier. It's also just... different.

My least favourite scenario is talking to strangers and acquaintances over the phone. The worst of both worlds... literal torture.  

What is it about seeing what someone looks like that helps you in photos vs. in person? For me, it's always the expression in the eyes (or lack thereof), and the body language, including the choice of posing (or again, lackthereof). 

I share a lot of crossover.

I grew up in a volatile and traumatic environment.

Accurately and quickly scanning, analysing and profiling behaviour for mood, temperament and affect was necessary as a matter of survival. I had to figure out if I was in danger very quickly (I raise this not to elicit compassion or sympathy, just as an explanatory mechanism). In addition, I had a lot of societal conditioning to place more emphasis on the wellbeing and emotional care for others due to being born female. It is the default expectation. But paying attention to feelings, vibe, harmony and others wellbeing was a draining process. Not natural to me. This effectively fooled me into thinking I was a stronger feeling type for a long time.

[eos_nyxia]

9 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I share a lot of crossover.

I grew up in a volatile and traumatic environment.

Accurately and quickly scanning, analysing and profiling behaviour for mood, temperament and affect was necessary as a matter of survival. I had to figure out if I was in danger very quickly (I raise this not to elicit compassion or sympathy, just as an explanatory mechanism). In addition, I had a lot of societal conditioning to place more emphasis on the wellbeing and emotional care for others due to being born female. It is the default expectation.

Interesting, I wonder how common it is for thinking-types who had the feminine social conditioning. I suspect that it is very common and a matter of degrees, and generally not if we are affected but how much. I imagine that the more traumatic your environment was and the more you're just... different from your peers (especially others of your assigned gender), the more you have to socially compensate in order to survive growing up.

(And INTJ women are by definition gender unconventional.)

Quote

But paying attention to feelings, vibe, harmony and others wellbeing was a draining process. Not natural to me. This effectively fooled me into thinking I was a stronger feeling type for a long time.

Definitely not natural for me either, and it still isn't.

More than anything, I find it very difficult to get the hypervigilance (or alternatively, the impressions left by hypervigilance) out of what I generally consider to be positive, desirable qualities otherwise (being emotionally attuned to people, your environment, etc). (Like if everyone had these traits and used them conscientiously, the world would be a much better place for everyone.)

[Joseph Maynor]

40 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I grew up in a volatile and traumatic environment.

This factors in and has to be taken into consideration.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

8 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This factors in and has to be taken into consideration.  

Definitely.

I have integrated and healed from much of it. And I am very proud of this. Sometimes echoes remain. But I am much better at processing my emotions, understanding my own and others, and letting go. Unprocessed emotions for me, were states taking hold, where the compulsion to act them out or follow them was irresistible /  impossible. Processed emotions are genuinely feeling them, and not being overtaken in the same way. No need to act them out. I am comfortable in all ranges of feeling and emotion.

As a result, the hypervigilant state I was previously locked in has abated. The forced attention to emotions and feelings of others is not there. However, I understand the mechanics and where I may play a role in contributing / affecting others (as opposed to always feeling responsible for the emotions of others). 

Now I enjoy learning about the "why" and meaning of others relationally. Always as a genuine curiosity - and to try to work out how best I can apply myself to assist in their growth.

Edited 1 hour ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

10 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Definitely.

I have integrated and healed from much of it. And I am very proud of this. Sometimes echoes remain. But I am much better at processing my emotions, understanding my own and others, and letting go. Unprocessed emotions for me, were states taking hold, where the compulsion to act them out or follow them was irresistible /  impossible. Processed emotions are genuinely feeling them, and not being overtaken in the same way. No need to act them out. I am comfortable in all ranges of feeling and emotion.

As a result, the hypervigilant state I was previously locked in has abated. The forced attention to emotions and feelings of others is not there. However, I understand the mechanics and where I may play a role in contributing / affecting others (as opposed to always feeling responsible for the emotions of others). 

Now I enjoy learning about the "why" and meaning of others relationally. Always as a genuine curiosity - and to try to work out how best I can apply myself to assist in their growth.

Trauma is really hard.  I get  it.  I have some too.