Typology, Jungian Functions, MBTI, catchall

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

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

❤️

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, eos_nyxia said:

@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.

 

This is the most Ti thing I've seen all week, lol.

That split-column comparison I posted was just meant to be pointers. It's difficult to type yourself without some serious observation and study because what you'll tend to do is ask "which sounds best?" or "what makes the most sense?" instead of "what does my mind actually do?"

Everyone can use all 8 functions. The first two functions are the most native and effortless for us. I would imagine gifted people would generally be more competent across the board, depending on how often they exercise the specific functions. 

INTP function stack

Each type spends the majority of their time in their dominant and auxiliary functions. The lower you go, the more difficult things get, generally. It can be the case that someone's job or lifestyle forces a non-native function to operate often and they get good at that function, but if you spend the majority of your time in Ti, you're building really strong Ti while neglecting the others.

Notice Se and Fi are the least exercised functions of the INTP. If you research all the functions and if those two seem most repulsive or non-native to you, that's a strong sign. 

The dominant function isn't a preference - it's your default mode and you don't even know you're doing it. What you have to suppress is native. What you have to do deliberately isn't. You build castles natively. That's an INTP thing that you've put a check on. Most people don't have to put a check on that because they just don't do it. Of course, traits from Big 5 and other models can also explain things. And things like high need for cognition, giftedness, etc., but I have high need for cognition and I'm gifted-lite, and I never cared to build castles for the fun of it. I do a ton of intellectual work but it looks totally different than the work of an INTP. If you could observe the Obsidian vaults of the 10 INTPs and 10 INTJs, you'd see a clear difference, which the model predicts. 

I can't really prove the model, but hopefully this makes some sense.

Edited 4 hours ago by Joshe

[Joseph Maynor]

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

 

This is the most Ti thing I've seen all week, lol.

That split-column comparison I posted was just meant to be pointers. It's difficult to type yourself without some serious observation and study because what you'll tend to do is ask "which sounds best?" or "what makes the most sense?" instead of "what does my mind actually do?"

Everyone can use all 8 functions. The first two functions are the most native and effortless for us. I would imagine gifted people would generally be more competent across the board, depending on how often they exercise the specific functions. 

INTP function stack

Each type spends the majority of their time in their dominant and auxiliary functions. The lower you go, the more difficult things get, generally. It can be the case that someone's job or lifestyle forces a non-native function to operate often and they get good at that function, but if you spend the majority of your time in Ti, you're building really strong Ti while neglecting the others.

Notice Se and Fi are the least exercised functions of the INTP. If you research all the functions and if those two seem most repulsive or non-native to you, that's a strong sign. 

The dominant function isn't a preference - it's your default mode and you don't even know you're doing it. What you have to suppress is native. What you have to do deliberately isn't. You build castles natively. That's an INTP thing that you've put a check on. Most people don't have to put a check on that because they just don't do it. Of course, traits from Big 5 and other models can also explain things. And things like high need for cognition, giftedness, etc., but I have high need for cognition and I'm gifted-lite, and I never cared to build castles for the fun of it. I do a ton of intellectual work but it looks totally different than the work of an INTP. If you could observe the Obsidian vaults of the 10 INTPs and 10 INTJs, you'd see a clear difference, which the model predicts. 

I can't really prove the model, but hopefully this makes some sense.

You might be over thinking this, not to be rude.  

[Ramanujan]

@Joseph Maynor does life get better with age as an INFJ . or does it get worse

 

[Joshe]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You might be over thinking this, not to be rude.  

It's all good!

[Joshe]

@Natasha Tori Maru

This dude is funny

[Joseph Maynor]

25 minutes ago, Ramanujan said:

@Joseph Maynor does life get better with age as an INFJ . or does it get worse

 

Good question.  I don't think of myself as an INFJ most of the time.  

[Lyubov]

INFJ

I think a lot of people here are neurodivergent and spiritually inclined. 

[eos_nyxia]

27 minutes ago, Joshe said:

This is the most Ti thing I've seen all week, lol.

It was a decent demonstration of something which comes to me effortlessly (the cognitive sorting and making-sense process), and also something I would not normally be assed to do (writing it out). Sorting it mentally takes me about as much time and effort as it takes to read it and make basic sense of it (let's just say a minute or so because I'm a fast read) and about 10ish to mark it up and explain what it means, but I don't inherently find this aspect of my own thinking that interesting, rewarding, or fun.

 It's just another tool like a wrench or a screwdriver. I'm not so enamoured with it that I think I AM the wrench...

Quote

That split-column comparison I posted was just meant to be pointers. It's difficult to type yourself without some serious observation and study because what you'll tend to do is ask "which sounds best?" or "what makes the most sense?" instead of "what does my mind actually do?"

I get that. I think you need some sort of accountability process with yourself where you occasionally ask yourself not just if you are capable of introspecting correctly (both perceiving and interpreting), but if you have the emotional drive to be honest enough with yourself. (Although I suspect that with INTJ types, honesty with oneself is NOT an issue or relatively minimal!)  

Quote

Each type spends the majority of their time in their dominant and auxiliary functions. The lower you go, the more difficult things get, generally. It can be the case that someone's job or lifestyle forces a non-native function to operate often and they get good at that function, but if you spend the majority of your time in Ti, you're building really strong Ti while neglecting the others.

Notice Se and Fi are the least exercised functions of the INTP. If you research all the functions and if those two seem most repulsive or non-native to you, that's a strong sign. 

I've spent a lot of time in non-native environments around non-native people, both being forced and choosing to adapt to them (but often not the other way around). I've also done a ton of shadow work and a lot of journaling across my lifetime, and have spent a lot of time and energy trying to even myself out. A good example is how weak my Se function is naturally is that I was very, very unathletic as a child (without having a visible disability or physical illness), have always contended with the intensity of sensory sensitivities, and I even physically developed slower than my peers. It was like my body decided to dump ALL of its stat points into "higher" traits like intelligence/ willpower/ wisdom and I was a glass cannon of a human being for a while until I could grind my other stats lol. I have very heavily compensated for this starting in my mid-to-late teens and now I would legitimately be considered very athletic, but I am heavily constrained by working with my intrinsic physical weaknesses and limits (e.g. hypermobility). I value this more because I worked very hard for it, and equally I get bored of things that come to me too easily if I'm just doing it for my own amusement and exploration (rather than to serving a higher purpose). I've got that appetite for novelty and I NEED genuine challenge or else I feel like a miserable shell of a person.    

Otherwise, I would probably still be closer my childhood self, having my """super deep thoughts""" but then walking into a door or wall because I stopped noticing it was there again, or tripping over literally nothing and rolling onto my ankle, ****just because****. 

The stack chart is very helpful, thanks! I'll be mulling over it and making sense of it over the next week or so. Hopefully I'll be much more literate at reading these stacks by then.  

 

[something_else]

I've tested as lots of different types over the years, INTP, ENTP, ISTP, INFP, INFJ. I think INTP is probably the most accurate.

Cognitive function wise, Ne, Ti, Se, Ni, are the ones I feel strongest in. Si, Te were the ones I struggled with the most until I got medicated for ADHD. Now I don't find them nearly as challenging, although I still wouldn't call them strengths.

I somewhat dislike that cognitive functions and the MBTI types are treated as a linked system. They seem like two totally disconnected systems to me. I think MBTI has value as a simple 4 dimension test of I vs E, S vs N, T vs F, J vs P, comparable to The Big 5, but I don't really see how you can deduce anything accurate about someone's cognitive function preferences from those dimensions.

Vice versa, someone could have Ni, Si, Ti, Fi as their strongest functions and that just doesn't map to an MBTI type cleanly at all.

I think these are best thought of as two different systems.

[Jirh]

Psychology slop.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

5 minutes ago, Jirh said:

Psychology slop.

Quality.

[Sugarcoat]

8 hours ago, Joshe said:

One thing I'm not really buying though is that @Sugarcoat is an INTJ. Ain't no way. 

Hhahaha why you say so? 

That result is based on taking the test a few years ago, twice I think I got that. Also used to be in INTJ subreddit a while back then. 

I and N definitely, very much apply, the T and J make sense too overall but not as clearly as I and N. 

I have not read so much into this system as it seems some of you guys have, so I don't know much about the differences between the terms beyond the basics, but some of the categorizations relate to how I myself think of human tendencies overall so I think theres value in the distinctions made

Edited 16 minutes ago by Sugarcoat